Legal Proceedings	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2015
Legal Proceedings [Abstract]
Legal Proceedings	16. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS The Company is currently subject to an audit by U.S. Customs & Border Protection (“CBP”) in respect of the period from 2006 to 2010. In October 2013, CBP issued the final audit report. In that report CBP projects that unpaid duties totaling approximately $12.4 million are due for the period under review and recommends collection of the duties due. Crocs responded that these projections are erroneous and provided arguments that demonstrate the amount due in connection with this matter is considerably less than the projection. Additionally, on December 12, 2014, Crocs made an offer to settle CBP’s potential claims and tendered $3.5 million. At this time, it is not possible to determine how long it will take CBP to evaluate the offer or to predict whether the offer will be accepted. Likewise, if a settlement cannot be reached, it is not possible to predict with any certainty whether CBP will seek to assert a claim for penalties in addition to any unpaid duties, but such an assertion is a possibility. Mexico’s Federal Tax Authority (“SAT”) has audited the Company’s records regarding imports and exports during the period from January 2006 to July 2011. There were two phases to the audit, the first for capital equipment and finished goods and the second for raw materials. The first phase was completed and no major discrepancies were noted by the SAT. On January 9, 2013, Crocs received a notice for the second phase in which the SAT issued a tax assessment (taxes and penalties) of roughly 280.0 million pesos (approximately $22.0 million) based on the value of all of Crocs’ imported raw materials during the audit period. Crocs believes that the proposed penalty amount is unfounded and without merit. With the help of local counsel Crocs filed an appeal by the deadline of March 15, 2013. Crocs has argued that the amount due in connection with the matter, if any, is substantially less than that proposed by the SAT. In connection with the appeal, the SAT required Crocs to post an appeal surety bond in the amount of roughly 321.0 million pesos (approximately $26.0 million), which amount reflects estimated additional penalties and interest if the Company is not successful on its appeal. On November 27, 2014, the Superior Chamber of the Federal Tax Court ruled in favor of Crocs and annulled the tax assessment and the corresponding penalty. The SAT filed its appeal of the decision in Crocs’ favor on February 25, 2015. On June 24, 2015, the Circuit Court rejected SAT´s appeal, and thus, confirmed the favorable decision issued to Crocs by the Federal Tax Court. On August 6, 2015, the Circuit Court entered its final written order in favor of Crocs and this matter is now considered closed and the bond commitment has been released. Crocs is currently subject to an audit by the Brazilian Federal Tax Authorities related to imports of footwear from China between 2010 and 2014. On January 13, 2015, Crocs was notified about the issuance of assessments totaling approximately $3.7 million for the period January 2010 through May 2011. Crocs has disputed these assessments and asserted defenses to the claims. On February 25, 2015, Crocs received additional assessments totaling approximately $8.4 million related to the remainder of the audit period. Crocs has also disputed these assessments and asserted defenses to these claims, which also included requesting an interpretation from the trade authorities of whether certain Crocs’ footwear models are included in the scope of the application of anti-dumping duties on footwear from China. It is anticipated that this matter will take up to several years to be resolved. It is not possible at this time to predict the outcome of this matter. On August 8, 2014, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in California State Court against a Crocs subsidiary, Crocs Retail, LLC (Zaydenberg v. Crocs Retail, LLC, Case No. BC554214). The lawsuit alleged various employment law violations related to overtime, meal and break periods, minimum wage, timely payment of wages, wage statements, payroll records and business expenses. Crocs filed an answer on February 6, 2015, denying the allegations and asserting several defenses. On June 3, 2015, a second purported class action lawsuit was filed in California State Court against Crocs Retail, LLC (Christopher S. Duree and Richard Morely v. Crocs, Inc., Case No. BC583875), making substantially the same allegations as in the Zaydenberg lawsuit. The parties attended a mediation on June 26, 2015, and reached a settlement for $1.5 million, which will release the claims in both lawsuits. On September 4, 2015, the Court granted preliminary approval of the settlement and set the final approval hearing for December 14, 2015. As of September 30, 2015, Crocs estimates that the ultimate resolution of these litigation matters and other disputes could result in a loss that is reasonably possible between $0.0 million and $6.7 million in aggregate, of which $5.2 million has been accrued and is reported in the balance sheet in line ‘Accrued expenses and other liabilities’. Although Crocs is subject to other litigation from time to time in the ordinary course of business, including employment, intellectual property and product liability claims, Crocs is not party to any other pending legal proceedings that Crocs believes would reasonably have a material adverse impact on its business, financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

16. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

The Company is currently subject to an audit by U.S. Customs & Border Protection (“CBP”) in respect of the period from 2006 to 2010. In October 2013, CBP issued the final audit report. In that report CBP projects that unpaid duties totaling approximately $12.4 million are due for the period under review and recommends collection of the duties due. Crocs responded that these projections are erroneous and provided arguments that demonstrate the amount due in connection with this matter is considerably less than the projection. Additionally, on December 12, 2014, Crocs made an offer to settle CBP’s potential claims and tendered $3.5 million. At this time, it is not possible to determine how long it will take CBP to evaluate the offer or to predict whether the offer will be accepted. Likewise, if a settlement cannot be reached, it is not possible to predict with any certainty whether CBP will seek to assert a claim for penalties in addition to any unpaid duties, but such an assertion is a possibility.

Mexico’s Federal Tax Authority (“SAT”) has audited the Company’s records regarding imports and exports during the period from January 2006 to July 2011. There were two phases to the audit, the first for capital equipment and finished goods and the second for raw materials. The first phase was completed and no major discrepancies were noted by the SAT. On January 9, 2013, Crocs received a notice for the second phase in which the SAT issued a tax assessment (taxes and penalties) of roughly 280.0 million pesos (approximately $22.0 million) based on the value of all of Crocs’ imported raw materials during the audit period. Crocs believes that the proposed penalty amount is unfounded and without merit. With the help of local counsel Crocs filed an appeal by the deadline of March 15, 2013. Crocs has argued that the amount due in connection with the matter, if any, is substantially less than that proposed by the SAT. In connection with the appeal, the SAT required Crocs to post an appeal surety bond in the amount of roughly 321.0 million pesos (approximately $26.0 million), which amount reflects estimated additional penalties and interest if the Company is not successful on its appeal. On November 27, 2014, the Superior Chamber of the Federal Tax Court ruled in favor of Crocs and annulled the tax assessment and the corresponding penalty. The SAT filed its appeal of the decision in Crocs’ favor on February 25, 2015. On June 24, 2015, the Circuit Court rejected SAT´s appeal, and thus, confirmed the favorable decision issued to Crocs by the Federal Tax Court. On August 6, 2015, the Circuit Court entered its final written order in favor of Crocs and this matter is now considered closed and the bond commitment has been released.

Crocs is currently subject to an audit by the Brazilian Federal Tax Authorities related to imports of footwear from China between 2010 and 2014. On January 13, 2015, Crocs was notified about the issuance of assessments totaling approximately $3.7 million for the period January 2010 through May 2011. Crocs has disputed these assessments and asserted defenses to the claims. On February 25, 2015, Crocs received additional assessments totaling approximately $8.4 million related to the remainder of the audit period. Crocs has also disputed these assessments and asserted defenses to these claims, which also included requesting an interpretation from the trade authorities of whether certain Crocs’ footwear models are included in the scope of the application of anti-dumping duties on footwear from China. It is anticipated that this matter will take up to several years to be resolved. It is not possible at this time to predict the outcome of this matter.

On August 8, 2014, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in California State Court against a Crocs subsidiary, Crocs Retail, LLC (Zaydenberg v. Crocs Retail, LLC, Case No. BC554214). The lawsuit alleged various employment law violations related to overtime, meal and break periods, minimum wage, timely payment of wages, wage statements, payroll records and business expenses. Crocs filed an answer on February 6, 2015, denying the allegations and asserting several defenses. On June 3, 2015, a second purported class action lawsuit was filed in California State Court against Crocs Retail, LLC (Christopher S. Duree and Richard Morely v. Crocs, Inc., Case No. BC583875), making substantially the same allegations as in the Zaydenberg lawsuit. The parties attended a mediation on June 26, 2015, and reached a settlement for $1.5 million, which will release the claims in both lawsuits. On September 4, 2015, the Court granted preliminary approval of the settlement and set the final approval hearing for December 14, 2015.

As of September 30, 2015, Crocs estimates that the ultimate resolution of these litigation matters and other disputes could result in a loss that is reasonably possible between $0.0 million and $6.7 million in aggregate, of which $5.2 million has been accrued and is reported in the balance sheet in line ‘Accrued expenses and other liabilities’.

Although Crocs is subject to other litigation from time to time in the ordinary course of business, including employment, intellectual property and product liability claims, Crocs is not party to any other pending legal proceedings that Crocs believes would reasonably have a material adverse impact on its business, financial position, results of operations or cash flows.