Contingencies

Income Tax Contingencies

We are subject to income taxes in the United States and numerous other jurisdictions. Significant judgment is required in determining our worldwide provision for income taxes. In the ordinary course of our business, there are many transactions and calculations where the ultimate tax determination is uncertain. We are regularly audited by tax authorities. Although we believe our tax estimates are reasonable, the final determination of tax audits and any related litigation could be materially different than what is reflected in income tax provisions and accruals. An audit or litigation could materially affect our financial position, income tax provision, net income, or cash flows in the period or periods challenged.

It is possible that future changes to tax laws (including tax treaties) could impact our ability to realize the tax savings recorded to date as well as future tax savings, resulting from our 2002 corporate reorganization. See Note 12-Income Taxes to our 2010 Annual Report for additional discussion.

On September 14, 2006, Nabors Drilling International Limited, one of our wholly owned Bermuda subsidiaries (“NDIL”), received a Notice of Assessment from Mexico’s federal tax authorities in connection with the audit of NDIL’s Mexico branch for 2003. The notice proposes to deny depreciation expense deductions relating to drilling rigs operating in Mexico in 2003. The notice also proposes to deny a deduction for payments made to an affiliated company for the procurement of labor services in Mexico. The amount assessed was approximately $19.8 million (including interest and penalties). Nabors and its tax advisors previously concluded that the deductions were appropriate and more recently that the government’s position lacks merit. NDIL’s Mexico branch took similar deductions for depreciation and labor expenses from 2004 to 2008. On June 30, 2009, the government proposed similar assessments against the Mexico branch of another wholly owned Bermuda subsidiary, Nabors Drilling International II Ltd. (“NDIL II”) for 2006. We anticipate that a similar assessment will eventually be proposed against NDIL for 2005 through 2008 and against NDIL II for 2007 to 2010. We believe that the potential assessments will range from $6 million to $26 million per year for the period from 2005 to 2009, and in the aggregate, would be approximately $90 million to $95 million. Although we believe that any assessments related to the 2003 and 2005 to 2010 years lack merit, a reserve has been recorded in accordance with GAAP. The statute of limitations for NDIL’s 2004 tax year expired. Accordingly, during the fourth quarter of 2010, we released $7.4 million from our tax reserves, which represented the reserve recorded for that tax year. If these additional assessments were made and we ultimately did not prevail, we would be required to recognize additional tax for the amount in excess of the current reserve.

Self-Insurance

We estimate the level of our liability related to insurance and record reserves for these amounts in our consolidated financial statements. Our estimates are based on the facts and circumstances specific to existing claims and our past experience with similar claims. These loss estimates and accruals recorded in our financial statements for claims have historically been reasonable in light of the actual amount of claims paid. Although we believe our insurance coverage and reserve estimates are reasonable, a significant accident or other event that is not fully covered by insurance or contractual indemnity could occur and could materially affect our financial position and results of operations for a particular period.

Litigation

Nabors and its subsidiaries are defendants or otherwise involved in a number of lawsuits in the ordinary course of business. We estimate the range of our liability related to pending litigation when we believe the amount and range of loss can reasonably be estimated. We record our best estimate of a loss when the loss is considered probable. When a liability is probable and there is a range of estimated loss with no best estimate in the range, we record the minimum estimated liability related to the lawsuits or claims. As additional information becomes available, we assess the potential liability related to our pending litigation and claims and revise our estimates. Due to uncertainties related to the resolution of lawsuits and claims, the ultimate outcome may differ from our estimates. In the opinion of management and based on liability accruals provided, our ultimate exposure with respect to these pending lawsuits and claims is not expected to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position or cash flows, although they could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations for a particular reporting period.

On July 5, 2007, we received an inquiry from the U.S. Department of Justice relating to its investigation of one of our vendors and compliance with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. The inquiry relates to transactions with and involving Panalpina, which provided freight forwarding and customs clearance services to some of our affiliates. To date, the inquiry has focused on transactions in Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia, Algeria and Nigeria. The Audit Committee of our Board of Directors has engaged outside counsel to review some of our transactions with this vendor, has received periodic updates at its regularly scheduled meetings, and the Chairman of the Audit Committee has received updates between meetings as circumstances warrant. The investigation includes a review of certain amounts paid to and by Panalpina in connection with obtaining permits for the temporary importation of equipment and clearance of goods and materials through customs. Both the SEC and the Department of Justice have been advised of our investigation. The ultimate outcome of this investigation or the effect of implementing any further measures that may be necessary to ensure full compliance with applicable laws cannot be determined at this time.

A court in Algeria entered a judgment of approximately $19.7 million against us related to alleged customs infractions in 2009. We believe we did not receive proper notice of the judicial proceedings, and that the amount of the judgment is excessive. We have asserted the lack of legally required notice as a basis for challenging the judgment on appeal to the Algeria Supreme Court. Based upon our understanding of applicable law and precedent, we believe that this challenge will be successful. We do not believe that a loss is probable and have not accrued any amounts related to this matter. However, the ultimate resolution and the timing thereof are uncertain. If we are ultimately required to pay a fine or judgment related to this matter, the amount of the loss could range from approximately $140,000 to $19.7 million.

In August 2010, Nabors and its wholly owned subsidiary, Diamond Acquisition Corp. (“Diamond”), were sued in three putative shareholder class actions. Two of the cases were dismissed. The remaining case pending, Jordan Denney, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. David E. Wallace, et al., Civil Action No. 10-1154, is pending in the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. The suits were brought against Superior, the individual members of its board of directors, certain of Superior’s senior officers, Nabors and Diamond. The complaints alleged that Superior’s officers and directors violated various provisions of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and breached their fiduciary duties in connection with the Superior acquisition, and that Nabors and Diamond aided and abetted these violations. The complaints sought injunctive relief, including an injunction against the consummation of the Superior acquisition, monetary damages, and attorneys fees and costs. The claim against Superior and its directors is covered by insurance after a deductible amount. We have entered into a settlement agreement pursuant to which Superior’s insurers will pay $475,000 in attorney’s fees in full settlement of this matter. The court has preliminarily approved the settlement, with a final hearing scheduled on September 8, 2011.

In March 2011, the Court of Ouargla (in Algeria), sitting at first instance, entered a judgment of approximately $39.1 million against NDIL relating to alleged violations of Algeria’s foreign currency exchange controls, which require that goods and services provided locally be invoiced and paid in local currency. The case relates to certain foreign currency payments made to NDIL by CEPSA, a Spanish operator, for wells drilled in 2006. Approximately $7.5 million of the total contract amount was paid offshore in foreign currency, and approximately $3.2 million was paid in local currency. The judgment includes fines and penalties of approximately three times the amount at issue, and is not payable pending appeal. We have appealed the ruling based on our understanding that the law in question applies only to resident entities incorporated under Algerian law. An intermediate court of appeals has upheld the lower court’s ruling, and we have appealed the matter to the Algeria Supreme Court. While our payments were consistent with our historical operations in the country, and, we believe, those of other multinational corporations there, and interpretations of the law by the Central Bank of Algeria, the ultimate resolution of this matter could result in a loss of up to $31.1 million in excess of amounts accrued.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements (Including Guarantees)

We are a party to transactions, agreements or other contractual arrangements defined as “off-balance sheet arrangements” that could have a material future effect on our financial position, results of operations, liquidity and capital resources. The most significant of these off-balance sheet arrangements involve agreements and obligations under which we provide financial or performance assurance to third parties. Certain of these agreements serve as guarantees, including standby letters of credit issued on behalf of insurance carriers in conjunction with our workers’ compensation insurance program and other financial surety instruments such as bonds. In addition, we have provided indemnifications, which serve as guarantees, to some third parties. These guarantees include indemnification provided by Nabors to our share transfer agent and our insurance carriers. We are not able to estimate the potential future maximum payments that might be due under our indemnification guarantees.

Management believes the likelihood that we would be required to perform or otherwise incur any material losses associated with any of these guarantees is remote. The following table summarizes the total maximum amount of financial guarantees issued by Nabors:


	Maximum Amount
	Remainder
	of 2011		2012		2013		Thereafter		Total
	(In thousands)

Financial standby letters of credit and other financial surety instruments	$	49,783	$	60,201	$	—	$	—	$	109,984