The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company, its subsidiaries, all of which are wholly-owned, and variable interest entities (“VIEs”) for which the Company is considered the primary beneficiary. All significant intercompany transactions have been eliminated.

U.S. GAAP requires the Company to identify entities for which control is achieved through means other than voting rights and to determine whether the Company is the primary beneficiary of VIEs. A VIE is broadly defined as an entity with one or more of the following characteristics: (a) the total equity investment at risk is insufficient to finance the entity’s activities without additional subordinated financial support; (b) as a group, the holders of the equity investment at risk lack (i) the ability to make decisions about the entity’s activities through voting or similar rights, (ii) the obligation to absorb the expected losses of the entity, or (iii) the right to receive the expected residual returns of the entity; and (c) the equity investors have voting rights that are not proportional to their economic interests, and substantially all of the entity’s activities either involve, or are conducted on behalf of, an investor that has disproportionately few voting rights. The Company consolidates its investment in a VIE when it determines that it is the VIE’s primary beneficiary. The Company may change its original assessment of a VIE upon subsequent events such as the modification of contractual arrangements that affects the characteristics or adequacy of the entity’s equity investments at risk and the disposition of all or a portion of an interest held by the primary beneficiary.

The primary beneficiary of a VIE is the entity that has both: (i) the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance; and (ii) the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits of the VIE that could be significant to the entity. The Company performs this analysis on an ongoing basis.

Management of the Company has determined that Turning Point Brands Canada (formerly ReCreation Marketing) is a VIE for which the Company is considered the primary beneficiary due to the power the Company has over the activities that most significantly impact the economic performance of Turning Point Brands Canada and the right to receive benefits and the obligation to absorb losses of Turning Point Brands Canada through the Company’s 65% equity interest, additional subordinated financing provided by the Company to Turning Point Brands Canada and the distribution agreement with Turning Point Brands Canada for the sale of the Company’s products that makes up a significant portion of Turning Point Brands Canada’s business activities.

The Company recognizes revenues in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (“Topic 606”), which includes excise taxes and shipping and handling charges billed to customers, net of cash discounts for prompt payment, sales returns and sales incentives, upon delivery of goods to the customer—at which time the Company’s performance obligation is satisfied—at an amount that the Company expects to be entitled to in exchange for those goods in accordance with the five-step analysis outlined in Topic 606: (i) identify the contract with the customer, (ii) identify the performance obligations in the contract, (iii) determine the transaction price, (iv) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations, and (v) recognize revenue when (or as) performance obligations are satisfied. The Company excludes from the transaction price, sales taxes and value-added taxes imposed at the time of sale (which do not include excise taxes on smokeless tobacco, cigars, or vaping products billed to customers).

The Company records an allowance for sales returns, based principally on historical volume and return rates, which is included in accrued liabilities on the consolidated balance sheets. The Company records sales incentives, which consist of consumer incentives and trade promotion activities, as a reduction in revenues (a portion of which is based on amounts estimated as being due to wholesalers, retailers and consumers at the end of the period) based principally on historical volume and utilization rates. Expected payments for sales incentives are included in accrued liabilities on the consolidated balance sheets.

A further requirement of ASC 606 is for entities to disaggregate revenue recognized from contracts with customers into categories that depict how the nature, amount, timing, and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows are affected by economic factors. Company management views business performance through segments that closely resemble the performance of major product lines. Thus, the primary and most useful disaggregation of the Company’s contract revenue for decision making purposes is the disaggregation by segment which can be found in Note 20, “Segment Information”. An additional disaggregation of contract revenue by sales channel can be found within Note 20 as well.

The Company enters into foreign currency contracts to hedge a portion of its exposure to changes in foreign currency exchange rates on inventory purchase commitments. The Company accounts for its foreign currency contracts under the provisions of ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging. Under the Company’s policy, the Company may hedge up to 100% of its anticipated purchases of inventory in the denominated invoice currency over a forward period not to exceed twelve months. The Company may also, from time to time, hedge up to 100% of its non-inventory purchases (e.g. production equipment) in the denominated invoice currency. Foreign currency contracts that qualify as hedges are adjusted to their fair value through other comprehensive income as determined by market prices on the measurement date, except any hedge ineffectiveness which is recognized currently in income. Gains and losses on these foreign currency contracts are transferred from other comprehensive income into inventory as the related inventories are received and are transferred to net income as inventory is sold. Changes in fair value of any contracts that do not qualify for hedge accounting or are not designated as hedges are recognized currently in income.

Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or net realizable value using the first-in, first-out (“FIFO”) method. Leaf tobacco is presented in current assets in accordance with standard industry practice, notwithstanding the fact that such tobaccos are carried longer than one year for the purpose of curing.

Property, plant and equipment is stated at cost less accumulated depreciation and impairment. Depreciation is provided using the straight-line method over the lesser of the estimated useful lives of the assets or the life of the leases for leasehold improvements (4 to 7 years for machinery, equipment and furniture, 10 to 15 years for leasehold improvements, and up to 15 years for buildings and building improvements). Expenditures for repairs and maintenance are charged to expense as incurred. The costs of major renewals and improvements are capitalized and depreciated over their estimated useful lives. Upon disposition of fixed assets, the costs and related accumulated depreciation amounts are relieved. Any resulting gain or loss is reflected in operations during the period of disposition. Long-lived assets are reviewed for impairment when changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable.

When testing goodwill for impairment, the Company has the option to first perform qualitative testing to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying value. If the Company chooses not to complete a qualitative assessment for a given reporting unit or if the initial assessment indicates that it is more likely than not that the carrying value of a reporting unit exceeds its estimated fair value, additional quantitative testing is required. If the carrying value of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value, an impairment loss is recognized in the amount by which the carrying value of the reporting unit exceeds its fair value, limited to the amount of goodwill at the reporting unit. The Company determines fair values for each of the reporting units using a combination of the income approach and/or market approach. Under the income approach, fair value is determined based on the present value of estimated future cash flows, discounted at an appropriate risk-adjusted rate. Under the market approach, the Company selects peer sets based on close competitors and reviews the revenue and EBITDA multiples to determine the fair value. See Note 10, “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets” for further information on goodwill.

Indefinite-lived intangible assets are tested for impairment at least annually; however, these tests are performed more frequently when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the asset may be impaired. Impairment exists when carrying value exceeds fair value. The Company’s fair value methodology is primarily based on the relief from royalty approach.

U.S. GAAP establishes a framework for measuring fair value. That framework provides a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3).

For equity investments that do not qualify to be accounted for under the equity method of accounting and that do not have a readily determinable fair value, the Company has elected a practical expedient to record the investment at the original cost, as adjusted for impairment and observable price changes. Under the practical expedient, if a qualitative analysis indicates impairment exists, the fair value of the investment is required to be estimated and any excess of the carrying value over the estimated fair value is recognized as an impairment loss.

Equity investments accounted for under the equity method of accounting are assessed for impairment when events or circumstances suggest that any loss in value of the investment may be other than temporary. A loss in value of an investment is other than temporary when evidence of a loss in value indicates the absence of an ability to recover the carrying amount of the investment or inability of the investee to sustain an earnings capacity that would justify the carrying amount of the investment.

In the absence of observable data, the Company estimates the fair values of these investments using a market approach derived from applying market multiples of comparable public companies to the financial results of each investment. The valuation methodology and the significant assumptions used by management in estimating the fair values of each investment, involve a high degree of judgment and may involve the use of third-party valuation specialists.

Deferred financing costs are amortized over the terms of the related debt obligations using the straight-line method. Unamortized amounts are expensed upon extinguishment of the related borrowings. Deferred financing costs are presented as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of that debt liability except for deferred financing costs relating to our revolving credit facility, which are presented as an asset.

The Company records the effects of income taxes under the liability method in which deferred income tax assets and liabilities are recognized based on the difference between the financial and tax basis of assets and liabilities using the enacted tax rates in effect for the years in which the differences are expected to reverse. The Company assesses its ability to realize future benefits of deferred tax assets by determining if they meet the “more likely than not” criteria in ASC 740, Income Taxes. If the Company determines that future benefits do not meet the “more likely than not” criteria, a valuation allowance is recorded.

The Company measures stock-based compensation costs related to its stock options on the fair value-based method under the provisions of ASC 718, Compensation – Stock Compensation. The fair value-based method requires compensation cost for stock options to be recognized over the requisite service period based on the fair value of stock options granted. The Company determined the fair value of these awards using the Black-Scholes option pricing model.

The Company grants performance-based restricted stock units (“PRSU”) subject to both performance-based and service-based vesting conditions. The fair value of each PRSU is the Company’s stock price on the date of grant. For purposes of recognizing compensation expense as services are rendered in accordance with ASC 718, the Company assumes all employees involved in the PRSU grant will provide service through the end of the performance period. Stock compensation expense is recorded based on the probability of achievement of the performance conditions specified in the PRSU grant.

The Company grants restricted stock units (“RSU”) subject to service-based vesting conditions. The fair value of each RSU is the Company’s stock price on the date of grant. The Company recognizes compensation expense as services are rendered in accordance with ASC 718. Stock compensation expense is recorded over the service period in the RSU grant.

Manufacturers and sellers of tobacco products are subject to regulation at the federal, state, and local levels. Such regulations include, among others, labeling requirements, limitations on advertising, and prohibition of sales to minors. The tobacco industry is likely to continue to be heavily regulated. There can be no assurance as to the ultimate content, timing, or effect of any regulation of tobacco products by any federal, state, or local legislative or regulatory body, nor can there be any assurance that any such legislation or regulation would not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. In a number of states targeted flavor bans have been proposed or enacted legislatively or by the administrative process. Depending on the number and location of such bans, that legislation or regulation could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) continues to consider various restrictive regulations around our products, including targeted flavor bans; however, the details, timing, and ultimate implementation of such measures remain unclear.

The tobacco industry has experienced, and is experiencing, significant product liability litigation. Most tobacco liability lawsuits have been brought against manufacturers and sellers of cigarettes for injuries allegedly caused by smoking or exposure to smoke. However, several lawsuits have been brought against manufacturers and sellers of smokeless products for injuries to health allegedly caused by use of smokeless products. Typically, such claims assert that use of smokeless products is addictive and causes oral cancer. Additionally, several lawsuits have been brought against manufacturers and distributors of Creative Distribution Solutions products due to malfunctioning devices. There can be no assurance the Company will not sustain losses in connection with such lawsuits and that such losses will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

Master Settlement Agreement (MSA): Forty-six states, certain U.S. territories, and the District of Columbia are parties to the Master Settlement Agreement (“MSA”) and the Smokeless Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement (“STMSA”). To the Company’s knowledge, signatories to the MSA include 49 cigarette manufacturers and/or distributors. The only signatory to the STMSA is US Smokeless Tobacco Company. In the Company’s opinion, the fundamental basis for each agreement is the states’ consents to withdraw all claims for monetary, equitable, and injunctive relief against certain tobacco products manufacturers and others and, in return, the signatories have agreed to certain marketing restrictions and regulations as well as certain payment obligations.

Pursuant to the MSA and subsequent states’ statutes, a “cigarette manufacturer” (which is defined to also include MYO cigarette tobacco) has the option of either becoming a signatory to the MSA or opening, funding, and maintaining an escrow account, with sub-accounts on behalf of each settling state. The STMSA has no similar provisions. The MSA escrow accounts are governed by states’ statutes that expressly give the manufacturers the option of opening, funding, and maintaining an escrow account in lieu of becoming a signatory to the MSA. The statutes require companies who are not signatories to the MSA to deposit, on an annual basis, into qualified banks, escrow funds based on the number of cigarettes or cigarette equivalents, i.e., the pounds of MYO tobacco, sold. The purpose of these statutes is expressly stated to be to eliminate the cost disadvantage the settling manufacturers have as a result of entering into the MSA. Such companies are entitled to direct the investment of the escrowed funds and withdraw any appreciation, but cannot withdraw the principal for twenty-five years from the year of each annual deposit, except to withdraw funds deposited pursuant to an individual state’s escrow statute to pay a final judgment to that state’s plaintiffs in the event of such a final judgment against the company. Either option – becoming an MSA signatory or establishing an escrow account – is permissible.

The Company chose to open and fund an MSA escrow account as its means of compliance. It is management’s opinion, due to the possibility of future federal or state regulations, though none have to date been enacted, that entering into one or both of the settlement agreements or establishing and maintaining an escrow account would not necessarily prevent future regulations from having a material adverse effect on the results of operations, financial position, and cash flows of the Company.

Various states have enacted or proposed complementary legislation intended to curb the activity of certain manufacturers and importers of cigarettes that are selling into MSA states without signing the MSA or who have failed to properly establish and fund a qualifying escrow account. To the best of the Company’s knowledge, no such statute has been enacted which could inadvertently and negatively impact the Company, which has been, and is currently, fully compliant with all applicable laws, regulations, and statutes. However, there can be no assurance that the enactment of any such complementary legislation in the future will not have a material adverse effect on the results of operations, financial position, or cash flows of the Company.

Pursuant to the MSA escrow account statutes, in order to be compliant with the MSA escrow requirements, companies selling products covered by the MSA are required to deposit such funds for each calendar year into a qualifying escrow account by April 15 of the following year. At December 31, 2023, the Company had on deposit approximately $32.1 million, the fair value of which was approximately $28.7 million. At December 31, 2022, the Company had on deposit approximately $32.1 million, the fair value of which was approximately $28.0 million. The increase in fair value was due to decreasing maturities affecting the fair value of U.S. government securities held in the MSA escrow account. Inputs to the valuation methodology of the MSA escrow deposits when funds are invested include unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets at the measurement date. During 2023, no monies were deposited into this qualifying escrow account. The investment vehicles available to the Company are specified in the state escrow agreements and are limited to low-risk government securities.

The Company has chosen to invest a portion of the MSA escrow, from time to time, in U.S. Government securities including TIPS, Treasury notes, and Treasury bonds. These investments are classified as available-for-sale and carried at fair value. Realized losses are prohibited under the MSA; thus, any investment with an unrealized loss position will be held until the value is recovered, or until maturity.

Fair values for the U.S. Governmental agency obligations are Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy. The following tables show cost and estimated fair value of the assets held in the MSA account, respectively, as well as the maturities of the U.S. Governmental agency obligations held in such account for the periods indicated.

Concentration of Credit Risk: At December 31, 2023 and 2022, the Company had bank deposits, including MSA escrow accounts, in excess of federally insured limits of approximately $119.0 million and $105.2 million, respectively. During 2023 and 2022, the Company invested a portion of the MSA escrow accounts in U.S. Government securities including TIPS, Treasury notes, and Treasury bonds.

The Company sells its products to distributors, retail establishments, and consumers throughout the U.S. and also sells Zig-Zag^® premium cigarette papers in Canada and some smaller quantities in other countries. The Company had no customers that accounted for more than 10% of net sales for 2023, 2022, or 2021. The Company performs periodic credit evaluations of its customers and generally does not require collateral on trade receivables. Historically, the Company has not experienced significant credit losses.

Accounts receivable are recognized at their net realizable value. All accounts receivable are trade related, recorded at the invoiced amount, and do not bear interest. The Company maintains allowances for credit losses for estimated uncollectible invoices resulting from a customer’s inability to pay (bankruptcy, out of business, etc., i.e. “bad debt” which results in write-offs). The activity of allowance for credit losses during 2023 and 2022 is as follows: