Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2017
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies The Company is subject to comprehensive federal, state, local and international environmental laws and regulations relating to the release or discharge of materials into the environment, the management, use, processing, handling, storage, transport or disposal of hazardous materials and wastes, and other laws and regulations relating to the protection of human health and the environment. These laws and regulations not only expose ARI to liability for the environmental condition of its current or formerly owned or operated facilities, and its own negligent acts, but also may expose ARI to liability for the conduct of others or for ARI’s actions that were in compliance with all applicable laws at the time such actions were taken. In addition, these laws may require significant expenditures to achieve compliance and are frequently modified or revised to impose new obligations. Civil and criminal fines and penalties and other sanctions may be imposed for non-compliance with these environmental laws and regulations. ARI’s operations that involve hazardous materials also raise potential risks of liability under common law. Certain real property ARI acquired from ACF Industries LLC (ACF) in 1994 had been involved in investigation and remediation activities to address contamination both before and after their transfer to ARI. ACF is an affiliate of Mr. Carl Icahn, the Company’s principal beneficial stockholder through Icahn Enterprises L.P. (IELP). Substantially all of the issues identified with respect to these properties relate to the use of these properties prior to their transfer to ARI by ACF and for which ACF has retained liability for environmental contamination that may have existed at the time of transfer to ARI. ACF has also agreed to indemnify ARI for any cost that might be incurred with those existing issues. As of the date of this report, ARI does not believe it will incur material costs in connection with activities relating to these properties, but it cannot assure that this will be the case. If ACF fails to honor its obligations to ARI, ARI could be responsible for the cost of any additional investigation or remediation that may be required. The Company believes that its operations and facilities are in substantial compliance with applicable laws and regulations and that any noncompliance is not likely to have a material adverse effect on its financial condition or results of operations. ARI is a party to collective bargaining agreements with labor unions at two repair facilities that will expire in January and September 2021, respectively, unless extended or modified. ARI is also party to a collective bargaining agreement with a labor union at a steel component manufacturing facility that was previously set to expire in April 2017. This collective bargaining agreement was extended and modified during the second quarter of 2017, so that it will now expire in April 2022, unless extended or modified. The Company has various agreements with and commitments to related parties. See Note 14, Related Party Transactions, for further detail. Certain claims, suits and complaints arising in the ordinary course of business have been filed or are pending against ARI. In the opinion of management, all such claims, suits, and complaints arising in the ordinary course of business are without merit or would not have a significant effect on the future liquidity, results of operations or financial position of ARI if disposed of unfavorably. Gyansys On October 24, 2014, the Company filed a complaint in United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against GyanSys Inc. (GyanSys). The complaint asserts a claim against GyanSys for breaching its contract with ARI to implement an enterprise resource planning system. The Company's complaint alleges that it has suffered damages in excess of $25 million as a result of GyanSys' breach. GyanSys filed a response to the suit denying its responsibility. It also alleged a counterclaim against ARI for breach of contract and wrongful termination, seeking equitable relief and damages, which GyanSys alleges to be more than $10 million. At this time, the Company does not have sufficient information to reasonably form an estimate of the potential outcome (gain or loss) of this litigation. As a result, no such accrual has been recorded. On September 9, 2015, the court denied ARI's motion to dismiss the wrongful termination counterclaim. However, ARI continues to believe that GyanSys' counterclaims lack merit and will continue to vigorously defend against these counterclaims. The trial began in June 2017 and is ongoing, with a decision expected before year end. FRA Directive On September 30, 2016, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) issued Railworthiness Directive (RWD) No. 2016-01 (the Original Directive). The Original Directive addressed, among other things, certain welding practices in one weld area in specified DOT 111 tank railcars manufactured between 2009 and 2015 by ARI and ACF. ACF is an affiliate of Mr. Carl Icahn, the Company's principal beneficial stockholder through IELP. The Company met and corresponded with the FRA following the issuance of the Original Directive to express the Company's concerns with the Original Directive and its impact on ARI, as well as the industry as a whole. On November 18, 2016 (the Issuance Date), the FRA issued RWD No. 2016-01 [Revised] (the Revised Directive). The Revised Directive changes and supersedes the Original Directive. The Original Directive indicated that approximately 14,800 general purpose tank railcars could be affected. The Revised Directive requires owners to identify their subject tank railcars and then from that population identify the 15% of subject tank railcars currently in hazardous materials service with the highest mileage in each tank car owner’s fleet. Visual inspection of each of the subject tank railcars is required by the car operator prior to putting any railcar into service. Owners must ensure appropriate inspection, testing and repairs, if needed, within twelve months of the Issuance Date for the 15% of their subject tank railcars identified to be in hazardous materials service with the highest mileage. The FRA will monitor and analyze the results of the 15% sample and has reserved the right to impose additional test and inspection requirements for the remaining fleet of tank railcars subject to the Revised Directive. During 2016, the Company recorded a loss contingency of $12.3 million related to the Revised Directive to cover its probable and estimable liabilities taking into account available information and the Company's contractual obligations in its capacity as both a manufacturer and owner of railcars subject to the Revised Directive. During the three and six months ended June 30, 2017, there were no material developments related to the Revised Directive. During the second quarter of 2017, certain tank railcars subject to the Revised Directive were inspected, tested, and, if necessary, repaired, all as mandated by the Revised Directive. As a result of these services and the Company's revised assumptions, the contingency reserve was decreased to $10.1 million as of June 30, 2017. This contingency amount is included in accrued expenses and other liabilities on the condensed consolidated balance sheets and will continue to be evaluated as ARI's and its customers' compliance with the Revised Directive progresses and the Company evolves its understanding of the impact that the Revised Directive may have on its business, including results of operations and cash flows. Actual results could differ from this estimate. It is reasonably possible that a loss exists in excess of the amount accrued by the Company. However, the amount of potential costs and expenses expected to be incurred for compliance with the Revised Directive in excess of the loss contingency of $10.1 million cannot be reasonably estimated at this time. Although the Revised Directive addresses some of the Company’s concerns and clarifies certain requirements of the Original Directive, ARI has identified significant issues with the Revised Directive. As a result, in a letter to the FRA dated November 28, 2016, ARI has requested that the FRA immediately rescind or stay the Revised Directive without reinstating the Original Directive. In addition, ARI has sought judicial review of and relief from the Revised Directive. On December 13, 2016, ARI filed a petition for review in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit against the FRA. In the petition, the Company asserted that (i) the Revised Directive was unlawful and inconsistent with administrative law, (ii) the Revised Directive is arbitrary, capricious and inconsistent with law, (iii) the FRA exceeded its authority when it issued the Revised Directive and (iv) the Revised Directive was an improper adjudication under applicable laws. The petition requests that the court review, remand and vacate, defer enforcement of, and/or stay pending review, the Revised Directive. Briefs have been filed relating to this ongoing matter and a hearing date has been set by the court for September 22, 2017. The Company cannot assure you that this petition will be successful in reversing or modifying the Revised Directive or, if it is successful, whether it will be successful in a reasonable amount of time to benefit railcar owners with cars subject to the Revised Directive. Regardless of the petition, significant uncertainty exists in connection with the Revised Directive and its implementation. The Company's attempts to comply with the Revised Directive may fail if it is unable to get clarification from the FRA on a variety of questions and the Company or other railcar owners cannot meet the expectations of the FRA in complying with the Revised Directive. Legal fees incurred with respect to this matter will be expensed in the period in which they occur, in accordance with the Company's accounting policy.

Commitments and Contingencies

The Company is subject to comprehensive federal, state, local and international environmental laws and regulations relating to the release or discharge of materials into the environment, the management, use, processing, handling, storage, transport or disposal of hazardous materials and wastes, and other laws and regulations relating to the protection of human health and the environment. These laws and regulations not only expose ARI to liability for the environmental condition of its current or formerly owned or operated facilities, and its own negligent acts, but also may expose ARI to liability for the conduct of others or for ARI’s actions that were in compliance with all applicable laws at the time such actions were taken. In addition, these laws may require significant expenditures to achieve compliance and are frequently modified or revised to impose new obligations. Civil and criminal fines and penalties and other sanctions may be imposed for non-compliance with these environmental laws and regulations. ARI’s operations that involve hazardous materials also raise potential risks of liability under common law.

Certain real property ARI acquired from ACF Industries LLC (ACF) in 1994 had been involved in investigation and remediation activities to address contamination both before and after their transfer to ARI. ACF is an affiliate of Mr. Carl Icahn, the Company’s principal beneficial stockholder through Icahn Enterprises L.P. (IELP). Substantially all of the issues identified with respect to these properties relate to the use of these properties prior to their transfer to ARI by ACF and for which ACF has retained liability for environmental contamination that may have existed at the time of transfer to ARI. ACF has also agreed to indemnify ARI for any cost that might be incurred with those existing issues. As of the date of this report, ARI does not believe it will incur material costs in connection with activities relating to these properties, but it cannot assure that this will be the case. If ACF fails to honor its obligations to ARI, ARI could be responsible for the cost of any additional investigation or remediation that may be required. The Company believes that its operations and facilities are in substantial compliance with applicable laws and regulations and that any noncompliance is not likely to have a material adverse effect on its financial condition or results of operations.

ARI is a party to collective bargaining agreements with labor unions at two repair facilities that will expire in January and September 2021, respectively, unless extended or modified. ARI is also party to a collective bargaining agreement with a labor union at a steel component manufacturing facility that was previously set to expire in April 2017. This collective bargaining agreement was extended and modified during the second quarter of 2017, so that it will now expire in April 2022, unless extended or modified.

The Company has various agreements with and commitments to related parties. See Note 14, Related Party Transactions, for further detail.

Certain claims, suits and complaints arising in the ordinary course of business have been filed or are pending against ARI. In the opinion of management, all such claims, suits, and complaints arising in the ordinary course of business are without merit or would not have a significant effect on the future liquidity, results of operations or financial position of ARI if disposed of unfavorably.

Gyansys

On October 24, 2014, the Company filed a complaint in United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against GyanSys Inc. (GyanSys). The complaint asserts a claim against GyanSys for breaching its contract with ARI to implement an enterprise resource planning system. The Company's complaint alleges that it has suffered damages in excess of $25 million as a result of GyanSys' breach. GyanSys filed a response to the suit denying its responsibility. It also alleged a counterclaim against ARI for breach of contract and wrongful termination, seeking equitable relief and damages, which GyanSys alleges to be more than $10 million. At this time, the Company does not have sufficient information to reasonably form an estimate of the potential outcome (gain or loss) of this litigation. As a result, no such accrual has been recorded. On September 9, 2015, the court denied ARI's motion to dismiss the wrongful termination counterclaim. However, ARI continues to believe that GyanSys' counterclaims lack merit and will continue to vigorously defend against these counterclaims. The trial began in June 2017 and is ongoing, with a decision expected before year end.

FRA Directive

On September 30, 2016, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) issued Railworthiness Directive (RWD) No. 2016-01 (the Original Directive). The Original Directive addressed, among other things, certain welding practices in one weld area in specified DOT 111 tank railcars manufactured between 2009 and 2015 by ARI and ACF. ACF is an affiliate of Mr. Carl Icahn, the Company's principal beneficial stockholder through IELP. The Company met and corresponded with the FRA following the issuance of the Original Directive to express the Company's concerns with the Original Directive and its impact on ARI, as well as the industry as a whole.

On November 18, 2016 (the Issuance Date), the FRA issued RWD No. 2016-01 [Revised] (the Revised Directive). The Revised Directive changes and supersedes the Original Directive.

The Original Directive indicated that approximately 14,800 general purpose tank railcars could be affected. The Revised Directive requires owners to identify their subject tank railcars and then from that population identify the 15% of subject tank railcars currently in hazardous materials service with the highest mileage in each tank car owner’s fleet. Visual inspection of each of the subject tank railcars is required by the car operator prior to putting any railcar into service. Owners must ensure appropriate inspection, testing and repairs, if needed, within twelve months of the Issuance Date for the 15% of their subject tank railcars identified to be in hazardous materials service with the highest mileage. The FRA will monitor and analyze the results of the 15% sample and has reserved the right to impose additional test and inspection requirements for the remaining fleet of tank railcars subject to the Revised Directive.

During 2016, the Company recorded a loss contingency of $12.3 million related to the Revised Directive to cover its probable and estimable liabilities taking into account available information and the Company's contractual obligations in its capacity as both a manufacturer and owner of railcars subject to the Revised Directive. During the three and six months ended June 30, 2017, there were no material developments related to the Revised Directive. During the second quarter of 2017, certain tank railcars subject to the Revised Directive were inspected, tested, and, if necessary, repaired, all as mandated by the Revised Directive. As a result of these services and the Company's revised assumptions, the contingency reserve was decreased to $10.1 million as of June 30, 2017. This contingency amount is included in accrued expenses and other liabilities on the condensed consolidated balance sheets and will continue to be evaluated as ARI's and its customers' compliance with the Revised Directive progresses and the Company evolves its understanding of the impact that the Revised Directive may have on its business, including results of operations and cash flows. Actual results could differ from this estimate.

It is reasonably possible that a loss exists in excess of the amount accrued by the Company. However, the amount of potential costs and expenses expected to be incurred for compliance with the Revised Directive in excess of the loss contingency of $10.1 million cannot be reasonably estimated at this time.

Although the Revised Directive addresses some of the Company’s concerns and clarifies certain requirements of the Original Directive, ARI has identified significant issues with the Revised Directive. As a result, in a letter to the FRA dated November 28, 2016, ARI has requested that the FRA immediately rescind or stay the Revised Directive without reinstating the Original Directive. In addition, ARI has sought judicial review of and relief from the Revised Directive. On December 13, 2016, ARI filed a petition for review in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit against the FRA. In the petition, the Company asserted that (i) the Revised Directive was unlawful and inconsistent with administrative law, (ii) the Revised Directive is arbitrary, capricious and inconsistent with law, (iii) the FRA exceeded its authority when it issued the Revised Directive and (iv) the Revised Directive was an improper adjudication under applicable laws. The petition requests that the court review, remand and vacate, defer enforcement of, and/or stay pending review, the Revised Directive. Briefs have been filed relating to this ongoing matter and a hearing date has been set by the court for September 22, 2017. The Company cannot assure you that this petition will be successful in reversing or modifying the Revised Directive or, if it is successful, whether it will be successful in a reasonable amount of time to benefit railcar owners with cars subject to the Revised Directive. Regardless of the petition, significant uncertainty exists in connection with the Revised Directive and its implementation. The Company's attempts to comply with the Revised Directive may fail if it is unable to get clarification from the FRA on a variety of questions and the Company or other railcar owners cannot meet the expectations of the FRA in complying with the Revised Directive.

Legal fees incurred with respect to this matter will be expensed in the period in which they occur, in accordance with the Company's accounting policy.