10-K

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

x ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For The Year Ended December 31, 2013

OR

¨ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For The Transition Period From            To

Commission file number 001-13795

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

Delaware	95-2588080
(State or other jurisdiction of Incorporation or organization)	(I.R.S. Employer Identification Number)

4695 MacArthur Court, Newport Beach, California	92660
(Address of principal executive offices)	(Zip Code)

(949) 260-1200

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Title of each class:	Name of each exchange on which registered:
Common Stock, $.10 par value	New York Stock Exchange

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

NONE

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.    Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15 (d) of the Act.     Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  x    No  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes  x    No  ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.  x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

Large accelerated filer  x Accelerated filer  ¨ Non-accelerated filer  ¨ Smaller reporting company  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).    Yes  ¨    No  x

The aggregate market value of the voting stock of the registrant held by non-affiliates is $656.2 million. This figure is estimated as of June 30, 2013 at which date the closing price of the registrant’s Common Stock on the New York Stock Exchange was $23.43 per share. For purposes of this calculation, shares owned by executive officers, directors, and 5% stockholders known to the registrant have been deemed to be owned by affiliates. The number of shares of $.10 par value Common Stock outstanding as of June 30, 2013, was 28,661,414. The number of shares of $.10 par value Common Stock outstanding as of February 20, 2014 was 28,772,622.

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

December 31, 2013

		Page No.
	PART I
Item 1.	Business	1
Item 1A.	Risk Factors	6
Item 1B.	Unresolved Staff Comments	8
Item 2.	Properties	8
Item 3.	Legal Proceedings	9
Item 4.	Mine Safety Disclosures	13
	PART II
Item 5.	Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities	13
Item 6.	Selected Financial Data	15
Item 7.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	15
Item 7A.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk	29
Item 8.	Financial Statements and Supplementary Data	29
Item 9.	Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure	29
Item 9A.	Controls and Procedures	29
Item 9B.	Other Information	32
	PART III
Item 10.	Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance	32
Item 11.	Executive Compensation	32
Item 12.	Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters	32
Item 13.	Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence	32
Item 14.	Principal Accountant Fees and Services	32
	PART IV
Item 15.	Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules	33
SIGNATURES AND CERTIFICATIONS		34

i

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

PART I

Unless otherwise indicated or the context otherwise requires, the terms “Company,” “we,” “us,” and “our” refer to American Vanguard Corporation and its consolidated subsidiaries (“AVD”).

Forward-looking statements in this report, including without limitation, statements relating to the Company’s plans, strategies, objectives, expectations, intentions, and adequacy of resources, are made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Investors are cautioned that such forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties. (Refer to PART II, Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation, Risk Factors, of this Annual Report.)

ITEM 1 BUSINESS

AVD was incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware in January 1969 and operates as a holding company. Unless the context otherwise requires, references to the “Company”, or the “Registrant”, in this Annual Report refer to AVD and its consolidated subsidiaries. The Company conducts its business through its subsidiaries, AMVAC Chemical Corporation (“AMVAC”), GemChem, Inc. (“GemChem”), 2110 Davie Corporation (“DAVIE”), Quimica Amvac de Mexico S.A. de C.V. (“AMVAC M”), AMVAC Mexico Sociedad de Responsabilidad Limitada (“AMVAC M Srl”), AMVAC de Costa Rica Sociedad de Responsabilidad Limitada (“AMVAC CR Srl”), AMVAC Switzerland GmbH (“AMVAC S”), AMVAC do Brasil Representácoes Ltda (“AMVAC B”), AMVAC CV (“AMVAC CV”), AMVAC Netherlands BV (“AMVAC BV”) and Envance Technologies, LLC (“Envance”).

Based on similar economic and operational characteristics, the Company’s business is aggregated into one reportable segment. Refer to Part I, Item 7 for selective enterprise information.

AMVAC

AMVAC is a California corporation that traces its history from 1945. AMVAC is a specialty chemical manufacturer that develops and markets products for agricultural, commercial and consumer uses. It manufactures and formulates chemicals for crops, turf and ornamental plants, and human and animal health protection. These chemicals, which include insecticides, fungicides, herbicides, molluscicides, growth regulators, and soil fumigants, are marketed in liquid, powder, and granular forms. In prior years, AMVAC considered itself a distributor-formulator, but now AMVAC primarily manufactures, distributes, and formulates its own proprietary products or custom manufactures or formulates for others. AMVAC has historically expanded its business through both the acquisition of established chemistries (which it has revived in the marketplace) and the development and commercialization of new compounds through licensing arrangements. Below is a description of the Company’s acquisition/licensing activity over the past five years.

On March 25, 2013, AVD made an equity investment in TyraTech Inc. (“TyraTech”), a Delaware corporation that specializes in developing, marketing and selling pesticide products containing essential oils and other natural ingredients. As of December 31, 2013, the Company’s ownership position in TyraTech was approximately 29.27%.

On November 30, 2012, AMVAC, along with TyraTech, formed Envance, a Delaware limited liability company. The Company holds a 60% equity interest in Envance and TyraTech holds a 40% equity interest. Envance develops and commercializes pesticide products and technologies in global consumer, commercial, professional, crop protection and seed treatment markets. Envance is headquartered at TyraTech’s facility in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

On October 7, 2011, AMVAC completed the acquisition of the international rights to the cotton defoliant product tribufos (sold under the trade name Def ^®) from Bayer CropScience AG (“BCS AG”). The acquired assets include registrations and data rights, rights relating to manufacturing and formulation know-how, inventories, and the trademark Def. Def complements AMVAC’s existing cotton defoliant product Folex^®, which it has marketed since 2002. This acquisition also complements the U.S. rights to Def that the Company purchased from BCS AG in July 2010 (see below). Both Folex and Def are fast and effective cotton defoliants that facilitate the removal of leaves surrounding the cotton boll and in combination with other products function as a harvest aid. AMVAC acquired the U.S. rights to Def from BCS AG on July 21, 2010.

1

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

On December 20, 2010, AMVAC completed the acquisition of a global product line relating to the active ingredient tebupirimfos from BCS AG. The acquired assets include product rights (registrations and data rights, rights relating to manufacturing and formulation know-how), inventories, the trademarks Aztec^®, Azteca^® and Capinda^® and customer lists associated with these products, which are insecticides that are used to combat such soil borne insects as rootworm, cutworm, wireworm, seed corn maggots/beetles and white grub in a variety of corn crops. Additionally, it is registered in South Korea (and sold under the trade name Capinda) for use primarily in vegetable crops such as Chinese cabbage and ginseng.

On December 7, 2010, AMVAC completed the acquisition of a global insecticide product line relating to the active ingredient ethoprophos (sold under the trade name Mocap^®) from BCS AG. The acquired assets include product rights (registrations and data rights, rights relating to manufacturing and formulation know-how), inventories, the Ultima^® packaging system, the trademarks Mocap and Ultima and customer lists associated with the product. Mocap is a leading soil insecticide that is registered in 50 countries where it is used to combat nematode species in a wide range of crops.

On December 7, 2010, AMVAC completed the acquisition of a global (except for Europe and Argentina) insecticide product line relating to the active ingredient fenamiphos (sold under the trade name Nemacur^®) from BCS AG. The acquired assets include product rights (registrations and data rights, rights relating to manufacturing and formulation know-how), inventories, the trademark Nemacur and customer lists associated with the product. Nemacur is a leading soil insecticide that is registered in 30 countries for use primarily as a nematicide with additional efficacy against above ground sucking insects.

On October 14, 2010, AMVAC and Kanesho Soil Treatment completed agreements with Certis-USA regarding the crop protection product Basamid^® (dazomet) under which AMVAC became the exclusive distributor and registration holder for this granular soil fumigant in the United States. Basamid complements the strong market position of AMVAC’s Vapam^® & K-Pam^® soil fumigant brands. The Company will be developing the use of Basamid for high-valued crop segments such as strawberries, tomatoes, lettuce & spinach and will be responsible for the re-registration of dazomet in the United States. In addition, beginning in 2014, the Company has started selling Basamid into the turf, greenhouse and ornamental markets.

Seasonality

The agricultural chemical industry, in general, is cyclical in nature. The demand for AMVAC’s products tends to be seasonal. Seasonal usage, however, does not necessarily follow calendar dates, but more closely follows varying growing seasonal patterns, weather conditions, weather related pressure from pests and customer marketing programs.

Backlog

AMVAC does not believe that backlog is a significant factor in its business. AMVAC primarily sells its products on the basis of purchase orders, although it has entered into requirements contracts with certain customers.

Customers

The Company’s largest three customers accounted for 17%, 13%, and 8% of the Company’s sales in 2013; 19%, 10%, and 8% in 2012; and 17%, 11% and 9% in 2011.

Distribution

AMVAC distributes its products domestically predominantly through national distribution companies and buying groups or co-operatives (see “Customers” above) that purchase AMVAC’s goods on a purchase order basis, and, in turn, sell them to retailers/growers/end-users. The company’s domestic and international customers typically have long-established relationships with retailers/end-users, far-reaching logistics and transportation capabilities, and customer service expertise. The markets for AMVAC products vary by region, target crop, use and type of distribution channel. AMVAC’s customers are expert at addressing these markets. The company manages its international sales through its Netherlands’ office and sells product outside of the U.S. either via its sales offices in the Netherlands, Mexico or Cost Rica, via employed sales force executives located in France, Canada and Venezuela, or via sales agents in other territories.

Competition

AMVAC faces competition from many domestic and foreign manufacturers in its marketplaces. Competition in AMVAC’s marketplace is based primarily on quality, efficacy, price, safety and ease of application. Many of our competitors are larger and have substantially greater financial and technical resources than AMVAC. AMVAC’s ability to compete depends on its ability to develop additional applications for its current products and expand its product lines and customer base. AMVAC competes principally on the basis of the quality and efficacy of its products, price and the technical service and support given to its customers.

2

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Generally, the treatment against pests of any kind is broad in scope, there being more than one way or one product for treatment, eradication, or suppression. In some cases, AMVAC has attempted to position itself in smaller niche markets which are no longer addressed by larger companies. In other cases, for example in the Midwestern corn market, the company competes directly with larger competitors.

Manufacturing

Through its four domestic manufacturing facilities (see Item 2, Properties), AMVAC synthesizes many of the technical grade active ingredients that are in its end-use products. Further, AMVAC formulates and packages the majority of its end-use products at its own facilities or at the facilities of third-party formulators.

Raw Materials

AMVAC utilizes numerous companies to supply the various raw materials and components used in manufacturing its products. Many of these materials are readily available from domestic sources. In those instances where there is a single source of supply or where the source is not domestic, AMVAC seeks to secure its supply by either long-term (multi-year) arrangements or purchasing on long lead times from its suppliers. AMVAC believes that it is considered to be a valued customer to such sole-source suppliers.

Intellectual Property

AMVAC’s proprietary product formulations are protected, to the extent possible, as trade secrets and, to a lesser extent, by patents. The company’s closed delivery systems are patented and AMVAC has made applications for related inventions to expand its equipment portfolio. Further, AMVAC’s trademarks bring value to its products in both domestic and foreign markets. AMVAC considers that, in the aggregate, its trademarks, licenses, and patents constitute a valuable asset; however, it does not regard its business as being materially dependent upon any single trademark, license, or patent.

EPA Registrations

AMVAC’s products also receive protection afforded by the effect of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (“FIFRA”) legislation. The legislation makes it unlawful to sell any pesticide in the United States, unless such pesticide has first been registered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“USEPA”). Substantially all of AMVAC’s products are subject to USEPA registration and re-registration requirements and are registered in accordance with FIFRA. This registration by USEPA is based, among other things, on data demonstrating that the product will not cause unreasonable adverse effects on human health or the environment, when it is used according to approved label directions. All states, where any of AMVAC’s products are used, require a registration by that specific state before it can be marketed or used in that state. State registrations are renewed annually, as appropriate. The USEPA and state agencies have required, and may require in the future, that certain scientific data requirements be performed on registered products sold by AMVAC. AMVAC, on its own behalf and in joint efforts with other registrants, has furnished, and is currently furnishing, certain required data relative to specific products.

Under FIFRA, the federal government requires registrants to submit a wide range of scientific data to support U.S. registrations. This requirement results in operating expenses in such areas as regulatory compliance with U.S. EPA and other such bodies in the markets in which we sell our products, and the production of new products or new formulation of existing products. AMVAC expensed $16,526, $17,809, and $15,496 during 2013, 2012 and 2011 respectively, on these activities.

	2013		2012		2011
Registration		11,556		13,168		11,593
Product Development		4,970		4,641		3,903
		16,526		17,809		15,496

See also PART II, Item 7 of this Annual Report on form 10-K for discussions pertaining to research and development expenses.

Environmental

During 2013, AMVAC continued activities to address environmental issues associated with its facility in Commerce, CA. (the “Facility”). An outline of the history of those activities follows.

3

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

In 1995, the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (“DTSC”) conducted a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”) Facility Assessment (“RFA”) of those facilities having hazardous waste storage permits. In March 1997, the RFA culminated in DTSC accepting the Facility into its Expedited Remedial Action Program. Under this program, the Facility was required to conduct an environmental investigation and health risk assessment. Depending on the findings of these investigations, the Facility might also be required to develop and implement remedial measures to address any historical environmental impairment.

This activity then took two paths: the RCRA permit closure and the larger site characterization. With respect to the permit closure, in 1998, AMVAC began the formal process to close its hazardous waste permit at the Facility (which had allowed AMVAC to store hazardous waste longer than 90 days) as required by federal regulations. Formal regulatory closure actions began in 2005 and were completed in 2008, as evidenced by DTSC’s October 1, 2008 acknowledgement of AMVAC’s Closure Certification Report.

With respect to the site characterization, soil and groundwater characterization activities began in December 2002 in accordance with the Site Investigation Plan that was approved by the DTSC. Additional activities were conducted from 2003 to 2013, with oversight provided by the DTSC. Additional review of groundwater and soil data is being conducted in response to federally-mandated initiatives of similarly affected sites. Risk assessment activities have concluded. At present, the company is finalizing the location of groundwater monitoring wells and preparing a remedial action plan for submission in 2014. Until the remedial action plan has been submitted and comments are received from DTSC, it is uncertain whether the cost associated with further investigation and potential remediation activities will have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements or its results of operations. Thus, the Company is unable to determine what sort of remediation is probable, nor can the cost of remediation be reasonably estimated (the scope can vary depending upon the risk assessment and many other factors). Accordingly, the Company has not set up a loss contingency with respect thereto.

AMVAC is subject to numerous federal and state laws and governmental regulations concerning environmental matters and employee health and safety at the Axis, AL; Commerce, CA; Marsing, ID; and Hannibal, MO facilities. AMVAC continually adapts its manufacturing process to the environmental control standards of the various regulatory agencies. The USEPA and other federal and state agencies have the authority to promulgate regulations that could have an impact on AMVAC’s operations.

AMVAC expends substantial funds to minimize the discharge of materials in the environment and to comply with the governmental regulations relating to protection of the environment. Wherever feasible, AMVAC recovers and recycles raw materials and increases product yield in order to partially offset increasing pollution abatement costs.

The Company is committed to a long-term environmental protection program that reduces emissions of hazardous materials into the environment, as well as to the remediation of identified existing environmental concerns.

Employees

As of December 31, 2013, the Company employed 499 employees. From time to time, due to the seasonality of its business, AMVAC uses temporary contract personnel to perform certain duties primarily related to packaging of its products. None of the Company’s employees are subject to a collective bargaining agreement. The Company believes it maintains positive relations with its employees.

Domestic operations

AMVAC is a California corporation that was incorporated under the name of Durham Chemical in August 1945. The name of the corporation was subsequently changed to AMVAC in January 1973. As the Company’s main operating subsidiary, it owns and/or operates the Company’s domestic manufacturing facilities and is also the parent company (owns 99%) of AMVAC CV. AMVAC manufactures, formulates, packages and sells its products predominantly in the USA and is a wholly owned subsidiary of AVD.

GemChem is a California corporation incorporated in 1991 and purchased by the Company in 1994. GemChem, in addition to purchasing key raw materials for the Company, also sells into the pharmaceutical, cosmetic and nutritional markets. GemChem is a wholly owned subsidiary of AVD.

DAVIE currently owns real estate for corporate use only. See also PART I, Item 2 of this Annual Report. DAVIE is a wholly owned subsidiary of AVD.

4

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

On November 30, 2012, AMVAC and TyraTech formed a Delaware limited liability company, Envance, in which the Company owns 60% of the equity interest. Envance develops and commercializes pesticide products and technologies made from natural oils in global consumer, commercial, professional, crop protection and seed treatment markets.

International operations

In November 2013, a new Mexican entity, AMVAC M Srl, was incorporated to conduct business in Mexico; this entity is part of the new international business structure and is owned and managed by AMVAC BV.

In July 2012, the Company formed AMVAC CV which is incorporated in the Netherlands, for the purpose of managing foreign sales on behalf of the Company. AMVAC CV is owned jointly by AMVAC as the general partner and AVD International, LLC as the limited partner (a wholly owned subsidiary of AVD).

AMVAC BV is a registered Dutch private limited liability company, a company formed in July 2012. AMVAC BV is located in the Netherlands and is wholly owned by AMVAC CV. During 2013, the international business made sales in in 56 countries.

The Company opened an office in 2008 in Costa Rica to conduct business in Costa Rica and other countries in Central America. The office is operated by AMVAC CR Srl and markets chemical products for agricultural and commercial uses.

The Company opened an office in Basel, Switzerland in 2006. The office is operated by AMVAC S. The Company formed the new subsidiary to expand its resources dedicated to business development opportunities.

The Company also formed a Brazilian entity in 2006 operating as AMVAC B. It functions primarily to maintain the company’s registrations in that country.

The Company opened an office in 1998 in Mexico to conduct business primarily in Mexico. The office is operated by AMVAC M Srl and markets chemical products for agricultural and commercial uses.

The Company classifies as export sales all products bearing foreign labeling shipped to a foreign destination.

	2013			2012			2011
Export sales	$	69,772		$	69,909		$	63,454
Percentage of net sales		18.3	%		19.1	%		21.1	%

Risk Management

The Company regularly monitors matters, whether insurable or not, that could pose material risk to its operations. In 2010, the Board formed a Risk Committee, which, consists of three members of the Board of Directors. It should be noted that, usually, all members of the Board attend the regular meetings of the Risk Committee. The committee meets regularly with senior management to evaluate the Company’s risk profile, to identify mitigation measures and to ensure that the Company is prudently managing these risks. In support of the Risk Committee senior management has appointed a risk manager and designated several senior executives to lead teams focused on addressing each of several of the most material risks facing the Company; these groups perform analysis with the benefit of operational knowledge. The top risks identified by management and being addressed by risk teams (in no particular order) include: adverse political and regulatory climate; ensuring a reliable and continuous supply of raw materials, intermediates and active ingredients; succession planning and bench strength; maintaining a competitive edge in the marketplace; the possibility of an environmental event; undervaluation of the company; and availability of acquisition and licensing targets. Over the course of 2013, the company continued to implement its enterprise risk management program, which extends to all areas of potential risk and is intended to serve as a permanent feature in the Company’s operation. In addition, the Company continually evaluates insurance levels for product liability, property damage and other potential areas of risk. Management believes its facilities and equipment are adequately insured against loss from usual business risks.

Available Information

The Company makes available free of charge (through its website, www.american-vanguard.com), its Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and all amendments to those reports as soon as reasonably practicable after such material is electronically filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Such reports are also available free of charge on the SEC website, www.sec.gov. Also available free of charge on the Company’s website are the Company’s Audit Committee, Compensation Committee, Finance Committee and Nominating

5

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

and Corporate Governance Committee Charters, the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines, the Company’s Code of Conduct and Ethics, the Company’s Employee Complaint Procedures for Accounting and Auditing Matters and our policy on Stockholder Nomination and Communication. The Company’s Internet website and the information contained therein or incorporated therein are not intended to be incorporated into this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

The regulatory climate has grown increasingly challenging to the Company’s interests both domestically and internationally—Various agencies within the U.S. government continue to exercise increased scrutiny in permitting continued uses (or the expansion of such uses) of older chemistries, including many of the Company’s products and, in some cases, have initiated or entertained challenges to these uses. The challenge of the regulatory climate is even more pronounced in certain other geographical regions where the Company faces resistance to the continued use of certain of its products. There is no guarantee that this climate will change in the near term, nor is there any guarantee that the Company will be able to maintain or expand the uses of many of its products in the face of these regulatory challenges.

The Company’s business may be adversely affected by cyclical and seasonal effects—Demand for the Company’s products tends to be seasonal. Seasonal usage follows varying agricultural seasonal patterns, weather conditions and weather related pressure from pests, and customer marketing programs and requirements. Weather patterns can have an impact on the Company’s operations. For example, the end user of its products may, because of weather patterns, delay or intermittently disrupt field work during the planting season, which may result in a reduction of the use of some products and therefore may reduce the Company’s revenues and profitability. There can be no assurance that the Company will adequately address any adverse seasonal effects.

The Company’s financial performance may be disproportionately affected by the strength or weakness of specific markets. From 2010 through 2012, the Company enjoyed dramatic growth in its corn product lines sold primarily into the Midwestern United States. By 2013, those products accounted for approximately 38% of the company’s total net sales. However, due to prolonged wet conditions in early 2013, excess inventory of corn crop inputs (including some of the company’s products) has accumulated in the distribution channel. This market condition adversely affected the company’s overall financial performance in the fourth quarter and for the full year of 2013. While the Company believes that this is a temporary condition, there is no guarantee that market conditions will return to the historical norm or that other conditions adversely affecting the market will not come about.

Use of the Company’s products is subject to continuing challenges from activist groups—Use of agrochemical products, including the Company’s products is regularly challenged by activist groups in many jurisdictions under a multitude of federal and state statutes, including FIFRA, the Food Quality Protection Act, Endangered Species Act, and the Clean Water Act, to name a few. These challenges typically take the form of lawsuits or administrative proceedings against the USEPA and/or other federal or state agencies, the filing of amicus briefs in pending actions, the introduction of legislation that is inimical to the Company’s interests, and/or adverse comments made in response to public comment invited by USEPA in the course of registration, re-registration or label expansion. It is possible that one or more of these challenges could succeed, resulting in a material adverse effect upon one or more of our products.

The distribution and sale of the Company’s products are subject to prior governmental approvals and thereafter ongoing governmental regulation—The Company’s products are subject to laws administered by federal, state and foreign governments, including regulations requiring registration, approval and labeling of its products. The labeling requirements restrict the use of and type of application for our products. More stringent restrictions could make our products less available, which would adversely affect our revenues and profitability. Substantially all of the Company’s products are subject to the USEPA, and similar agencies in the jurisdictions in which we do business, registration and re-registration requirements, and are registered in accordance with FIFRA. Such registration requirements are based, among other things, on data demonstrating that the product will not cause unreasonable adverse effects on human health or the environment when used according to approved label directions. All states where any of the Company’s products are used also require registration before they can be marketed or used in that state. Governmental regulatory authorities have required, and may require in the future, that certain scientific data requirements be performed on the Company’s products. The Company, on its behalf and also in joint efforts with other registrants, has and is currently furnishing certain required data relative to its products. There can be no assurance, however, that the USEPA will not request that certain tests or studies be repeated or that more stringent legislation or requirements will not be imposed in the future. The Company can provide no assurance that any testing approvals or registrations will be granted on a timely basis, if at all, or that its resources will be adequate to meet the costs of regulatory compliance.

6

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

The manufacturing of the Company’s products is subject to governmental regulations—The Company currently owns and operates three manufacturing facilities in Los Angeles, California; Axis, Alabama; and Marsing, Idaho and owns and has manufacturing services provided in a fourth facility in Hannibal, Missouri (the “Facilities”). The Facilities operate under the terms and conditions imposed by required licenses and permits by state and local authorities. The manufacturing of key ingredients for certain of the Company’s products occurs at the Facilities. An inability to renew or maintain a license or permit or a significant increase in the fees for such licenses or permits could impede the Company’s manufacture of one or more of its products and/or increase the cost of production; this, in turn, would materially and adversely affect the Company’s ability to provide its products in a timely and affordable manner.

The Company faces competition in certain markets from new technologies, both genetic and chemical—The Company faces competition from larger companies that market new chemistries, genetically modified (“GMO”) seeds and other similar technologies (e.g., RNA interference) in certain of the crop protection sectors in which the Company competes, particularly that of corn. In fact, many growers that have chosen to use GMO seeds have reduced their use of the types of pesticides sold by the Company. There is no guarantee that the Company will maintain its market share or pricing levels in sectors that are subject to competition from companies that market these technologies.

The Company is dependent upon certain sole source suppliers for certain of its active ingredients—In conjunction with the purchase and/or licensing of various product lines (including Impact^® and Force^®), the Company has entered into multi-year supply arrangements under which such counterparties are the sole source of either active ingredients and/or formulated end-use product. In some cases, the manufacturer has been unable to deliver the volume of product necessary to meet the Company’s demand. In some cases, the manufacturer has entered the market as a competitor. There is no guarantee that these sole source manufacturers will be willing or able to supply these products to the Company reliably, continuously and at the levels anticipated by the Company or required by the market. In addition, while the Company is making efforts to transfer production of certain of these products to its own facilities, there is no guarantee that these initiatives will be successful or that they will be completed in a timely fashion so as to permit the Company to meet market demand in the short to mid-term. If these sources prove to be unreliable and the Company is not able to supplant or otherwise second source these manufacturers, it is possible that the Company will not realize its projected sales, which, in turn, could adversely affect the Company’s results of operation.

The Company may be subject to environmental liabilities—While the Company expends substantial funds to minimize the discharge of materials into the environment and to comply with governmental regulations relating to protection of the environment and its workforce, federal and state authorities may nevertheless seek fines and penalties for violation of the various laws and governmental regulations. Further, these various governmental agencies could, among other things, impose liability on the Company for cleaning up the damage resulting from the release of pesticides and other agents into the environment. In addition, while the Company continually adapts its manufacturing processes to the environmental control standards of regulatory authorities, it cannot completely eliminate the risk of accidental contamination or injury from hazardous or regulated materials. In the event of such contamination or injury, the Company may be held liable for significant damages or fines. In the event that such damages or fines are assessed, it could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operation.

The Company faces competition from generic competitors that source product from countries having lower cost structures—The Company continues to face competition from competitors that may enter the market through making offers to pay data compensation and then subsequently may source material from countries having lower cost structures (typically India and China). These competitors typically tend to operate at thinner gross margins and, with low costs of goods, can drive pricing and profitability of subject product lines downward. Further, such competitors typically spend little on product stewardship and employ few personnel within the United States. In effect, they may attempt to commoditize all products which they distribute; that is, they operate by offering the lowest price goods. There is no guarantee that the Company will maintain market share and pricing over generic competitors or that such competitors will not offer generic versions of the Company’s products in the future.

The Company’s key customers typically carry competing product lines and may be influenced by the Company’s larger competitors—A significant portion of the Company’s products are sold to national distributors in the United States, which also carry product lines of competitors that are much larger than the Company. Typically, revenues from the sales of these competing product lines and related program incentives constitute a greater part of our distributors’ income than do revenues from sales and program incentives arising from the Company’s product lines. Further, these distributors are often under pressure to market competing product lines in favor of the Company’s. In light of these facts, there is no assurance that such customers will continue to market our products aggressively or successfully or that the Company will be able to influence such customers to continue to purchase our products instead of those of our competitors.

7

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

To the extent that capacity utilization is not fully realized at its manufacturing facilities, the Company may experience lower profitability—The Company has pursued a business strategy of acquiring manufacturing facilities at a steep discount to their replacement value. These acquisitions have enabled the Company to be more independent of overseas manufacturers than some of our competitors. While the Company endeavors continuously to maximize utilization of these several facilities, our success in these endeavors is dependent upon many factors beyond our control, including fluctuating market conditions, product life cycles, weather conditions, availability of raw materials and regulatory constraints, among other things. There can be no assurance that the Company will be able to maximize its utilization of capacity at its manufacturing facilities. To the extent that the Company experiences excess manufacturing capacity, it may experience lower profitability.

Reduced availability and higher prices of raw materials may reduce the Company’s profitability and could threaten the viability of some of its products—In the recent past, there has been a material reduction in the number of suppliers of certain important raw materials used by the Company in many of its products. Certain of these raw materials are available solely from sources overseas or from single sources domestically. In the recent past, the price of these raw materials has fluctuated sharply. There can be no assurance that the Company will be able to source some or all of these materials indefinitely or that it will be able to do so at a level of cost that will enable it to maintain its current profit margin on its products.

Dependence on the Company’s banking relationship—The Company’s main bank is Bank of the West, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the French bank, BNP Paribas. Bank of the West has been the Company’s primary bank for more than 30 years. Bank of the West is the syndication manager for the Company’s loans and acts as the counterparty on the Company’s derivative transactions. In addition to Bank of the West, the syndicated banks include Wells Fargo Bank, BMO Capital Markets Financing, Union Bank, Agstar Financial Services ACA and Greenstone Farm Credit. The Company reviews the creditworthiness of its banks on a quarterly basis via credit agencies and also has face-to-face meetings with senior management of the banks. Management believes that the Company has an excellent working relationship with Bank of the West and the other financial institutions in the Company’s lender group. In light of the uncertainties in global financial markets, there is no guarantee, however, that the Company’s lenders will be either willing or able to continue lending to the Company at such rates and in such amounts as may be necessary to meet the Company’s working capital needs.

The Company is dependent on a limited number of customers, which makes it vulnerable to the continued relationship with and financial health of those customers—In 2013, three customers accounted for 38% of the Company’s sales. The Company’s future prospects will depend on the continued business of such customers and on our continued status as a qualified supplier to such customers. The Company cannot guarantee that our current significant customers will continue to buy products from us at current levels. The loss of a key customer could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operation.

ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

None

ITEM 2 PROPERTIES

AMVAC owns in fee the Facility constituting approximately 152,000 square feet of improved land in Commerce, California (“Commerce”) on which its West Coast manufacturing and some of its warehouse facilities and offices are located.

DAVIE owns in fee approximately 72,000 square feet of warehouse, office and laboratory space on approximately 118,000 square feet of land in Commerce, California, which is leased to AMVAC. In 2013, the Company made a significant investment in the Glenn A. Wintemute Research Center, which houses the Company’s primary research laboratory supporting synthesis, formulation and other new product endeavors.

In 2001, AMVAC completed the acquisition of a manufacturing facility from E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Company (“DuPont”). The facility is one of three such units located on DuPont’s 510 acre complex in Axis, Alabama. The acquisition consisted of a long-term ground lease of 25 acres and the purchase of all improvements thereon. The facility is a multi-purpose plant designed for synthesis of active ingredients and formulation and packaging of finished products.

8

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

On December 28, 2007, AMVAC, pursuant to the provisions of the definitive Sale and Purchase Agreement (the “Agreement”) dated as of November 27, 2006 between AMVAC and Badische Anilin-und Soda-Fabrik (“BASF”), through which AMVAC purchased the global Counter product line. AMVAC purchased certain manufacturing assets relating to the production of Counter and Thimet and located at BASF’s multi-plant facility situated in Hannibal, Missouri (the “Hannibal Site”). Subject to the terms and conditions of the Agreement, AMVAC purchased certain buildings, manufacturing equipment, office equipment, fixtures, supplies, records, raw materials, intermediates and packaging constituting the “T/C Unit” of the Hannibal Site. The parties entered into a ground lease and a manufacturing and shared services agreement, under which BASF continues to supply various shared services to AMVAC from the Hannibal Site.

On March 7, 2008, AMVAC acquired from BCS LP a facility (the “Marsing Facility”) located in Marsing, ID, which consists of approximately 17 acres of improved real property, 15 of which are owned by AMVAC and two of which AMVAC leases from the City of Marsing for a term of 25 years. The Marsing Facility is engaged in the blending of liquid and powder raw materials and the packaging of finished liquid products in the agricultural chemical field. With this acquisition, AMVAC acquired the ability to formulate flowable materials. In connection with the acquisition, AMVAC and BCS LP agreed to enter into a master processor agreement under which AMVAC provides certain third party manufacturing services to BCS LP on an ongoing basis that continues in 2014.

The production areas of AMVAC’s facilities are designed to run on a continuous 24 hour per day basis. AMVAC regularly adds chemical processing equipment to enhance its production capabilities. AMVAC believes its facilities are in good operating condition, are suitable and adequate for current needs, can be modified to accommodate future needs, have flexibility to change products, and can produce at greater rates as required. Facilities and equipment are insured against losses from fire as well as other usual business risks. The Company knows of no material defects in title to, or encumbrances on, any of its properties except that substantially all of the Company’s assets are pledged as collateral under the Company’s loan agreements with its primary lender group. For further information, refer to note 2 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements in PART IV, Item 15 of this Annual Report.

AMVAC owns approximately 42 acres of unimproved land in Texas for possible future expansion.

The Company leases approximately 23,800 square feet of office space located at 4695 MacArthur Court in Newport Beach, California. The premises serve as the Company’s corporate headquarters and include offices for the CEO, CFO, Finance, Sales, Marketing, Customer Service, Business Development, Marketing, Regulatory, and Administration. The subject lease expires June 30, 2016 and includes a right to extend the term for one additional five-year term.

AMVAC BV’s, GemChem’s, AMVAC UK’s, AMVAC M’s, AMVAC M Srl’s, AMVAC CR Srl’s and AMVAC S’s facilities consist of administration and sales offices which are leased.

ITEM 3 LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

A. DBCP Cases

Over the course of the past 30 years, AMVAC and/or the Company have been named or otherwise implicated in a number of lawsuits concerning injuries allegedly arising from either contamination of water supplies or personal exposure to 1, 2-dibromo-3-chloropropane (“DBCP^®”). DBCP was manufactured by several chemical companies, including Dow Chemical Company, Shell Oil Company and AMVAC and was approved by the USEPA to control nematodes. DBCP was also applied on banana farms in Latin America. The USEPA suspended registrations of DBCP in October 1979, except for use on pineapples in Hawaii. The USEPA suspension was partially based on 1977 studies by other manufacturers that indicated a possible link between male fertility and exposure to DBCP among their factory production workers involved with producing the product.

At present, there are approximately 100 lawsuits, foreign and domestic, filed by former banana workers in which AMVAC has been named as a party. Fifteen of these suits have been filed in the United States (with prayers for unspecified damages) and the remainder have been filed in Nicaragua.

As described more fully below, activity in domestic cases during 2013 is as follows: in Hawaii, Patrickson, et. al. v. Dole Food Company, et. al which had been dismissed in 2011, remains on appeal; and Adams, from which co-defendant Dole was dismissed, is on appeal with respect to such dismissal and, at any rate, involves claims that pre-dated AMVAC’s sales into the relevant market. In Louisiana and Delaware, there has been much overlapping activity. Three actions filed in Louisiana state court (Soriano et al) in November 1999 have been dismissed due to expiration of the statute of limitations; however, plaintiffs appealed the dismissal in 2013. Seven cases filed by HendlerLaw, P.C. in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana (Aguilar et al) were dismissed (due to expiration of the statute of limitations), then appealed by

9

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

plaintiffs, and the dismissal was upheld by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal in 2013. In Delaware, the Blanco case (involving a single Costa Rican claimant) survived defendants’ motion to dismiss for expiration of the statute of limitations, was then appealed to the Delaware Supreme Court by defendants, and upheld by that court which recognized the doctrine of cross jurisdictional tolling. Also, in Delaware, HendlerLaw, P.C. filed nine matters during 2012, eight with the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware and one before the Delaware state court (Chaverri). Six of the federal matters were identical to claims then pending before the Louisiana courts and, upon defendants’ motion, were dismissed by the Delaware federal court, then appealed by plaintiffs, and the dismissals were subsequently upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Two of the eight Delaware cases (Abad-Castillo and Marquinez) (involving claims brought on behalf of 2,700 plantation workers from Costa Rica, Ecuador, Guatemala and Panama) remain pending and are the subject of motions to dismiss.

Delaware Matters

On or about July 21, 2011, an action encaptioned, Blanco v. AMVAC Chemical Corporation et al., was filed with the Superior Court of the State of Delaware in and for New Castle County (No. N11C-07-149 JOH) on behalf of an individual plaintiff, residing in Costa Rica, against several defendants, including, among others, AMVAC, The Dow Chemical Company, Occidental Chemical Corporation, and Dole Food Company. In the action, plaintiff claims personal injury (sterility) arising from the alleged exposure to DBCP between 1979 and 1980 while working as a contract laborer in a banana plantation in Costa Rica. Defendant Dow filed a motion to dismiss the action as being barred under the applicable statute of limitations, as this same plaintiff filed the same claim in Florida in 1995 and subsequently withdrew the matter. Plaintiff contends that the statute of limitations was tolled by a prior motion for class certification, which was denied. On August 8, 2012, the court denied Dow’s motion to dismiss based upon applicable statutes of limitation. In response to that denial, on August 20, 2012, defendants filed a motion for interlocutory appeal and, on September 18, 2012, the Delaware Supreme Court granted interlocutory appeal on the question of whether the State of Delaware will recognize cross jurisdictional tolling (that is, whether it is proper for a Delaware court to follow the class action tolling of another jurisdiction, in this case, Texas, rather than its own two year statute of limitations). On June 10, 2013, the Delaware Supreme Court denied the appeal and upheld the lower court ruling, holding that it was proper to extend the class action tolling exception to cross-jurisdictional class action cases. Thus, Blanco remains pending. AMVAC contends that the plaintiff could not have been exposed to any DBCP supplied by AMVAC in Costa Rica and intends to defend the matter vigorously. The Company does not believe that a loss is either probable or reasonably estimable and has not set up a loss contingency for the matter.

On or about May 31, 2012 (the day on which the trial court in Blanco denied defendants’ motion to dismiss), HendlerLaw, P.C., which represents plaintiffs in seven related matters that had been pending before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana (the “Hendler-Louisiana Cases” referred to in the Company’s Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2011 as Aguilar et al., v. Dole Fruit Company, Inc., et al (U.S.D.C., E.D. of LA No. CV-01305-CJB-SS)), filed nine separate actions, eight with the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (the “Hendler—Delaware Cases” (USCD DE No. 1:12-CV-00696-RGA)) and one with the Superior Court of the State of Delaware (which, for purposes of this filing shall be referred to as Chaverri et al. v. Dole Food Company, Inc. et al., case no. N12C-06-017-JOH). Six of the eight Hendler—Delaware cases and Chaverri involve claims for personal injury allegedly arising from exposure to DBCP on behalf of 235 banana workers from Costa Rica, Ecuador and Panama. Dole subsequently brought a motion to dismiss these seven matters under the “first-to-file” theory of jurisdiction, specifically in light of the fact that they involved identical claims and claimants as those appearing in the Hendler—Louisiana cases. On August 21, 2012, the U.S. District Court in the Hendler-Delaware cases granted defendants’ motion to dismiss six complaints (filed on behalf of 235 plaintiffs) finding that the same claimants and claims were pending in the Hendler-Louisiana cases where they had been first filed. Plaintiffs appealed the dismissal; however, on September 19, 2013, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal upheld the lower court’s decision, finding no reason to reverse the dismissal.

In October 2012, the federal district court in Louisiana granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the Hendler-Louisiana Cases for plaintiffs’ failure to bring the action within the applicable statute of limitations. On October 16, 2013, Plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal in the Hendler-Delaware cases. The Company believes that the appeal has no merit. Further, with respect to Chaverri, at this stage of the proceedings, the Company does not believe that a loss is either probable or reasonably estimable and has not set up a loss contingency.

Two of the eight Hendler-Delaware Cases (namely, Abad-Castillo and Marquinez) are unrelated to the Hendler-Louisiana Cases and, involve claims for physical injury arising from alleged exposure to DBCP over the course of the late 1960’s through the mid-1980’s on behalf of 2,700 banana plantation workers from Costa Rica, Ecuador, Guatemala and Panama. Defendant Dole brought a motion to dismiss 22 plaintiffs from the Abad-Castillo case on the ground that they were parties in the Hendler-Louisiana cases. On September 19, 2013, the appeals court granted, in part, and denied, in part, the

10

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

motion to dismiss, holding that 14 of the 22 plaintiffs should be dismissed (as they were named as plaintiffs in a prior action filed by the Hendler law firm in Louisiana). As for the remaining eight plaintiffs, the court found that there was a question as to whether they were parties to earlier cases in Louisiana. Defendants are investigating possible defenses to Abad-Castillo and Marquinez, including whether any of the claimants had appeared in prior actions that may have been settled or dismissed, what statutes of limitations may apply, and whether claimants used any of defendants’ products. AMVAC intends to defend these matters vigorously. No discovery has commenced in either case, and it is too early to predict whether a loss is either probable or reasonably estimable; accordingly, the company has not set up a loss contingency on either of these matters.

Hawaiian Matters

Patrickson, et. al. v. Dole Food Company, et. al

In October 1997, AMVAC was served with two complaints in which it was named as a defendant, filed in the Circuit Court, First Circuit, State of Hawaii and in the Circuit Court of the Second Circuit, State of Hawaii (two identical suits) entitled Patrickson, et. al. v. Dole Food Company, et. al (“Patrickson Case”) alleging damages sustained from injuries (including sterility) to banana workers caused by plaintiffs’ exposure to DBCP while applying the product in their native countries. Other named defendants include: Dole Food Company, Shell Oil Company and Dow Chemical Company. The ten named plaintiffs are variously citizens of four countries—Guatemala, Costa Rica, Panama, and Ecuador. Punitive damages are sought against each defendant. The case was also filed as a class action on behalf of other workers allegedly so exposed in these four countries.

After several years of law and motion activity, Dow filed a motion for summary adjudication as to the remaining plaintiffs based on the statute of limitations, as they had filed suit in Florida in 1995. All defendants joined in this motion. The court granted this motion on June 9, 2009. Plaintiffs’ counsel unsuccessfully argued that their claims were tolled by prior class action cases. On November 30, 2009, the court denied a motion for reconsideration. Judgment in favor of the defendants was entered on July 28, 2010. On August 24, 2010, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal, which is presently pending. In March 2011, Dow filed a brief in opposition to the appeal, arguing that plaintiffs are barred from this action by the applicable statute of limitations. Following the completion of briefing on April 8, 2011, counsel for plaintiffs filed a pleading to withdraw and to substitute new counsel. The court has not ruled on any of the pending motions, nor do the court rules require that the court rule by any particular date. The Company does not believe that a loss is either probable or reasonably estimable and, accordingly, has not set up a loss contingency for this matter.

Adams v. Dole Food Company et al

On approximately November 23, 2007, AMVAC was served with a suit filed by two former Hawaiian pineapple workers (and their spouses), alleging that they had testicular cancer due to DBCP exposure: Adams v. Dole Food Company et al in the First Circuit for the State of Hawaii. The complaint was filed on June 29, 2007 and names Dole Food Company, Standard Fruit and Steamship Company, Dole Fresh Food, Pineapple Growers Association, AMVAC, Shell Oil Company, Dow Chemical Company and Occidental Chemical Corporation. Plaintiff Mark Adams alleges he was exposed to DBCP in 1974 and 1975 while working on Dole’s plantation on Oahu. Plaintiff Nelson Ng alleges he was exposed between 1971 and 1973 while working in Lanai City, Lanai. AMVAC answered the complaint on or about December 14, 2007. While little discovery has taken place, AMVAC denies that any of its product could have been used at the times and locations alleged by these plaintiffs. Dole Food Company was dismissed on the basis of the exclusive remedy of worker’s compensation benefits, as it was the employer of plaintiffs. However, plaintiffs have been granted relief to seek an interim appeal as to the dismissal of Dole, which appeal is pending. A stay has been placed on discovery other than to obtain written records. Recent pleadings included a request for withdrawal of plaintiffs’ counsel and substitution of new counsel. The substitution was denied by the court on November 14, 2012. There is no estimated date of opinion. The Company does not believe that a loss is either probable or reasonably estimable and has not set up a loss contingency for this matter.

Louisiana Matters (Federal)

On June 1, 2011, seven separate actions were filed by HendlerLaw, P.C. in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana on behalf of 259 individual plaintiffs (banana plantation workers from Ecuador, Panama and Costa Rica) against Dole Food Company, the Dow Chemical Company, Shell Oil Company, and AMVAC Chemical Corporation (to name a few) which, for purposes of convenience here, are encaptioned Aguilar et al., v. Dole Food Company, Inc., et al (U.S.D.C., E.D. of Louisiana No. CV-01305-CJB-SS). These matters allege personal injury (including sterility, cancer, skin disorders and other conditions) arising from alleged exposure to DBCP within the time period from 1960 through 1985 or later. A number of the plaintiffs appear to have been drawn from earlier DBCP litigation matters filed by HendlerLaw, P.C., including, for example, the Mendez case that was dismissed from state court in Hawaii (see the

11

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Company’s Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011). In September 2012, the court granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment based upon the expiration of the applicable statute of limitations. Plaintiffs filed an appeal to the dismissal and, on September 19, 2013, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed the order of dismissal of the lower court, finding no basis for reversal. Thus, this matter is concluded.

Louisiana Matters (State)

In November 1999, AMVAC was served with three complaints filed in the 29^th Judicial District Court for the Parish of St. Charles, State of Louisiana; we have reported on these matters under the name of the lead case, Eduardo Soriano, et al. v. AMVAC, et al. These matters allege personal injuries to about 314 persons (approximately 167 from Ecuador, 102 from Costa Rica, and 45 from Guatemala) from alleged exposure to DBCP. With the United States Supreme Court holding there was no federal court jurisdiction in the Patrickson case, the federal court judge remanded the cases to Louisiana state court in June 2003. In state court, the three cases were assigned to two different judges. On November 17, 2006, the state court separated the cases handled by HendlerLaw, P.C. from the cases being pursued only against the growers handled by different counsel. Subsequently, the cases against the growers were settled and all those actions were dismissed. The cases handled by HendlerLaw, P.C. were supposed to be placed in a new action, which was not done. After a hearing on January 29, 2008, the court ruled on February 8, 2008 that these plaintiffs could still proceed in the existing cases rather than in a new action. In mid-June 2011, some 12 years after filing the actions, plaintiffs have propounded written discovery against defendants. In November 2012, the court granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment as to all of these cases on the ground that the applicable statute of limitations had expired. On October 16, 2013, plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal of the dismissal with the U.S. court of Appeal for the Third Circuit. AMVAC does not believe that the appeal has any merit and intends to defend it vigorously. With respect to these matters, the Company does not believe that a loss is either probable or reasonably estimable and has not set up a loss contingency for this matter.

Nicaraguan Matters

A review of court filings in Chinandega, Nicaragua, has found 85 suits alleging personal injury allegedly due to exposure to DBCP and involving approximately 3,592 plaintiffs have been filed against AMVAC and other parties. Of these cases, only two - Flavio Apolinar Castillo et al. v. AMVAC Chemical Corporation et al., No. 535/04 and Luis Cristobal Martinez Suazo et al. v. AMVAC Chemical Corporation et al., No. 679/04 Castillo and Suazo, (which were filed in 2004 and involve 15 banana workers) have been served on AMVAC. All but one of the suits in Nicaragua have been filed pursuant to Special Law 364, an October 2000 Nicaraguan statute that contains substantive and procedural provisions that Nicaragua’s Attorney General previously expressed as unconstitutional. Each of the Nicaraguan plaintiffs’ claims $1,000 in compensatory damages and $5,000 in punitive damages. In all of these cases, AMVAC is a joint defendant with Dow Chemical Company and Dole Food Company, Inc. AMVAC contends that the Nicaragua courts do not have jurisdiction over it and that Public Law 364 violates international due process of law. AMVAC has objected to personal jurisdiction and demanded under Law 364 that the claims be litigated in the United States. In 2007, the court denied these objections, and AMVAC appealed the denial. It is not presently known as to how many of these plaintiffs actually claim exposure to DBCP at the time AMVAC’s product was allegedly used nor is there any verification of the claimed injuries. Further, to date, plaintiffs have not had success in enforcing Nicaraguan judgments against domestic companies before U.S. courts. With respect to these Nicaraguan matters, AMVAC intends to defend any claim vigorously. Furthermore, the Company does not believe that a loss is either probable or reasonably estimable and has not set up a loss contingency for these matters.

B. Other Matters

Brazilian Citation. On or about October 5, 2009, IBAMA (the Brazilian equivalent of the USEPA) served AMVAC Brazil with a Notice of Violation alleging that two lots of Granutox 150 (formulated product having phorate as the active ingredient) stored at BASF S.A. (AMVAC’s exclusive distributor in Brazil) and FMC Quimica do Brasil Ltda. (which formulates end-use product in that country) were not in compliance with the end-use registration on file with IBAMA. Specifically, IBAMA alleged that the color of the lots (gray) was inconsistent with the description in IBAMA’s files (pink). IBAMA also indicated an intention to assess a fine of approximately $200 against AMVAC B. The Company has challenged the citation, for among other reasons, on the ground that the change in color has to do with the removal of a coloring component and that such removal poses no environmental or toxicity risk. In March 2011, IBAMA denied AMVAC B’s first appeal. The Company believes, however, that the agency is statutorily prevented from levying a fine of this magnitude for an infraction of this nature. Thus, the Company has filed another appeal on these grounds and expects to hear a response during 2014. At this stage, the Company believes that a loss of between $200 and $300 is probable and has set up a loss contingency in the amount of $200.

12

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

ITEM 4 MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

Not Applicable

PART II

ITEM 5 MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

Market Information

Effective March 6, 2006, the Company listed its $0.10 par value common stock (“Common Stock”) on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol AVD. From January 1998 through March 6, 2006, the Common Stock was listed on the American Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol AVD. The Company’s Common Stock traded on The NASDAQ Stock Market under the symbol AMGD from March 1987 through January 1998.

The following table sets forth the range of high and low sales prices as reported for the Company’s Common Stock for the calendar quarters indicated (as adjusted for stock splits and stock dividends).

	High		Low
Calendar 2013
First quarter	$	34.97	$	28.33
Second quarter		32.34		21.83
Third quarter		27.34		22.92
Fourth quarter		29.54		22.26
Calendar 2012
First quarter	$	21.79	$	13.00
Second quarter		27.25		21.60
Third quarter		37.51		23.00
Fourth quarter		36.97		27.83

Holders

As of February 17, 2014, the number of stockholders of the Company’s Common Stock was approximately 9,894, which includes beneficial owners with shares held in brokerage accounts under street name and nominees.

Dividends

The Company has issued a cash dividend in each of the last sixteen years dating back to 1996. Dividends issued during the past three years are summarized in the table below.

Declaration Date	Distribution Date	Record Date	Dividend Per Share	Total Paid
December 18, 2013	January 10, 2014	December 27, 2013	$0.05	$1,418
September 9, 2013	October 18, 2013	October 4, 2013	0.05	1,415
June 10, 2013	July 19, 2013	July 5, 2013	0.05	1,413
March 11, 2013	April 19, 2013	April 5, 2013	0.07	1,976
Total 2013			$0.22	$6,222
December 3, 2012	December 21, 2012	December 11, 2012	0.10	2,821
September 17, 2012	October 12, 2012	September 28, 2012	0.07	1,947
March 8, 2012	April 16, 2012	April 1, 2012	0.05	1,380
Total 2012			$0.22	$6,148
September 8, 2011	October 14, 2011	September 29, 2011	0.05	1,379
March 10, 2011	April 15, 2011	April 1, 2011	0.03	826
Total 2011			$0.08	$2,205

13

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer

In June 2013, the Board of Directors authorized the Company to repurchase its common stock with the intent of maintaining the level of its issued and outstanding shares and offsetting dilution caused by incentive stock compensation. During the fourth quarter of 2013, the Company paid $1,934 to repurchase 70,000 shares at an average price of $27.58 per share.

Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans

Plan Category	Number of securities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options, warrants, and rights (a)		Weighted- average exercise price of outstanding options, warrants, rights (b)		Number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans (excluding securities reflected in column (a) (c)
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders		561,029		7.76		1,338,000
Total		561,029		7.76		1,338,000

Stock Performance Graph

The following graph presents a comparison of the cumulative, five-year total return for the Company, the S&P 500 Stock Index, and a peer group (Specialty Chemical Industry). The graph assumes that the beginning values of the investments in the Company, the S&P 500 Stock Index, and the peer group of companies each was $100 on December 31, 2008. All calculations assume reinvestment of dividends. Returns over the indicated period should not be considered indicative of future returns.

14

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

ITEM 6 SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

	2013		2012		2011		2010		2009
Net sales	$	381,021	$	366,190	$	301,080	$	226,859	$	205,801
Gross profit	$	171,347	$	161,125	$	123,068	$	86,321	$	56,898
Operating income (loss)	$	55,735	$	59,323	$	39,226	$	19,191	$	(6,329	)
Income (loss) before income tax (benefit) expense	$	53,834	$	56,852	$	35,223	$	16,174	$	(9,538	)
Net income (loss) attributable to American Vanguard	$	34,449	$	36,867	$	22,068	$	10,984	$	(5,789	)
Earnings (loss) per common share(1)	$	1.22	$	1.32	$	0.80	$	0.40	$	(0.21	)
Earnings (loss) per common share—assuming dilution(1)	$	1.19	$	1.28	$	0.79	$	0.40	$	(0.21	)
Total assets	$	447,443	$	399,890	$	342,558	$	280,179	$	255,268
Working capital	$	139,007	$	108,647	$	104,713	$	69,046	$	68,797
Long-term debt less current portion	$	51,676	$	36,196	$	51,917	$	53,710	$	45,432
Stockholders’ equity	$	257,795	$	225,436	$	187,072	$	166,437	$	153,087
Weighted average shares outstanding—basic(1)		28,301		27,914		27,559		27,385		27,120
Weighted average shares outstanding—assuming dilution(1)		28,899		28,756		27,875		27,652		27,120
Dividends per share of common stock(1)	$	0.22	$	0.22	$	0.08	$	0.03	$	0.06

The selected consolidated financial data set forth above with respect to each of the calendar years in the five-year period ended December 31, 2013, have been derived from the Company’s consolidated financial statements and are qualified in their entirety by reference to the more detailed consolidated financial statements and the independent registered public accounting firm’s reports thereon, which are included elsewhere in this Report on Form 10-K for the three years in the period ended December 31, 2013. See ITEM 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation.”

(1) The basic and diluted weighted average number of shares outstanding, net income per share and dividend information for all periods presented has been restated to reflect the effects of stock splits and dividends.

ITEM 7 MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS/RISK FACTORS:

The Company, from time-to-time, may discuss forward-looking statements including assumptions concerning the Company’s operations, future results and prospects. Generally, “may,” “could,” “will,” “would,” “expect,” “believe,” “estimate,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “continue” and similar words identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements appearing in this Report are made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements are based on our current expectations and are subject to risks and uncertainties that can cause actual results and events to differ materially from those set forth in or implied by the forward-looking statements and related assumptions contained in the entire Report. Such factors include, but are not limited to: product demand and market acceptance risks; the effect of economic conditions; weather conditions; changes in regulatory policy; the impact of competitive products and pricing; changes in foreign exchange rates; product development and commercialization difficulties; capacity and supply constraints or difficulties; availability of capital resources; general business regulations, including taxes and other risks as detailed from time-to-time in the Company’s reports and filings filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). It is not possible to foresee or identify all such factors. We urge you to consider these factors carefully in evaluating the forward-looking statements contained in this Report.

15

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Results of Operations

2013 Compared with 2012:

	2013			2012			Change
Net sales:
Insecticides	$	193,623		$	194,060		$	(437	)
Herbicides/soil fumigants/fungicides		121,042			89,899			31,143
Other, including plant growth regulators		31,849			45,581			(13,732	)
Total crop		346,514			329,540			16,974
Non-crop		34,507			36,650			(2,143	)
	$	381,021		$	366,190		$	14,831
Cost of goods sold:
Insecticides	$	109,269		$	104,524		$	4,745
Herbicides/soil fumigants/fungicides		65,613			58,016			7,597
Other, including plant growth regulators		16,357			24,981			(8,624	)
Total crop		191,239			187,521			3,718
Non-crop		18,435			17,544			891
	$	209,674		$	205,065		$	4,609
Gross margin:
Insecticides	$	84,354		$	89,536		$	(5,182	)
Herbicides/soil fumigants/fungicides		55,429			31,883			23,546
Other, including plant growth regulators		15,492			20,600			(5,108	)
Gross margin crop		155,275			142,019			13,256
Gross margin non-crop		16,072			19,106			(3,034	)
	$	171,347		$	161,125		$	10,222
Gross margin crop		45	%		43	%
Gross margin non-crop		47	%		52	%
Total gross margin		45	%		44	%

During the months leading up to the 2013 planting season, most companies in the sector experienced heavy demand for their corn products, as growers anticipated another healthy season. As a result, many of these products—including herbicides, insecticides, fungicides and seed—were in such high demand, that suppliers were compelled to allocate their supply into the channel of distribution. In fact, an unprecedented number of these products were under allocation across the Midwest in both corn and soybeans. In the face of this demand, the Company experienced record sales of its corn products, including soil insecticides and herbicides, during the first quarter of 2013.

However, persistent spring rainfall in the Midwest region of the U.S., from February through May, caused considerable disruption to normal planting practices. In some areas of northern Iowa and southern Minnesota, flooded and muddy field conditions made it impractical to plant any crop at all. In other areas, wet weather caused such extensive delays in planting that growers were forced to switch their corn planting intentions over to soybeans. Throughout the region, many growers had such limited, clear weather planting opportunities that they chose to skip pre-emergent crop protection treatments altogether in order to concentrate on seed planting exclusively.

As a result of these circumstances, the distribution channel in the central U.S. accumulated inventory of crop input products in excess of normal levels; carryover inventory is estimated to be over 30% of annual sales volumes versus the historical level of approximately 20 to 25%. In light of this product carryover, some of our key customers in the distribution channel have exerted additional financial control over their working capital and applied additional constraints on procurement activities at the close of the financial year, as they sought to work down inventory levels.

Weather conditions and lower commodity prices in 2013 also resulted in a downturn in the number of U.S. acres planted in both cotton and peanuts, specifically, a two million acre reduction in cotton acres planted and a 30% drop in peanuts acres. Additionally, the wet spring weather caused some growers in the mid south and southeast regions to switch from planting corn to soybeans. Since AMVAC supplies crop protection product for corn, cotton and peanuts but does not provide any products for soybeans, these commodity price and weather-related shifts diminished AVD’s year-over-year growth.

16

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Overall financial performance for the year ended December 31, 2013 was mixed as compared to the same period in 2012, with net sales higher and net income lower. The Company’s total net sales for the period were up 4% to $381,021 compared to $366,190 for the year ended December 31, 2012. Net sales of our crop business in 2013 were $346,514, which constitutes an increase of 5% over the net sales of $329,540 for that business in 2012. Net sales of our non-crop products in 2013 were $34,507, which is a reduction of approximately 6% as compared to 2012. A more detailed discussion of product groups and products having a material effect on net sales for each of the crop and non-crop businesses appears below.

In our Crop business, net sales of insecticides in 2013 ended at $193,623, which was flat as compared to 2012. Within the Crop business, annual net sales of our granular soil insecticides were up 2% over 2012, driven by continued strong performance from our primary corn soil insecticides – Aztec^®, Smartchoice^® and Force, offset by year-over-year declines in Thimet due to reduced peanut acres and Counter which had somewhat lighter use in 2013 on corn and sugar beets. Our Mocap and Nemacur granular insecticides/nematicides benefited from increased demand in international markets. Among our non-granular insecticide products, net sales for crop applications declined by 3%, as less of our foliar cotton insecticide Bidrin was required on the reduced cotton acres planted in 2013. Sales of bifenthrin, permethrin and acephate remained relatively flat with the prior year.

Within the product group of herbicides/soil fumigants/fungicides, our crop net sales in 2013 were up 35% to $121,042 vs. $89,899 in 2012. Within this group, we had mixed results. The positive driver was our herbicide product category, up 146%, resulting from strong demand and ample supply availability for our post-emergent corn herbicide, Impact. Our co-marketing agreement with Monsanto continues to expand our market presence. Our fumigants sales volume, however, declined 2% as our Vapam and K-Pam^® products were affected by some water shortages in certain markets.

Within our other products group (which includes plant growth regulators, molluscicides and third party manufacturing activity), we experienced a decrease of 30% in net sales during 2013, $31,849 vs. $45,581 in 2012. The major driver of this sales performance was Folex, a defoliant used in cotton harvest management. This product was impacted by the drop in cotton acres mentioned above. Most of the other products and functional activities captured in this group were relatively flat with the prior year.

Within our non-crop business, 2013 net sales were down by 6% to $34,507 vs. $36,650 recorded in 2012. Naled^® sales (our Dibrom brand mosquito adulticide) were down slightly, and pest strips business was flat. Additionally, net sales of our PCNB fungicide for turf uses were stable. We experienced a decline in Pharmaceutical sales of approximately 9%, primarily due to generic competition from China.

Our cost of sales for 2013 was $209,674 or 55% of net sales. This compared to $205,065 or 56% of net sales for 2012. The decline in cost of sales as a percentage of net sales in 2013 arose primarily from these factors. In 2013 the Company continued to focus on continuing to limit volumes on products that have lower than average margins. Furthermore, in 2013 our sales team has focused on selling brands and tend to have stronger margins throughout the supply chain over the long term. As detailed in the table, the change in volume, mix, price and manufacturing activity resulted overall in a 1% improvement in gross margin to 45% in 2013 as compared to 44% for the same period of the prior year. This included the benefit of selling prices that increased on average by 4.7% offset by approximately 3.7% increase in raw material costs and manufacturing costs adjusted for the different mix of products manufactured and sold in 2013.

17

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Operating expenses in 2013 increased by $13,810 to $115,612 or 30% of sales as compared to $101,802 or 28% in 2012. The differences in operating expenses by department are as follows:

	2013		2012		Change
Selling	$	32,929	$	25,869	$	7,060
General and administrative		33,536		29,715		3,821
Research, product development and regulatory		21,644		20,750		894
Freight, delivery and warehousing		27,503		25,468		2,035
	$	115,612	$	101,802	$	13,810

• Selling expenses increased by $7,060 to end at $32,929 for the year ended December 31, 2013, as compared to $25,869 in 2012. The main drivers for increased overall expenses were costs associated with expanding our international and domestic sales teams to better support the expanding business, field stewardship activities and increased advertising and promotion expenses in support of our leading brands. Our costs in 2013 also included expenses as a result of starting up the Envance majority owned subsidiary.

• General and administrative expenses increased by $3,821 to $33,536 for the year ended December 31, 2013, as compared to $29,715 in 2012. The main drivers for the increase are primarily related to higher legal costs associated with a data compensation matter, which concluded in July 2013, other outside consulting services associated with domestic and international business development and additional personnel costs in support of our expanding business.

• Research, product development costs and regulatory expenses increased by $894 to $21,644 for the year ended December 31, 2013, as compared to $20,750 in 2012. This change is primarily driven by increased activities on both product development and additional formulation and process chemistry projects offset by some lower regulatory expenses.

• Freight, delivery and warehousing costs for the year ended December 31, 2013 increased by $2,035 to $27,503, as compared to $25,468 in 2012. We continue to focus on managing logistics expenses throughout our supply chain. As a percentage of sales, freight costs increased to 7.2% of net sales during 2013, as compared to 7.0% of net sales during 2012.

Total Interest expense was $1,901 in 2013, as compared to $2,471 in 2012. Interest costs are summarized in the following table:

	2013								2012
Average Indebtedness and Interest expense	Average Debt		Interest Expense			Interest Rate			Average Debt		Interest Expense			Interest Rate
Term loan	$	23,318	$	880			3.8	%	$	50,957	$	1,885			3.7	%
Real estate		—		—			—			—		—			—
Revolving line of credit		29,284		900			3.1	%		—		—			—
Average		52,602		1,780			3.4	%		50,957		1,885			3.7	%
Notes payable		270		8			3.0	%		6,291		220			3.5	%
Interest income				(1	)							(1	)
Capitalized interest		—		(274	)		—			—		(400	)		—
Amortization of deferred loan fees		—		180			—			—		129			—
Amortization of other deferred liabilities		—		167			—			—		601			—
Other interest expense		—		41			—			—		37			—
Total	$	52,872	$	1,901			3.6	%	$	57,248	$	2,471			4.3	%

The Company’s average overall debt for the year ended December 31, 2013 was $52,872 as compared to $57,248 for the comparable period of the previous year. As can be seen from the above table, on a gross basis, our effective interest rate decreased to 3.4% as compared to 3.7% in 2012, due to lower interest rates on our new senior credit facility agreement. After deductions of capitalized interest and including expenses related to the amortization of deferred liabilities, our effective rate was 3.6% for 2013 as compared to 4.3% in 2012. Lower amortization of discounting on deferred liabilities related to product line acquisitions contributed to the reduction in our effective interest rate in 2013.

18

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Income tax expense for 2013 amounted to $18,916 as compared to $20,026 for 2012. The 2013 effective tax rate was 35.1%, which is flat as compared to 2012. This is primarily due to the benefit from our international structure offset by decreased domestic production deduction.

The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (the “Act”) was signed into law on January 2, 2013. The Act retroactively restored several expired business tax provisions, including the research and experimentation credit. Changes in tax laws are accounted for in the period of enactment, and the retroactive effect of the Act, on the Company’s U.S. federal taxes for 2012, amounted to a benefit of approximately $250, which has been recognized in 2013.

On our financial statements ended December 31, 2013 we included losses on equity investment of $986. There were no such losses recorded in 2012. Furthermore, in 2013 we adjusted our net income attributable to American Vanguard by $517 for the non-controlling interest’s share of the net losses of our majority-owned subsidiary, Envance. In 2012, the adjustment to our net income attributable to American Vanguard for such losses was $41.

Net income attributable to American Vanguard decreased by 6.6% and ended at $34,449 or $1.19 per diluted share in 2013 as compared to $36,867 or $1.28 per diluted share in 2012.

Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

We believe that the combination of our cash flows from operations, current cash on hand and the availability under the Company’s credit facility will be sufficient to meet our working capital and capital expenditure requirements and provide us with adequate liquidity to meet our anticipated operating needs for at least the next 12 months. Although operating activities are expected to provide cash, to the extent of significant growth in the future, our operating and investing activities will use cash and, consequently, this growth may require us to access some or all of the availability under the credit facilities. It is also possible, that additional sources of finance may be necessary to support additional growth.

The following summarizes our contractual obligations at December 31, 2013, and the effects such obligations are expected to have on liquidity and cash flow in future periods:

	Payments Due by Period
	Total		Less than 1 Year		1—3 Years		4—5 Years		After 5 Years
Long-term debt	$	51,550	$	—	$	—	$	51,550	$	—
Notes payable		195		69		126		—		—
Sub-total long-term debt		51,745		69		126		51,550		—
Estimated interest liability(1)		7,076		1,590		4,757		729		—
Accrued royalty obligations		984		127		240		222		395
Deferred earn outs on product acquisitions		2,903		1,441		1,445		17		—
Employment agreements		3,970		1,518		1,857		595		—
Operating leases—rental properties		3,591		850		1,301		270		1,170
Operating leases—vehicles		939		442		495		2		—
	$	71,208	$	6,037	$	10,221	$	53,385	$	1,565

(1) Estimated interest liability has been calculated using the effective rate for each category of debt over the remaining term of the debt and taking into account scheduled repayments. The revolving line has been assumed to be constant (i.e. $51,550) throughout the remaining term. As noted above in this report, all of our debt is linked to LIBOR rates. The Company has in place an interest rate swap contract that hedges a portion of the Company’s variable rate debt. At December 31, 2013, the notional amount on the interest rate swap contract was $36,750, as compared to outstanding variable rate debt of $51,550 at December 31, 2013. The Company’s interest rate swap contract terminates on December 31, 2014.

There were no off-balance sheet arrangements as of December 31, 2013.

Under the terms of the credit facility, all debt outstanding is due when the agreement expires on June 17, 2018.

In addition to the above contractual obligations, $1,692 of unrecognized tax liabilities has been recorded as liabilities as of December 31, 2013 and we are uncertain as to if or when such amounts may be settled. Related to the unrecognized tax benefits not included in the table above, we have also recorded a liability for potential penalties and interest of $120 as of December 31, 2013.

19

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Results of Operations

2012 Compared with 2011:

	2012			2011			Change
Net sales:
Insecticides	$	194,060		$	137,460		$	56,600
Herbicides/soil fumigants/fungicides		89,899			90,782			(883	)
Other, including plant growth regulators		45,581			43,826			1,755
Total crop		329,540			272,068			57,472
Non-crop		36,650			29,012			7,638
	$	366,190		$	301,080		$	65,110
Cost of goods sold:
Insecticides	$	104,524		$	75,771		$	28,753
Herbicides/soil fumigants/fungicides		58,016			60,219			(2,203	)
Other, including plant growth regulators		24,981			25,730			(749	)
Total crop		187,521			161,720			25,801
Non-crop		17,544			16,292			1,252
	$	205,065		$	178,012		$	27,053
Gross margin:
Insecticides	$	89,536		$	61,689		$	27,847
Herbicides/soil fumigants/fungicides		31,883			30,563			1,320
Other, including plant growth regulators		20,600			18,096			2,504
Gross margin crop		142,019			110,348			31,671
Gross margin non-crop		19,106			12,720			6,386
	$	161,125		$	123,068		$	38,057
Gross margin crop		43	%		41	%
Gross margin non-crop		52	%		44	%
Total gross margin		44	%		41	%

The 2012 agricultural market conditions were somewhat better than those of 2011. Persistent strong global demand for food, animal feed, natural fiber and bio-fuel feed stocks continued to spur higher than normal crop commodity prices. As a result, growers invested more heavily in yield enhancing inputs which fueled demand for many of the Company’s most important crop protection products. This was particularly true in corn, where strong demand and a rising crop commodity price led to increased planted acreage in the United States. In 2012, a record 97 million acres of corn were planted; over 87 million acres were harvested; and yield per acre was depressed to approximately 123 bushels from an average yield of closer to 150 bushels in prior years. The drop in yield arose from a persistent drought in parts of the Midwest and Southwest.

This extreme mid-season and late-season drought did not affect the use of the Company’s important granular soil insecticides since these products are applied at the time of planting. The drought of 2012 also affected U.S. cotton growers and destroyed nearly 23% of planted acreage, mostly in Texas. However, in other Southern and Southeastern states weather conditions were somewhat more favorable, allowing AMVAC to achieve excellent sales of its cotton insecticides and harvest defoliants.

Adding to the challenges of meeting excess demand and coping with problematic weather, the continuing practice of planting corn on the same acres year-after-year (versus sequential rotation of corn and soybeans) has intensified primary & secondary insect pest pressure in the Midwest United States. Furthermore, over the past few seasons, growers (particularly of corn) have increasingly adopted the use of conventional chemistry as an important part of integrated pest management, both to control resistant pests and to help improve yield. Additionally, with the widespread use of glyphosate herbicides over the last 15 years, many growers are having to cope with hard-to-control weeds & grasses through other means, including complementary herbicides. As a result, the Company has experienced increased demand for its soil insecticides and post-emergent herbicide products for corn.

Overall financial performance (including net sales and net income) for the year ended December 31, 2012 improved as compared to the same period in 2011. The Company’s total net sales for the period were up 22% to $366,190 compared to

20

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

$301,080 for the year ended December 31, 2011. Net sales of our crop business in 2012 were $329,540, which constitutes an increase of 21% over the net sales of $272,068 for that business in 2011. Net sales of our non-crop products in 2012 were $36,650, which constitutes an increase of 26% over the net sales of $29,012 in the same period last year. A more detailed discussion of product groups and products having a material effect on net sales for each of the crop and non-crop segments appears below.

In our Crop business, net sales of insecticides in 2012 increased to $194,060 which represents a 41% increase as compared to $137,460 for the comparable period in 2011. This included approximately 6% related to price and 35% to increased volume. Within this business, annual net sales of our granular soil insecticides were up more than 50% over 2011, driven by a strong performance from our primary corn soil insecticides—Aztec, Smartchoice^®, Counter^® and Force. Our Mocap and Nemacur granular insecticides/nematicides benefited from an average 3% selling price increase and remained relatively flat on volume with improved supply of Mocap, offsetting some volume shortfall on Nemacur. Annual net sales of Thimet grew by nearly 33% over the prior year including approximately 5% related to price, primarily on peanut acres, in sugar cane fields and as a preferred substitute for a withdrawn competitive insecticide (aldicarb). Among our non-granular insecticide products, net sales for crop applications grew by 11% led by our foliar cotton insecticide Bidrin. Sales of bifenthrin, permethrin and acephate remained flat with the prior year, as we continued to de-emphasize the applications of these products that have become susceptible to low-priced generic competition.

Within the product group of herbicides/soil fumigants/fungicides, our crop net sales in 2012 were down about 1% to $89,899 vs. $90,782 in 2011. Within this group, we had mixed results. Net sales of our herbicide products were down 24%, resulting from the timing of sales and supply availability for our post-emergent corn herbicide, Impact. Actual “on-the-ground” use of Impact increased 22% in 2012 despite supply limitations and the effects of the severe Midwest summer drought. Our fumigants sales volume increased approximately 3% as our Vapam and K-Pam^® products continue to be domestic market leaders in this product category. Net sales of our fungicides were up 36% in 2012, as we continue to recapture market share in potatoes with our PCNB product range. There were no price increases on PCNB.

Within the other products group (which includes plant growth regulators, molluscicides and third party manufacturing activity), we experienced an increase of 4% in net sales during 2012, $45,581 vs. $43,826 in 2011. We had record sales performance for Folex, a defoliant used in cotton harvest management. This included slightly lower overall volumes in line with cotton acres harvested but increased pricing as the market recognized the benefits of this brand. NAA^®, our leading plant growth regulator, primarily used in apples to stop apple drop, the return of bloom and later in the season for thinning blossom, had a significant gain of 31%. Net sales of metaldehyde, (a molluscicide) were up 5% over the comparable 2011 period; and third party manufacturing revenues decreased by approximately 28% in 2012 as compared to 2011.

Within our non-crop business, 2012 net sales were up over 26% to $36,650 vs. $29,012 compared to 2011. Naled^® sales (our Dibrom brand mosquito adulticide) were up by 19% (including average 6% selling price increase), with moderate storm and hurricane activity and despite continued drought conditions in portions of the Southeast. Net sales of pest strips increased 20% in volume and approximately 4% in selling price as compared to the prior year, as professional pest control operators continue to recognize that these products are among the most effective residual pest deterrents in commercial applications. Additionally, net sales of our PCNB fungicide for turf uses tripled, as we continue to recover market share following our reentry to the market. The Company has yet to re-enter the Canadian market following the expiration of its registration at the end of 2010. We are also pleased to report that initial sales from Envance (our new Joint Venture with TyraTech) were recorded in the weeks leading up to December 31, 2012. The business sells very effective organic aerosol products through Home Depot stores. These products target crawling, flying or stinging insects. Offsetting these gains, we experienced a decline in Pharmaceutical sales of approximately 26% primarily due to generic competition from China.

Our cost of sales for 2012 was $205,065 or 56% of net sales. This compared to $178,012 or 59% of net sales for 2011. The decline in cost of sales as a percentage of net sales in 2012 arose primarily from these factors. In 2012 the Company continued to focus on selling those products having higher margins or lower costs. This included a further drop in manufacturing activities for third parties as increased demand for plant capacity generated less incentive to drive this aspect of the business. Typically, such activities enable us to cover costs but do not generate much, if any, gross profit. Furthermore, our sales in 2012 have been focused on our strongest brands that are targeted at specific problems that have been impacting agriculture in the year and products that tend to have strong margin performance throughout the supply chain. As detailed in the table, the change in volume, mix, price and manufacturing activity resulted overall in a 3% improvement in gross margin to 44% in 2012 as compared to 41% for the same period of the prior year. This included the benefit of selling prices that increased on average by 5% offset by approximately 2% increase in raw material costs.

21

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Operating expenses in 2012 increased by $17,960 to $101,802 or 28% of sales as compared to $83,842 or 28% in 2011. The differences in operating expenses by department are as follows:

	2012		2011		Change
Selling	$	25,869	$	23,318	$	2,551
General and administrative		29,715		21,429		8,286
Research, product development and regulatory		20,750		18,041		2,709
Freight, delivery and warehousing		25,468		21,054		4,414
	$	101,802	$	83,842	$	17,960

• Selling expenses increased by $2,551 to end at $25,869 for the year ended December 31, 2012, as compared to the same period of 2011. The main driver for increased overall cost was from expenses in support of our proprietary delivery system and other stewardship activities, wages, and travel expenses to support our growing business.

• General and administrative expenses increased by $8,286 to $29,715 for the year ended December 31, 2012, as compared to the same period of 2011. The main reasons for the increased costs are; first, stock based and incentive compensation as a result of our improved overall financial performance; second, legal and consulting costs related to product defense, creation of our new international structure and creation of our new majority owned subsidiary; third, additional headcount supporting our expanding business.

• Research, product development costs and regulatory expenses increased by $2,709 to $20,750 for the year ended December 31, 2012, as compared to the same period of 2011. This is mainly due to product defense and development cost in support of our expanding business plus key product development and research headcount.

• Freight, delivery and warehousing costs for the year ended December 31, 2012 were $25,468 or 7% of sales as compared to $21,054 or 7% of sales for the same period in 2011.

Total Interest expense was $2,471 in 2012, as compared to $3,457 in 2011. Interest costs are summarized in the following table:

	2012								2011
Average Indebtedness and Interest expense	Average Debt		Interest Expense			Interest Rate			Average Debt		Interest Expense			Interest Rate
Term loan	$	50,957	$	1,885			3.7	%	$	58,186	$	1,970			3.4	%
Real estate		—		—			—			—		1			—
Revolving line of credit		—		—			—			1,990		79			4.0	%
Average		50,957		1,885			3.7	%		60,176		2,050			3.4	%
Notes payable		6,291		220			3.5	%		12,732		480			3.8	%
Interest income				(1	)							(3	)
Capitalized interest		—		(400	)		—			—		(109	)		—
Amortization of deferred loan fees		—		129			—			—		129			—
Amortization of other deferred liabilities		—		601			—			—		896			—
Other interest expense		—		37			—			—		14			—
Total	$	57,248	$	2,471			4.3	%	$	72,908	$	3,457			4.7	%

The Company’s average overall debt for the year ended December 31, 2012 was $57,248 as compared to $72,908 for the comparable period of the previous year. During 2012 we operated the business without accessing our revolving debt facility by continued focus on inventory, receivables and program management. As can be seen from the above table, on a gross basis, our effective interest rate increased to 3.7% as compared to 3.4% last year. The increase is caused by the fixed interest rate swap, which is required as part of the Company’s credit agreement. After deductions of capitalized interest and including expenses related to the amortization of deferred liabilities, our effective rate was 4.3% for 2012 as compared to 4.7% in 2011. This is a reduction in comparison to the prior year primarily as a result of lower amortization of discounting on deferred liabilities related to product line acquisitions.

22

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Income tax expense for 2012 amounted to $20,026 as compared to $13,155 for 2011. The 2012 effective tax rate was 35.2%, as compared to an effective rate of 37.3% for 2011. The decrease in effective tax rate is primarily due to increased benefit from domestic production activities, Alabama income tax capital credit and the deductible stock based compensation.

Net income attributable to American Vanguard increased 67% ended at $36,867 or $1.28 per diluted share in 2012 as compared to $22,068 or $0.79 per diluted share in 2011.

23

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Liquidity and Capital Resources

The Company used $6,214 of cash in operating activities during the twelve months ended December 31, 2013 as compared to generating $40,424 in the same period of the prior year.

Net income of $33,932, non-cash depreciation, amortization of intangibles, other assets and discounted future liabilities generated $19,617 as compared to $17,230 in the prior year. Finally stock based compensation of $3,379 and loss from equity method investment of $986 and change in value of deferred income taxes of $2,523 provided a net cash inflow of $60,437 as compared to $55,499 for the same period of 2012.

As of December 31, 2013, our working capital has increased to $139,007 as compared to $108,647 as of December 31, 2012. This increase was mainly driven by increased inventory levels offset by increased levels of programs and deferred revenues. Inventories ended the year at $139,830, as compared to $87,951 at December 31, 2012. Following adverse weather in key states and at key times of the year driving growers to make late changes in crop planting to crops requiring shorter growing seasons such as soybeans, for which uses the Company does not offer products, elevated channel inventories caused a slowdown in demand at the end of the season. This resulted in the Company retaining higher than expected inventories on hand at the end of the year ahead of the start of the new growing season. It should also be noted that the Company purchases and holds raw material, intermediate or finished goods inventory from time to time based on a single annual purchase from a single source or supplier, potentially resulting in peaks in the carrying value of raw materials. Furthermore, in order to achieve efficient manufacturing runs, the Company may manufacture a particular product only one time a year and then carry high levels of that inventory for a period. Finally, it is a feature of the industry that inventory is carried in anticipation of demand from the market as a result of specific pest pressure or weather conditions, on time schedules that could not accommodate either a purchasing or manufacturing process.

Our program accruals have ended higher than at the end of the prior year reflecting primarily the mix of business that has driven the financial performance for 2013 including higher sales of certain programs that, for market reasons, carry higher program liabilities. As a result, accrued program costs are up 66% from $32,335 at December 31, 2012 to $53,630 at December 31, 2013.

A significant factor in our cash performance in 2013 has been the need to respond to market demand for products sold exclusively in our proprietary delivery systems including Smartbox^®. Demand has increased to such a degree that in 2013, we have made further increases in our inventory of long lived packaging supplies. These are treated as other assets and amortized over expected lives of between 2 and 10 years. These items increased by $16,940 during 2013.

The Company used $18,947 in investing activities in the twelve months to December 31, 2013 as compared to $21,101 in the same period of 2012. This year we have spent $15,260 on fixed assets primarily focused on continuing to invest in manufacturing infrastructure in support of our growing sales, and $3,687 on investments.

Our financing activities utilized net cash of $7,123 in 2013 as compared to using $16,429 in 2012. The main uses were to pay $4,804 in dividends as we continue our newly implemented quarterly dividend, $1,934 in repurchasing of common stock in the market place following the decision to begin a program aimed at offsetting dilution caused by incentive compensation, and the payment of other notes payable and long-term liabilities primarily associated with liabilities under deferred purchase agreements on product acquisitions in the amount of $7,985. The Company received $2,050 from the exercise of stock options and the sales of common stock under its ESPP plan (including associated tax benefits) as compared to $3,848 for the same period of last year. Finally, the Company increased net borrowings under its senior secured credit facility in the amount of $5,550 as compared to reducing borrowings by $8,443 in the year ended December 31, 2012.

The Company has various loans in place that together constitute the short-term and long-term loan balances shown in the balance sheet as at December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012. These are summarized in the following table:

Indebtedness	At December 31, 2013						At December 31, 2012
$000’s	Long-term		Short-term		Total		Long-term		Short-term		Total
Term loan	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	36,000	$	10,000	$	46,000
Revolving line of credit		51,550		—		51,550		—		—		—
Notes payable		126		69		195		196		6,247		6,443
Total indebtedness	$	51,676	$	69	$	51,745	$	36,196	$	16,247	$	52,443

On June 17, 2013, AMVAC Chemical Corporation (“AMVAC”), our principal operating subsidiary, as borrower, and affiliates (including the Company), as guarantors and/or borrowers, entered into a Second Amended and Restated Credit

24

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Agreement (the “New Credit Agreement”) with a group of commercial lenders led by Bank of the West (AMVAC’s primary bank) as agent, swing line lender and L/C issuer. The New Credit Agreement supersedes the Amended and Restated Credit Agreement (“First Amendment”) dated as of January 10, 2011 and more fully described in the Company’s Form 8-K filed on January 13, 2011. The New Credit Agreement is a senior secured lending facility with a five year term and consists of a revolving line of credit of $200 million and an accordion feature for up to $100 million. The new facility includes both AMVAC CV and AMVAC BV as borrowers. In connection with AMVAC’s entering into the New Credit Agreement, all outstanding indebtedness under the First Amendment was rolled over into the New Credit Agreement, and term loans were converted into revolving debt. Under the New Credit Agreement, revolving loans bear interest at a variable rate based, at borrower’s election with proper notice, on either (i) LIBOR plus the “Applicable Rate” which is based upon the Consolidated Funded Debt Ratio (“Eurocurrency Rate Loan”) or (ii) the greater of (x) the Prime Rate, (y) the Federal Funds Rate plus 0.5%, and (z) the Daily One-Month LIBOR Rate plus 1.00%, plus, in the case of (x), (y) or (z) the Applicable Rate (“Alternate Base Rate Loan”). Interest payments for Eurocurrency Rate Loans are payable on the last day of each interest period (either one, two, three or six months, as selected by the borrower) and the maturity date, while interest payments for Alternate Base Rate Loans are payable on the last business day of each month and the maturity date. The senior secured revolving line of credit matures on June 17, 2018.

The Company uses a pay fixed, receive 1Month LIBOR (London Interbank Offered Rate) interest rate swap to manage the interest expense generated by variable rate debt. At December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, the Company had in place an interest rate swap, the use of which results in a fixed interest rate of 3.39% for the portion of variable rate debt that is covered by the interest rate swap contract. The current interest rate swap contract was put in place on March 30, 2011 and terminates on December 31, 2014. The table below shows the amount of outstanding debt and the related notional amount on the interest rate swap contract at each of the balance sheet dates:

	Outstanding Variable Rate Debt		Notional Amount on Interest Rate Swap
At December 31, 2011	$	54,000	$	45,000
At December 31, 2012		46,000		44,250
At December 31, 2013		51,550		36,750

Under the New Credit Agreement, the Company has three key covenants (with which it was in compliance throughout the year and as of December 31, 2013). The covenants are as follows: (1) the Company must maintain its borrowings below a certain consolidated funded debt ratio, (2) the Company has a limitation on its annual spending on the acquisition of fixed asset capital additions, and (3) the Company must maintain a certain consolidated fixed charge coverage ratio.

At December 31, 2013 total indebtedness was $51,745 as compared to $52,443 at December 31, 2012. At December 31, 2013, based on its performance against the most restrictive covenants listed above, the Company had the capacity to increase its borrowings by up to $148,450 under the credit facility agreement.

Substantially all of the Company’s assets are pledged as collateral with its banks.

The Company’s main bank is Bank of the West, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the French bank, BNP Paribas. Bank of the West has been the Company’s bank for more than 30 years. Bank of the West is the syndication manager for the Company’s loans and acts as the counterparty on the Company’s derivative transactions.

Recently Issued Accounting Guidance

In February 2013, The Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2013-02, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Reporting of Amounts Reclassified Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income, establishes new requirements for disclosing reclassifications of items out of accumulated other comprehensive income (OCI). Specifically, (1) disclosure is required of the changes in components of accumulated OCI, (2) disclosure is required of the effects on individual line items in net income for each item of accumulated OCI that is reclassified in its entirety to net income, and (3) cross references are required to other disclosures that provide additional details for OCI items that are not reclassified in their entirety to net income. The requirements of ASU 2013-02 apply to all entities (i.e., both public and nonpublic) that report items of OCI in any period presented. ASU 2013-02 is effective prospectively for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2012. The Company adopted this standard effective January 1, 2013.

In October 2012, FASB issued ASU No. 2012-04, Technical Corrections and Improvements. This update primarily makes amendments to various Codifications to (1) conform the format and writing style of certain guidance carried forward without modification from pre-Codification pronouncements, (2) to correct references and provide clarification through

25

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

updated language, and (3) to relocate guidance within the Codification to a more appropriate location. In addition, ASU No. 2012-4 conforms the use of the term fair value throughout the Codification to reflect fully the measurement and disclosure requirements of FASB ASC Topic 820, Fair Value Measurement and Disclosures (e.g. to replace the terms “market value” and “mark-to-market” with “fair value” and “subsequently measure at fair value,” respectively). The majority of the amendments do not change the accounting practice. However, where applicable, the Company has applied the updates.

Foreign Exchange

Management does not believe that the fluctuation in the value of the dollar in relation to the currencies of its customers in the last three fiscal years has adversely affected the Company’s ability to sell products at agreed upon prices denominated in U.S. dollars. No assurance can be given, however, that adverse currency exchange rate fluctuations will not occur in the future. Should adverse currency exchange rate fluctuations occur in geographies where the Company sells/exports its products, management is not certain such fluctuations will or will not materially impact the Company’s operating results.

Inflation

Management believes inflation has not had a significant impact on the Company’s operations during the past three years. However, raw material prices have increased approximately 1% during the course of 2013 and are expected to continue to increase during 2014 and beyond due to the growth in global economies, particularly in China and India. This growth will put further pressure on supply demands of raw materials and will cause continual inflationary pressures to throughout 2014 and 2015.

CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Certain of the Company’s policies require the application of judgment by management in selecting the appropriate assumptions for calculating financial estimates. These judgments are based on historical experience, terms of existing contracts, commonly accepted industry practices and other assumptions that the Company believes are reasonable under the circumstances. These estimates and assumptions are reviewed periodically and the effects of revisions are reflected in the consolidated financial statements in the period they are determined to be necessary. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.

The Company’s critical accounting policies and estimates include:

Revenue Recognition and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts—Revenue from sales is recognized at the time title and the risks of ownership pass. This is when the customer has made the fixed commitment to purchase the goods, the products are shipped per the customer’s instructions, the sales price is fixed and determinable, and collection is reasonably assured. The Company has in place procedures to ensure that revenue is recognized when earned. The procedures are subject to management’s review and from time to time certain sales are excluded until it is clear that the title has passed and there is no further recourse to the Company. Allowance for doubtful accounts is established based on estimates of losses related to customer receivable balances. Estimates are developed using either standard quantitative measures based on historical losses, adjusted for current economic conditions or by evaluating specific customer accounts for risk of loss.

Accrued Program Costs—In accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 605, the Company classifies certain payments to its customers as a reduction of sales revenues. The Company describes these payments as “Programs”. Programs are a critical part of doing business in the agricultural chemicals business market place. For accounting purposes, programs are recorded as a reduction in gross sales and include market pricing adjustments, volume take up or other key performance indicator driven payments made to distributors, retailers or growers at the end of a growing season. Each quarter management compares each sale transaction with published programs to determine what program liability has been incurred. Once this initial calculation is made for the specific quarter, sales and marketing management along with executive and financial management review the accumulated program balance and make assessments of whether or not customers are tracking in a manner that indicates that they will meet the requirements set out in the terms and conditions attached to each program. If management believes that customers are falling short of their annual goals then periodic adjustments will be made to the accumulated accrual to properly reflect the Company’s best estimate of the liability at the balance sheet date. The majority of adjustments are made at the end of the crop season at which time customer performance can be fully assessed. Programs are paid out predominantly on an annual basis, usually in the final quarter of the financial year or the first quarter of the following year.

26

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Long-lived Assets—The carrying value of long-lived assets is reviewed for impairment quarterly and/or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of such assets may not be recoverable. Measurement of the impairment loss is based on the fair value of the asset. Generally, the fair value will be determined using valuation techniques such as the present value of expected future cash flows. There was no impairment of long-lived assets in 2013 or 2012.

Property, Plant and Equipment and Depreciation—Property, plant and equipment includes the cost of land, buildings, machinery and equipment, office furniture and fixtures, automobiles, construction projects and significant improvements to existing plant and equipment. Interest costs related to significant construction projects are capitalized at the Company’s current weighted average effective interest rate. Expenditures for minor repairs and maintenance are expensed as incurred. When property or equipment is sold or otherwise disposed of, the related cost and accumulated depreciation is removed from the respective accounts and the gain or loss realized on disposition is reflected in earnings. All plant and equipment is depreciated using the straight-line method, utilizing the estimated useful property lives. Building lives range from 10 to 30 years; machinery and equipment lives range from 3 to 15 years; office furniture and fixture lives range from 3 to 10 years; automobile lives range from 3 to 6 years; construction projects and significant improvements to existing plant and equipment lives range from 3 to 15 years when placed in service. The agricultural chemicals business involves complex manufacturing processes that drive high capital cost plant.

Foreign Currency Translation—Assets and liabilities of foreign subsidiaries, where the local currency is the functional currency, have been translated at period end exchange rates, and profit and loss accounts have been translated using weighted average yearly exchange rates. Adjustments resulting from translation have been recorded in the equity section of the balance sheet as cumulative translation adjustments in other comprehensive income (loss). The effects of foreign currency exchange gains and losses on transactions that are denominated in currencies other than the entity’s functional currency are remeasured to the functional currency using the end of the period exchange rates. The effects of remeasurement related to foreign currency transactions are included in current profit and loss accounts.

Derivative financial instruments and hedge activities—In accordance with FASB ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging, the Company recognizes all derivative instruments as either other assets or other liabilities at fair value on the balance sheet. In accordance with the hierarchy contained in FASB ASC 820, Fair Value Measurements, the Company calculated fair value using observable inputs other than Level 1 quoted prices (Level 2). During 2011, the Company entered into a Euro exchange forward contract in the amount of €4,500 for Euro-denominated liabilities that was settled in January 2013. These transactions were accounted for in accordance with the ASC 815, as non-designated hedges. During the period that the Company held the forward contract, the fair value was recorded in the Balance Sheet, with the change in value recorded in earnings, and generally offset by the gains and losses associated with the underlying foreign-currency-denominated balances, which were also reported in earnings.

At December 31, 2013, the Company had in place one interest rate swap contract with an amortizing notional amount of $36,750 that is accounted for under FASB ASC 815 as a cash flow hedge. The effective portion of the gains or losses on the interest rate swap are reported as a component of other comprehensive income and reclassified into earnings in the same period or periods during which the hedged transactions affect earnings. Amounts in other comprehensive income expected to be reclassified to earnings in the coming 12 months are $(564). Amounts recorded in earnings for hedge ineffectiveness for the period ending December 2013 were immaterial.

27

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets—The primary identifiable intangible assets of the Company relate to assets associated with its product acquisitions. The Company adopted the provisions of FASB ASC 350, under which identifiable intangibles with finite lives are amortized and those with indefinite lives are not amortized. The estimated useful life of an identifiable intangible asset to the Company is based upon a number of factors including the effects of demand, competition, and expected changes in the marketability of the Company’s products. The Company re-evaluates whether these intangible assets are impaired on an annual basis, relying on a number of factors including operating results, business plans and future cash flows. Identifiable intangible assets that are subject to amortization are evaluated for impairment using a process similar to that used to evaluate elements of property. The impairment test for identifiable intangible assets not subject to amortization consists of either a qualitative assessment or a comparison of the fair value of the intangible asset with its carrying amount. An impairment loss, if any, is recognized for the amount by which the carrying value exceeds the fair value of the asset. Fair value is typically estimated using a discounted cash flow analysis, which requires the Company to estimate the future cash flows anticipated to be generated by the particular asset(s) being tested for impairment as well as selecting a discount rate to measure the present value of the anticipated cash flows. When determining future cash flow estimates, the Company considers historical results adjusted to reflect current and anticipated operating conditions. Estimating future cash flows requires significant judgment by the Company, in such areas as: future economic conditions, industry-specific conditions, product pricing and necessary capital expenditures. The use of different assumptions or estimates for future cash flows could produce different impairment amounts (or none at all) for long-lived assets, goodwill and identifiable intangible assets. The Company has performed an impairment review for the years ending December 31, 2013 and 2012 and there were no impairment losses recorded.

Fair Value of Equity Investment—The Company utilizes the equity method of accounting with respect to its investment in TyraTech Inc. (“TyraTech”), a Delaware corporation that specializes in developing, marketing and selling pesticide products containing essential oils and other natural ingredients. At December 31, 2013, the carrying value of the Company’s investment in TyraTech was $2,701 and the quoted market value based on TyraTech’s share price (Level 1 input) was $4,073. The Company’s equity investment is included in other assets on the balance sheet.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments—The carrying values of cash, receivables and accounts payable approximate their fair values because of the short maturity of these instruments. The fair value of the Company’s long-term debt and note payable to our lender group is estimated based on the quoted market prices for the same or similar issues or on the current rates offered to the Company for debt of the same remaining maturities. Such fair value approximates the respective carrying values of the Company’s long-term debt and note payable to bank.

The Company’s cash flow hedge related to a variable debt instrument and outstanding foreign currency derivative used to hedge foreign currency balances are measured at fair value on a recurring basis.

The valuation techniques used to measure the fair value of the derivative financial instruments above in which the counterparties have high credit ratings, were derived from pricing models, such as discounted cash flow techniques, with all significant inputs derived from, or corroborated by, observable market data. The Company’s discounted cash flow techniques use observable market inputs, such as LIBOR-based yield curves and foreign currency forward rates.

28

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

ITEM 7A QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

The Company is exposed to market risk related to changes in interest rates, primarily from its borrowing activities. The Company’s indebtedness to its primary lender is evidenced by a line of credit with a variable rate of interest, which fluctuates with changes in the lender’s reference rate. The Company may use derivative financial instruments for trading purposes to protect trading performance from exchange rate fluctuations on material contracts.

The Company conducts business in various foreign currencies, primarily when doing business in Europe, Mexico, Central and South America. Therefore changes in the value of the currencies of such countries or regions affect the Company’s financial position and cash flows when translated into U.S. Dollars. The Company has mitigated, and will continue to mitigate, a portion of its currency exchange exposure through natural hedges based on the operation of decentralized foreign operating companies in which the majority of all costs are local-currency based. A 10% change in the value of all foreign currencies would have an immaterial effect on the Company’s financial position and cash flows. As part of an on-going process of assessing business risk, management has identified risk factors which are disclosed in Item 1A. Risk Factors of this Report.

ITEM 8 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

The Financial Statements and Supplementary Data required by this item are listed at PART IV, Item 15, Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules.

ITEM 9 CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

None.

ITEM 9A CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

Disclosure Controls and Procedures

Management, under the supervision of the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, periodically evaluate the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)). Based upon this evaluation, as of December 31, 2013, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer have concluded that these disclosure controls and procedures are effective in ensuring that the information required to be disclosed in reports filed under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is (i) recorded, processed, summarized and reported on a timely basis, and (ii) accumulated and communicated to the Company’s management, including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

29

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

Management of the Company is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for AVD and its subsidiaries (“the Company”). The Company’s internal control system over financial reporting is designed to provide reasonable assurance to management and the Board of Directors as to the fair, reliable and timely preparation and presentation of consolidated financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America filed with the SEC.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Therefore, even processes determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to the financial statement preparation and presentation.

Management conducted an evaluation of the Company’s internal controls over financial reporting based on a framework set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission in Internal Control—Integrated Framework (1992). This evaluation included review of the documentation of controls, evaluation of the design effectiveness of controls, testing of the effectiveness of controls and a conclusion on the evaluation. Based on this evaluation, management believes that as of December 31, 2013, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting is effective.

BDO USA, LLP, the independent registered public accounting firm that audited the consolidated financial statements included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K, was engaged to attest to and report on the effectiveness of AVD’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013. Its report is included herein.

Changes in Internal Controls over Financial Reporting

There were no changes in internal controls over financial reporting during the quarter ended December 31, 2013 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.

30

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders

American Vanguard Corporation

Newport Beach, California

We have audited American Vanguard Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework (1992) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (the COSO criteria). American Vanguard Corporation’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Item 9A, Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audit also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

In our opinion, American Vanguard Corporation maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013, based on the COSO criteria.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of American Vanguard Corporation as of December 31, 2013 and 2012, and the related consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2013 and our report dated February 28, 2014 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.

/s/ BDO USA, LLP

Los Angeles, California

February 28, 2014

31

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

ITEM 9B OTHER INFORMATION

None.

PART III

ITEM 10 DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

The information set forth under the captions “Executive Officers of the Company,” “Election of Directors,” “Information About the Board of Directors and Committees of the Board” and “Transactions with Management and Others—Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance” in our definitive proxy statement for our Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held in 2014 (the “Proxy Statement”), which will be filed with the SEC within 120 days of the end of our fiscal year ended December 31, 2013, is incorporated herein by reference.

ITEM 11 EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Except as specifically provided, the information set forth under the captions “Compensation of Executive Officers” and “Information About the Board of Directors and Committees of the Board—Compensation of Directors” in the Proxy Statement is incorporated herein by reference.

ITEM 12 SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

The disclosure contained in Part II, Item 5 under “Equity Compensation Plan Information” is incorporated herein by reference. Information regarding security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management is incorporated by reference to the information set forth under the caption “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management” in the Proxy Statement.

ITEM 13 CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE

The information set forth under the captions “Transactions with Management and Others” and “Information About the Board of Directors and Committees of the Board” in the Proxy Statement is incorporated herein by reference.

ITEM 14 PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES

Information regarding principal accountant fees and services is incorporated by reference to the information set forth under the caption “Ratification of the Selection of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm—Relationship of the Company with Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in the Proxy Statement.

32

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

PART IV

ITEM 15 EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES

(a) The following documents are filed as part of this report:

Index to Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data:

Description	Page No.
Financial Statements:
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm		35
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2013 and 2012		36
Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the Years Ended December  31, 2013, 2012, and 2011		37
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011		38
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 2012, and 2011		39
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies and Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements		41

(b) Exhibits:

The exhibits listed on the accompanying Index To Exhibits, page 101 are filed as part of this annual report.

(c) Valuation and qualifying accounts:

Schedule II-A—Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

Allowance for Doubtful Accounts Receivable (in thousands)

Fiscal Year Ended	Balance at Beginning of Period		Additions Charged to					Deductions		Balance at End of Period
			Costs and Expenses		Other
December 31, 2013	$	623		—	$	(231	)		—	$	392
December 31, 2012	$	340		—	$	283			—	$	623
December 31, 2011	$	447		—	$	(107	)		—	$	340

33

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, American Vanguard Corporation has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

(Registrant)

By:	/S/ ERIC G. WINTEMUTE	By:	/S/ DAVID T. JOHNSON
	Eric G. Wintemute Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board		David T. Johnson Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer
	February 28, 2014		February 28, 2014

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities indicated.

By:	/S/ ERIC G. WINTEMUTE	By:	/S/ DAVID T. JOHNSON
	Eric G. Wintemute Principal Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board		David T. Johnson Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer
	February 28, 2014		February 28, 2014
By:	/S/ DEBRA EDWARDS	By:	/S/ JOHN L. KILLMER
	Debra Edwards Director		John L. Killmer Director
	February 28, 2014		February 28, 2014
By:	/S/ LAWRENCE S. CLARK	By:	/S/ CARL R. SODERLIND
	Lawrence S. Clark Director		Carl R. Soderlind Director
	February 28, 2014		February 28, 2014
By:	/S/ MORTON D. ERLICH	By:	/S/ ALFRED INGULLI
	Morton D. Erlich Director		Alfred Ingulli Director
	February 28, 2014		February 28, 2014
By:	/S/ ESMAIL ZIRAKPARVAR	By:	/S/ SCOTT D. BASKIN
	Esmail Zirakparvar Director		Scott D. Baskin Director
	February 28, 2014		February 28, 2014

34

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders

American Vanguard Corporation

Newport Beach, California

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of American Vanguard Corporation and Subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2013 and 2012 and the related consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2013. In connection with our audits of the financial statements, we have also audited the financial statement schedule listed in the accompanying index under Item 15(c). These financial statements and schedule are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and schedule based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements and schedule. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of American Vanguard Corporation at December 31, 2013 and 2012, and the results of its operations and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2013, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Also, in our opinion, the financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), American Vanguard Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework (1992) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) and our report dated February 28, 2014 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.

/s/ BDO USA, LLP

Los Angeles, California

February 28, 2014

35

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

December 31, 2013 and 2012

(In thousands, except share data)

	2013			2012
Assets
Current assets:
Cash	$	6,680		$	38,476
Receivables:
Trade, net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $392 and $623, respectively		74,060			76,073
Other		892			1,230
		74,952			77,303
Inventories		139,830			87,951
Prepaid expenses		11,435			13,710
Income taxes receivable		10,088			—
Deferred income tax assets		6,521			4,877
Total current assets		249,506			222,317
Property, plant and equipment, net		52,468			45,701
Intangible assets, net of applicable amortization		107,007			113,521
Other assets		38,462			18,351
	$	447,443		$	399,890
Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
Current liabilities:
Current installments of long-term debt	$	69		$	16,247
Current installments of other liabilities		2,132			1,839
Accounts payable		40,702			32,838
Deferred revenue		3,788			20,427
Accrued program costs		53,630			32,335
Tax payable		—			1,313
Accrued expenses and other payables		10,178			8,671
Total current liabilities		110,499			113,670
Long-term debt, excluding current installments		51,676			36,196
Other liabilities, excluding current installments		4,143			5,425
Deferred income tax liabilities		23,330			19,163
Total liabilities		189,648			174,454
Commitments and contingent liabilities
Stockholders’ equity:
Preferred stock, $.10 par value per share; authorized 400,000 shares; none issued		—			—
Common stock, $.10 par value per share; authorized 40,000,000 shares; issued 31,092,782 shares in 2013 and 30,766,730 shares in 2012		3,109			3,077
Additional paid-in capital		60,160			54,323
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(1,048	)		(1,762	)
Retained earnings		202,470			174,243
		264,691			229,881
Less treasury stock at cost, 2,380,634 shares in 2013 and 2,310,634 shares in 2012		(6,738	)		(4,804	)
American Vanguard Corporation stockholders’ equity		257,953			225,077
Non-controlling interest		(158	)		359
Total stockholders’ equity		257,795			225,436
	$	447,443		$	399,890

See summary of significant accounting policies and notes to consolidated financial statements.

36

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME

Years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011

(In thousands, except per share data)

	2013			2012			2011
Net sales	$	381,021		$	366,190		$	301,080
Cost of sales		209,674			205,065			178,012
Gross profit		171,347			161,125			123,068
Operating expenses		115,612			101,802			83,842
Operating income		55,735			59,323			39,226
Interest expense		2,176			2,872			3,569
Interest income		(1	)		(1	)		(3	)
Interest capitalized		(274	)		(400	)		(109	)
Extinguishment of debt		—			—			546
Income before provision for income taxes and loss on equity investment		53,834			56,852			35,223
Income taxes expense		18,916			20,026			13,155
Income before loss on equity investment		34,918			36,826			22,068
Less loss from equity method investment		986			—			—
Net income		33,932			36,826			22,068
Add back net loss attributable to non-controlling interest		517			41			—
Net income attributable to American Vanguard	$	34,449		$	36,867		$	22,068
Change in fair value of interest rate swaps		388			158			(869	)
Foreign currency translation adjustment		326			330			(933	)
Comprehensive income	$	35,163		$	37,355		$	20,266
Earnings per common share—basic	$	1.22		$	1.32		$	0.80
Earnings per common share—assuming dilution	$	1.19		$	1.28		$	0.79
Weighted average shares outstanding—basic		28,301			27,914			27,559
Weighted average shares outstanding—assuming dilution		28,899			28,756			27,875

See summary of significant accounting policies and notes to consolidated financial statements.

37

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

Years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011

(In thousands, except share data)

	Common Stock				Additional Paid-in Capital		Retained Earnings			Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income/(loss)			Non- Controlling Interest			Treasury Stock					Total
	Shares		Amount													Shares		Amount
Balance, December 31, 2010		29,735,928	$	2,974	$	43,403	$	123,661		$	(448	)	$	—			2,260,996	$	(3,153	)	$	166,437
Stocks issued under ESPP		54,933		6		459		—			—			—			—		—			465
Cash dividends on common stock ($0.08 per share)		—		—		—		(2,205	)		—			—			—		—			(2,205	)
Foreign currency translation adjustment, net		—		—		—		—			(933	)		—			—		—			(933	)
Stock based compensation		—		—		1,994		—			—			—			—		—			1,994
Changes in fair value of interest swap		—		—		—		—			(869	)		—			—		—			(869	)
Stock options exercised and grants of restricted stock units		54,186		5		110		—			—			—			—		—			115
Net income		—		—		—		22,068			—			—			—		—			22,068
Balance, December 31, 2011		29,845,047		2,985		45,966		143,524			(2,250	)		—			2,260,996		(3,153	)		187,072
Stocks issued under ESPP		40,116		4		547		—			—			—			—		—			551
Cash dividends on common stock ($0.22 per share)		—		—		—		(6,148	)		—			—			—		—			(6,148	)
Foreign currency translation adjustment, net		—		—		—		—			330			—			—		—			330
Stock based compensation		—		—		2,950		—			—			—			—		—			2,950
Changes in fair value of interest swap		—		—		—		—			158			—			—		—			158
Stock options exercised and grants of restricted stock units		881,567		88		4,239		—			—			—			49,638		(1,651	)		2,676
Excess tax benefits from share based payment arrangements		—		—		621		—			—			—			—		—			621
Non-controlling interest contribution		—		—		—		—			—			400			—		—			400
Net (loss) income		—		—		—		36,867			—			(41	)		—		—			36,826
Balance, December 31, 2012		30,766,730		3,077		54,323		174,243			(1,762	)		359			2,310,634		(4,804	)		225,436
Stocks issued under ESPP		27,923		3		740		—			—			—			—		—			743
Cash dividends on common stock ($0.22 per share)		—		—		—		(6,222	)		—			—			—		—			(6,222	)
Foreign currency translation adjustment, net		—		—		—		—			326			—			—		—			326
Stock based compensation		—		—		3,819		—			—			—			—		—			3,819
Changes in fair value of interest swap		—		—		—		—			388			—			—		—			388
Stock options exercised and grants of restricted stock units		298,129		29		838		—			—			—			—		—			867
Excess tax benefits from share based payment arrangements		—		—		440		—			—			—			—		—			440
Shares repurchased		—		—		—		—			—			—			70,000		(1,934	)		(1,934	)
Net (loss) income		—		—		—		34,449			—			(517	)		—		—			33,932
Balance, December 31, 2013		31,092,782	$	3,109	$	60,160	$	202,470		$	(1,048	)	$	(158	)		2,380,634	$	(6,738	)	$	257,795

See summary of significant accounting policies and notes to consolidated financial statements

38

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

Years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011

(In thousands)

	2013			2012			2011
Increase cash
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net income	$	33,932		$	36,826		$	22,068
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash (used in) provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization of fixed and intangible assets		14,845			13,487			13,546
Amortization of other long term assets		4,598			2,925			1,983
Amortization of discounted liabilities		174			818			1,371
Stock-based compensation		3,819			2,950			1,994
Tax benefit from exercise of stock options		(440	)		(621	)		—
Increase (decrease) in deferred income taxes		2,523			(886	)		4,711
Loss from equity method investment		986			—			—
Changes in assets and liabilities associated with operations:
Decrease (increase) in net receivables		2,351			(7,505	)		(35,021	)
(Increase) decrease in inventories		(51,879	)		(16,883	)		2,986
(Increase) decrease in income tax receivable/payable, net		(10,961	)		2,137			6,512
Increase in prepaid expenses and other assets		(19,733	)		(23,725	)		(1,823	)
Increase in accounts payable		8,252			9,781			8,384
(Decrease) increase in deferred revenue		(16,639	)		12,856			2,003
Increase in other payables and accrued expenses		21,958			8,264			10,552
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities		(6,214	)		40,424			39,266
Cash flows from investing activities:
Capital expenditures		(15,260	)		(17,628	)		(6,261	)
Investment		(3,687	)		—			—
Acquisitions of intangible assets		—			(3,473	)		(316	)
Net cash used in investing activities		(18,947	)		(21,101	)		(6,577	)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Net borrowings (repayments) under line of credit agreement		51,550			—			(7,300	)
Payments on long-term debt		(46,000	)		(8,443	)		(8,429	)
Payment on other long-term liabilities		(1,831	)		(6,035	)		(401	)
Tax benefit from exercise of stock options		440			621			—
(Increase) decrease in other notes payable		(6,154	)		(51	)		20,063
Repurchases of common stock		(1,934	)		—			—
Proceeds from the issuance of common stock (sale of stock under ESPP and exercise of stock options)		1,610			3,227			580
Non-controlling interest contribution		—			400			—
Payment of cash dividends		(4,804	)		(6,148	)		(2,205	)
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities		(7,123	)		(16,429	)		2,308
Net (decrease) increase in cash		(32,284	)		2,894			34,997
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash		488			497			(1,070	)
Cash at beginning of year		38,476			35,085			1,158
Cash at end of year	$	6,680		$	38,476		$	35,085
Supplemental cash flow information:
Cash paid during the year for:
Interest	$	1,777		$	1,891		$	2,055
Income taxes	$	25,271		$	18,048		$	6,359

See summary of significant accounting policies and notes to the consolidated financial statements

39

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

Supplemental schedule of non-cash investing and financing activities:

During the fourth quarter of 2012, the Company formed a new venture and entered into a licensing agreement with the minority partner. As a result of the transactions, the Company recorded $1,073 as additions to intangible asset and a related liability.

During the first quarter of 2011, the Company recorded final purchase accounting entries related to the product line acquisitions completed in the final quarter of 2010. As a result, the Company recorded $6,802 as additions to intangible assets and related liability. There was no cash impact on this transaction during this period. During the last quarter of 2011, the Company completed the acquisition of product lines and recorded intangible assets in the amount of $316.

40

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Years Ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Description of Business, Basis of Consolidation and Significant Accounting Policies

American Vanguard Corporation (the “Company”) is primarily a specialty chemical manufacturer that develops and markets safe and effective products for agricultural, commercial and consumer uses. The Company manufactures and formulates chemicals for crops, human and animal protection. The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company, its wholly-owned subsidiaries and Envance, its majority owned subsidiary. All significant intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. The Company operates within a single operating segment.

Based on similar economic and operational characteristics, the Company’s business is aggregated into one reportable segment. Selective enterprise information is as follows:

	2013		2012		2011
Net sales:
Insecticides	$	193,623	$	194,060	$	137,460
Herbicides/soil fumigants/fungicides		121,042		89,899		90,782
Other, including plant growth regulators		31,849		45,581		43,826
Total crop		346,514		329,540		272,068
Non-crop		34,507		36,650		29,012
	$	381,021	$	366,190	$	301,080
Gross profit:
Crop	$	155,275	$	142,019	$	110,348
Non-crop		16,072		19,106		12,720
	$	171,347	$	161,125	$	123,068

Due to elements inherent to the Company’s business, such as differing and unpredictable weather patterns, crop growing cycles, changes in product mix of sales and ordering patterns that may vary in timing, measuring the Company’s performance on a quarterly basis (gross profit margins on a quarterly basis may vary significantly) even when such comparisons are favorable, is not as good an indicator as full-year comparisons.

Cost of Sales—In addition to normal cost centers (i.e., direct labor, raw materials) included in cost of sales, the Company also includes such cost centers as Health and Safety, Environmental, Maintenance and Quality Control in cost of sales.

Other Than Cost of Sales—Operating Expenses—Operating expenses include cost centers for Selling, General and Administrative, Research and Product Development, Regulatory/Registration, Freight, Delivery and Warehousing.

	2013		2012		2011
Selling	$	32,929	$	25,869	$	23,318
General and administrative		33,536		29,715		21,429
Research, product development and regulatory		21,644		20,750		18,041
Freight, delivery and warehousing		27,503		25,468		21,054
	$	115,612	$	101,802	$	83,842

Freight, Delivery and Warehousing Expense—Freight, delivery and warehousing costs incurred by the Company are reported as operating expenses.

41

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS––(Continued)

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Advertising Expense—The Company expenses advertising costs in the period invoiced. Advertising expenses, which include promotional costs, are recognized in operating costs (specifically in selling expenses) in the consolidated statements of operations and were $4,011 in 2013, $2,680 in 2012 and $2,095 in 2011.

Inventories—The Company values its inventories at lower of cost or market. Cost is determined by the first-in, first-out (“FIFO”) method, including material, labor, factory overhead and subcontracting services. The Company writes down and makes adjustments to its inventory carrying values as a result of the effects of unutilized capacity, net realizable value assessments of slow moving and obsolete inventory and other annual adjustments to ensure that our standard costs continue to closely reflect manufacturing cost.

The components of inventories consist of the following:

	2013		2012
Finished products	$	126,872	$	74,900
Raw materials	$	12,958		13,051
	$	139,830	$	87,951

Revenue Recognition and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts—Revenue from sales is recognized at the time title and the risks of ownership pass. This is when the customer has made the fixed commitment to purchase the goods, the products are shipped per the customer’s instructions, the sales price is fixed and determinable, and collection is reasonably assured. The Company has in place procedures to ensure that revenue is recognized when earned. The procedures are subject to management’s review and from time to time certain sales are excluded until it is clear that the title has passed and there is no further recourse to the Company. Allowance for doubtful accounts is established based on estimates of losses related to customer receivable balances. Estimates are developed using either standard quantitative measures based on historical losses, adjusted for current economic conditions or by evaluating specific customer accounts for risk of loss.

Accrued Program Costs—In accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 605, the Company classifies certain payments to its customers as a reduction of sales revenues. The Company describes these payments as “Programs.” Programs are a critical part of doing business in the agricultural chemicals business market place. For accounting purposes, programs are recorded as a reduction in gross sales and include market pricing adjustments, volume take up or other key performance indicator, driven payments made to distributors, retailers or growers at the end of a growing season. Each quarter management compares each sale transaction with published programs to determine what program liability has been incurred. Once this initial calculation is made for the specific quarter, sales and marketing management along with executive and financial management review the accumulated program balance and make assessments of whether or not customers are tracking in a manner that indicates that they will meet the requirements set out in the terms and conditions attached to each program. If management believes that customers are falling short of their annual goals then periodic adjustments will be made to the accumulated accrual to properly reflect the Company’s best estimate of the liability at the balance sheet date. The majority of adjustments are made at the end of the crop season, at which time customer performance can be fully assessed. Programs are paid out predominantly on an annual basis, usually in the final quarter of the financial year or the first quarter of the following year.

Long-lived Assets—The carrying value of long-lived assets is reviewed for impairment quarterly and/or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of such assets may not be recoverable. Measurement of the impairment loss is based on the fair value of the asset. Generally, the fair value will be determined using valuation techniques such as the present value of expected future cash flows. There was no impairment of long-lived assets in 2013 or 2012.

42

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS––(Continued)

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Property, Plant and Equipment and Depreciation—Property, plant and equipment includes the cost of land, buildings, machinery and equipment, office furniture and fixtures, automobiles, construction projects and significant improvements to existing plant and equipment. Interest costs related to significant construction projects are capitalized at the Company’s current weighted effective interest rate. Expenditures for maintenance and minor repairs are expensed as incurred. When property or equipment is sold or otherwise disposed of, the related cost and accumulated depreciation is removed from the respective accounts, and the gain or loss realized on disposition is reflected in earnings. All plant and equipment is depreciated using the straight-line method, utilizing the estimated useful property lives. Building lives range from 10 to 30 years; machinery and equipment lives range from 3 to 15 years; office furniture and fixture lives range from 3 to 10 years; automobile lives range from 3 to 6 years; construction projects and significant improvements to existing plant and equipment lives range from 3 to 15 years when placed in service. The agricultural chemicals business involves complex manufacturing processes that drive high capital cost plant.

Foreign Currency Translation—Assets and liabilities of foreign subsidiaries, where the local currency is the functional currency, have been translated at period end exchange rates, and profit and loss accounts have been translated using weighted average yearly exchange rates. Adjustments resulting from translation have been recorded in the equity section of the balance sheet as cumulative translation adjustments in other comprehensive income (loss). The effects of foreign currency exchange gains and losses on transactions that are denominated in currencies other than the entity’s functional currency are remeasured to the functional currency using the end of the period exchange rates. The effects of remeasurement related to foreign currency transactions are included in current profit and loss accounts.

Derivative financial instruments and hedge activities—In accordance with FASB ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging, the Company recognizes all derivative instruments as either other assets or other liabilities at fair value on the balance sheet. In accordance with the hierarchy contained in FASB ASC 820, Fair Value Measurements, the Company calculated fair value using observable inputs other than Level 1 quoted prices (Level 2). During 2011, the Company entered into a Euro exchange forward contract in the amount of €4,500 for Euro-denominated liabilities that was settled in January 2013. These transactions were accounted for in accordance with the ASC 815, as non-designated hedges. During the period that the Company held the forward contract, the fair value was recorded in the Balance Sheet, with the change in value recorded in earnings, and generally offset by the gains and losses associated with the underlying foreign-currency-denominated balances, which were also reported in earnings.

At December 31, 2013, the Company had in place one interest rate swap contract with an amortizing notional amount of $36,750 that is accounted for under FASB ASC 815 as a cash flow hedge. The effective portion of the gains or losses on the interest rate swap are reported as a component of other comprehensive income and reclassified into earnings in the same period or periods during which the hedged transactions affect earnings. Amounts in other comprehensive income expected to be reclassified to earnings in the coming 12 months are $(564). Amounts recorded in earnings for hedge ineffectiveness for the period ending December 2013 were immaterial.

The following tables illustrate the impact of derivatives on the Company’s statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2013.

The Effect of Derivative Instruments on the Statement of Financial Performance For the Period Ended December 31
Derivatives in ASC 815 Cash Flow	Amount of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in OCI on Derivative (Effective Portion)						Location of Gain or (Loss) Reclassified from Accumulated OCI into Income		Amount of Gain or (Loss) Reclassified from Accumulated OCI into Income (Effective Portion)						Location of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivative		Amount of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivative (Ineffective Portion)
Hedging Relationships	2013			2012			(Effective Portion)		2013			2012			(Ineffective Portion)		2013			2012
Interest rate contracts	$	(75	)	$	(472	)		Interest expense	$	(712	)	$	(721	)		Interest expense	$	(1	)	$	(1	)
Total	$	(75	)	$	(472	)			$	(712	)	$	(721	)			$	(1	)	$	(1	)

Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments	Location of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Income on	Amount of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivative
under ASC 815	Derivative	2013		2012
Foreign exchange contracts	Other income/(expense)	$	—	$	(160	)
Total		$	—	$	(160	)

The counterparty to the Company’s interest rate derivative financial instrument is Bank of the West, the Company’s primary bank. Pledged cash collateral is not required under the interest rate swap contract. At December 31, 2013, the Company did not hold any other derivative financial instruments. As a result, there occurs no offsetting of derivative liabilities in the Company’s financial statements. The gross amount of derivative liabilities is equal to the net amount recognized in current installments of other liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets, as shown in the below table:

									Gross Amounts Not Offset in the Statement of Financial Position
Description	Gross Amounts of Recognized Liabilities			Gross Amounts Offset in the Statement of Financial Position		Net Amounts of Liabilities Presented in the Statement of Financial Position			Financial Instruments		Cash Collateral Pledged		Net Amount
Derivatives by counterparty:
Bank of the West	$	(564	)	$	—	$	(564	)	$	—	$	—	$	(564	)
Total	$	(564	)	$	—	$	(564	)	$	—	$	—	$	(564	)

Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets—The primary identifiable intangible assets of the Company relate to assets associated with its product acquisitions. The Company adopted the provisions of FASB ASC 350, under which identifiable intangibles with finite lives are amortized and those with indefinite lives are not amortized. The estimated useful life of an identifiable intangible asset to the Company is based upon a number of factors including the effects of demand, competition, and expected changes in the marketability of the Company’s products. The Company re-evaluates whether these intangible assets are impaired on an annual basis, relying on a number of factors including operating results, business plans and future cash flows. Identifiable intangible assets that are subject to amortization are evaluated for impairment using a process similar to that used to evaluate elements of property. The impairment test for identifiable intangible assets not subject to amortization consists of either a qualitative assessment or a comparison of the fair value of the intangible asset with its carrying amount. An impairment loss, if any, is recognized for the amount by which the carrying value exceeds the fair value of the asset. Fair value is typically estimated using a discounted cash flow analysis, which requires the Company to estimate the future cash flows anticipated to be generated by the particular asset(s) being tested for impairment as well as selecting a discount rate to measure the present value of the anticipated cash flows. When determining future cash flow estimates, the Company considers historical results adjusted to reflect current and anticipated operating conditions. Estimating future cash flows requires significant judgment by the Company, in such areas as: future economic conditions, industry-specific conditions, product pricing and necessary capital expenditures. The use of different assumptions or estimates for future cash flows could produce different impairment amounts (or none at all) for long-lived assets, goodwill and identifiable intangible assets. The Company has performed an impairment review for the years ending December 31, 2013 and 2012, and there were no impairment losses recorded.

Fair Value of Equity Investment—The Company utilizes the equity method of accounting with respect to its investment in TyraTech Inc. (“TyraTech”), a Delaware corporation that specializes in developing, marketing and selling pesticide products containing essential oils and other natural ingredients. At December 31, 2013, the carrying value of the Company’s investment in TyraTech was $2,701 and the quoted market value based on TyraTech’s share price (Level 1 input) was $4,073. The Company’s equity investment is included in other assets on the balance sheet.

43

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS––(Continued)

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Fair Value of Financial Instruments—The carrying values of cash, receivables and accounts payable approximate their fair values because of the short maturity of these instruments. The fair value of the Company’s long-term debt and note payable to our lender group is estimated based on the quoted market prices for the same or similar issues or on the current rates offered to the Company for debt of the same remaining maturities. Such fair value approximates the respective carrying values of the Company’s long-term debt and note payable to bank.

The Company measures fair value based on the prices that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Fair value measurements are based on a three-tier hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value. These tiers include the following:

Level 1: Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that are accessible at the measurement date. The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to Level 1 inputs.

Level 2: Observable prices that are based on inputs not quoted on active markets, but corroborated by market data. These inputs include quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; quoted market prices in markets that are not active; or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities.

Level 3: Unobservable inputs are used when little or no market data is available. The fair value hierarchy gives the lowest priority to Level 3 inputs.

In determining fair value, the Company utilizes valuation techniques that maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs to the extent possible, as well as considering counterparty credit risk in the assessment of fair value.

	Fair Value Measurements Using Input Type
	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3
As of December 31, 2013:
Liability:
Interest rate derivative financial instruments (1)	$	—	$	564	$	—
Foreign currency derivative financial instrument	$	—	$	—	$	—
As of December 31, 2012:
Liability:
Interest rate derivative financial instruments (1)	$	—	$	1,201	$	—
Foreign currency derivative financial instrument	$	—	$	160	$	—

(1) Includes accrued interest expense.

Income Taxes—The Company utilizes the liability method of accounting for income taxes as set forth in ASC 740. Under the liability method, deferred taxes are determined based on the temporary differences between the financial statement and tax basis of assets and liabilities using tax rates expected to be in effect during the years in which the basis differences reverse. A valuation allowance is recorded when it is more likely than not that some of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. In determining the need for valuation allowances, the Company considers projected future taxable income and the availability of tax planning strategies. If in the future the Company determines that it would not be able to realize its recorded deferred tax assets, an increase in the valuation allowance would be recorded, decreasing earnings in the period in which such determination is made.

The Company assesses its income tax positions and records tax benefits for all years subject to examination based upon the Company’s evaluation of the facts, circumstances and information available at the reporting date. For those tax positions where there is greater than 50% likelihood that a tax benefit will be sustained, the Company has recorded the largest amount of tax benefit that may potentially be realized upon ultimate settlement with a taxing authority that has full knowledge of all relevant information. For those income tax positions where there is less than 50% likelihood that a tax benefit will be sustained, no tax benefit has been recognized in the financial statements.

44

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS––(Continued)

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Per Share Information—FASB ASC 260, requires dual presentation of basic earnings per share (“EPS”) and diluted EPS on the face of all income statements. Basic EPS is computed as net income divided by the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period. Diluted EPS reflects potential dilution that could occur if securities or other contracts, which, for the Company, consists of options to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock, are exercised as calculated using the treasury stock method.

The components of basic and diluted earnings per share were as follows:

	2013		2012		2011
Numerator:
Net income attributable to American Vanguard	$	34,449	$	36,867	$	22,068
Denominator:
Weighted average shares outstanding—basic		28,301		27,914		27,559
Dilutive effect of stock options and grants		598		842		316
		28,899		28,756		27,875

Accounting Estimates—The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S. GAAP”) requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues, and expenses at the date that the financial statements are prepared. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Reclassifications—Certain prior year’s amounts have been reclassified to conform to the current year’s presentation.

Total comprehensive income—In addition to net income, total comprehensive income includes changes in equity that are excluded from the consolidated statements of operations and are recorded directly into a separate section of stockholders’ equity on the consolidated balance sheets. For the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, total comprehensive income consisted of net income attributable to American Vanguard, the change in fair value of interest rate swaps and foreign currency translation adjustments.

Stock-Based Compensation—The Company accounts for stock-based awards to employees and directors using FASB ASC 718. When applying the provisions of FASB ASC 718, the Company also applies the provisions of Staff Accounting Bulletin (“SAB”) No. 107 and SAB No. 110.

FASB ASC 718 requires companies to estimate the fair value of share-based payment awards on the date of grant. The value of the portion of the award that is ultimately expected to vest is recognized as expense over the requisite service periods in the Company’s Consolidated Statement of Operations.

Stock-based compensation expense recognized during the period is based on the fair value of the portion of share-based payment awards that is ultimately expected to vest during the period. Stock-based compensation expense recognized is reduced for forfeitures as required by FASB ASC 718. Estimated forfeitures recognized in the Company’s Consolidated Statement of Operations reduced compensation expense for the year ended December 31, 2013 by $247. The Company estimates that 8% of all restricted stock grants that are currently vesting will be forfeited. The Company estimates that 28.6% of the performance based shares that are currently vesting will be forfeited. The Company estimates that 0.8% of all stock option grants that are currently vesting will be forfeited. These estimates are reviewed quarterly and revised as necessary.

As of December 31, 2013, the Company had approximately $21 of unamortized stock-based compensation expenses related to unvested options, which will be recognized over the weighted-average period of 0.5 years. As of December 31, 2013, the Company had approximately $5,550 of unamortized stock-based compensation expenses related to unvested restricted stock, which will be recognized over the weighted-average period of 1.9 years. As of December 31, 2013, the Company had approximately $564 of unamortized stock-based compensation expenses related to unvested performance based stock, which will be recognized over the weighted-average period of 2.4 years. This projected expense will change if any stock options and restricted stock are granted or cancelled prior to the respective reporting periods or if there are any changes required to be made for estimated forfeitures.

45

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS––(Continued)

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

The Company uses the Black-Scholes option-pricing model (“Black-Scholes model”) to value option grants using the following weighted average assumptions:

	2011
Risk free interest rate		2.26	%
Dividend yield		0.05	%
Volatility factor		55.31	%
Weighted average life (years)		6.0 years

There were no option shares granted during 2013 and 2012. The weighted average grant-date fair values of options granted during 2011 was $6.62.

The expected volatility and expected life assumptions are highly complex and use subjective variables. The variables take into consideration, among other things, actual and projected employee stock option exercise behavior. The Company estimates expected term using the “safe harbor” provisions of SAB 107 and SAB 110. The Company used historical volatility as a proxy for estimating expected volatility.

In December 2012, two employees retired, both of whom held options to acquire common stock. At the time of their retirement, options to acquire a total of 13,334 shares of common stock at $7.50 per share were unvested. The Company modified these unvested awards allowing the retiring employees to fully vest. Additionally, the retired employees were given one year to exercise these newly vested awards. At the time of modification, these modified awards were treated as a new grant and their fair value was measured as of the modification date using the Black Scholes model at $23.55 per share, resulting in $314 of additional stock-based compensation expense being recognized in 2012.

The Company values restricted stock grants using the Company’s traded stock price on the date of grant. The weighted average grant-date fair values of restricted stock grants during 2013, 2012, and 2011 were $30.91, $21.51, and $12.30, respectively.

Recently Issued Accounting Guidance

In February 2013, The Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2013-02, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Reporting of Amounts Reclassified Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income, establishes new requirements for disclosing reclassifications of items out of accumulated other comprehensive income (OCI). Specifically, (1) disclosure is required of the changes in components of accumulated OCI, (2) disclosure is required of the effects on individual line items in net income for each item of accumulated OCI that is reclassified in its entirety to net income, and (3) cross references are required to other disclosures that provide additional details for OCI items that are not reclassified in their entirety to net income. The requirements of ASU 2013-02 apply to all entities (i.e., both public and nonpublic) that report items of OCI in any period presented. ASU 2013-02 is effective prospectively for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2012. The Company adopted this standard effective January 1, 2013.

In October 2012, the FASB issued ASU No. 2012-04, Technical Corrections and Improvements. This update primarily makes amendments to various Codifications to (1) conform the format and writing style of certain guidance carried forward without modification from pre-Codification pronouncements, (2) to correct references and provide clarification through updated language, and (3) to relocate guidance within the Codification to a more appropriate location. In addition, ASU No. 2012-4 conforms the use of the term fair value throughout the Codification to reflect fully the measurement and disclosure requirements of FASB ASC Topic 820, Fair Value Measurement and Disclosures (e.g. to replace the terms “market value” and “mark-to-market” with “fair value” and “subsequently measure at fair value,” respectively). The majority of the amendments do not change the accounting practice. However, where applicable, the Company has applied the updates.

46

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS––(Continued)

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

(1) Property, Plant and Equipment

Property, plant and equipment at December 31, 2013 and 2012 consist of the following:

	2013			2012			Estimated useful lives
Land	$	2,458		$	2,458
Buildings and improvements		14,167			12,537			10 to 30 years
Machinery and equipment		94,184			89,089			3 to 15 years
Office furniture, fixtures and equipment		9,717			8,400			3 to 10 years
Automotive equipment		278			312			3 to 6 years
Construction in progress		10,615			3,363
		131,419			116,159
Less accumulated depreciation		(78,951	)		(70,458	)
	$	52,468		$	45,701

(2) Long-Term Debt

Long-term debt of the Company at December 31, 2013 and 2012 is summarized as follows:

	2013			2012
Term loan		—			46,000
Revolving line of credit(a)		51,550			—
Notes payable		195			6,443
		51,745			52,443
Less current installments		(69	)		(16,247	)
	$	51,676		$	36,196

Approximate principal payments on long-term debt at December 31, 2013 are as follows:

2014	$	69
2015		71
2016		55
2017		—
2018		51,550
	$	51,745

47

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS––(Continued)

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

(a) On June 17, 2013, AMVAC Chemical Corporation (“AMVAC”), our principal operating subsidiary, as borrower, and affiliates (including the Company), as guarantors and/or borrowers, entered into a Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement (the “New Credit Agreement”) with a group of commercial lenders led by Bank of the West (AMVAC’s primary bank) as agent, swing line lender and L/C issuer. The New Credit Agreement supersedes the Amended and Restated Credit Agreement (“First Amendment”) dated as of January 10, 2011. The New Credit Agreement is a senior secured lending facility with a five year term and consists of a revolving line of credit of $200 million and an accordion feature for up to $100 million. The new facility includes both AMVAC CV and AMVAC BV (both Dutch subsidiaries) as borrowers. In connection with AMVAC’s entering into the New Credit Agreement, all outstanding indebtedness under the First Amendment was rolled over into the New Credit Agreement, and term loans were converted into revolving debt. Under the New Credit Agreement, revolving loans bear interest at a variable rate based, at borrower’s election with proper notice, on either (i) LIBOR plus the “Applicable Rate” which is based upon the Consolidated Funded Debt Ratio (“Eurocurrency Rate Loan”) or (ii) the greater of (x) the Prime Rate, (y) the Federal Funds Rate plus 0.5%, and (z) the Daily One-Month LIBOR Rate plus 1.00%, plus, in the case of (x), (y) or (z) the Applicable Rate (“Alternate Base Rate Loan”). Interest payments for Eurocurrency Rate Loans are payable on the last day of each interest period (either one, two, three or six months, as selected by the borrower) and the maturity date, while interest payments for Alternate Base Rate Loans are payable on the last business day of each month and the maturity date. The senior secured revolving line of credit matures on June 17, 2018.

The Company uses a pay fixed, receive 1M LIBOR (London Interbank Offered Rate) interest rate swap to manage the interest expense generated by variable rate debt. At December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, the Company had in place an interest rate swap, the use of which results in a fixed interest rate of 3.39% for the portion of variable rate debt that is covered by the interest rate swap contract. The current interest rate swap contract was put in place on March 30, 2011 and terminates on December 31, 2014. The table below shows the amount of outstanding debt and the related notional amount on the interest rate swap contract at each of the balance sheet dates:

	Outstanding Variable Rate Debt		Notional Amount on Interest Rate Swap
At December 31, 2011	$	54,000	$	45,000
At December 31, 2012		46,000		44,250
At December 31, 2013		51,550		36,750

Under the New Credit Agreement, the Company has three key covenants (with which it was in compliance throughout the year and as of December 31, 2013). The covenants are as follows: (1) the Company must maintain its borrowings below a certain consolidated funded debt ratio, (2) the Company has a limitation on its annual spending on the acquisition of fixed asset capital additions, and (3) the Company must maintain a certain consolidated fixed charge coverage ratio.

At December 31, 2013 total indebtedness is $51,745 as compared to $52,443 at December 31, 2012. At December 31, 2013, based on its performance against the most restrictive covenants listed above, the Company has the capacity to increase its borrowings by up to the maximum limit of $148,450 under the Credit Agreement.

Substantially all of the Company’s assets are pledged as collateral under the Credit Agreement.

The Company’s main bank is Bank of the West, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the French bank, BNP Paribas. Bank of the West has been the Company’s bank for more than 30 years. Bank of the West is the syndication manager for the Company’s loans and acts as the counterparty on the Company’s derivative transactions.

48

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS––(Continued)

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

The Company has various loans in place that together constitute the short-term and long-term loan balances shown in the balance sheet at December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012. These are summarized in the following table:

Indebtedness	December 31, 2013						December 31, 2012
$000’s	Long-term		Short-term		Total		Long-term		Short-term		Total
Term loan	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	36,000	$	10,000	$	46,000
Revolving line of credit		51,550		—		51,550		—		—		—
Notes payable		126		69		195		196		6,247		6,443
Total indebtedness	$	51,676	$	69	$	51,745	$	36,196	$	16,247	$	52,443

On June 17, 2013, all outstanding term loans were converted into revolving debt. The average amount outstanding on the term loan during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 was $23,318 and $50,957, respectively. The weighted average interest rate on the term loan during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 was 3.8% and 3.7%, respectively.

The average amount outstanding on the senior secured revolving line of credit during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 was $29,284 and $0. The weighted average interest rate on the revolving credit line during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 was 3.1% and 0.0% respectively.

(3) Income Taxes

The components of income tax expense are:

	2013		2012			2011
Current:
Federal	$	12,285	$	17,448		$	6,070
State		3,007		2,528			1,275
Foreign		1,101		1,027			535
Deferred:
Federal		2,213		(590	)		4,691
State		310		(387	)		584
	$	18,916	$	20,026		$	13,155

Total income tax expense differed from the amounts computed by applying the U.S. Federal income tax rate of 35.0% to income before income tax expense as a result of the following:

	2013			2012			2011
Computed tax expense at statutory federal rates	$	18,678		$	19,911		$	12,328
Increase (decrease) in taxes resulting from:
State taxes, net of federal income tax benefit		1,983			1,947			1,374
Domestic production deduction		(1,142	)		(1,661	)		(826	)
Income tax credits		(724	)		(395	)		(343	)
Other expenses		121			224			622
	$	18,916		$	20,026		$	13,155

The components of income before provision for income taxes are as follows:

	2013		2012		2011
Domestic	$	46,520	$	53,361	$	33,399
Foreign		7,314		3,491		1,824
	$	53,834	$	56,852	$	35,223

49

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS––(Continued)

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Temporary differences between the financial statement carrying amounts and tax bases of assets and liabilities that give rise to significant portions of the net deferred tax liability at December 31, 2013 and 2012 relate to the following:

	2013			2012
Current:
Inventories	$	4,398		$	3,490
State income taxes		(331	)		(431	)
Vacation pay accrual		648			354
Accrued bonuses		1,791			2,289
Bad debt		169			192
Prepaid expenses		(1,929	)		(1,490	)
Other		1,775			473
Net deferred tax asset		6,521			4,877
Non-Current:
Plant and equipment, principally due to differences in depreciation and capitalized interest		(25,662	)		(21,993	)
Tax credit		14			73
Fair value adjustment		207			460
Other		2,111			2,297
Net deferred tax liability		(23,330	)		(19,163	)
Total net deferred tax liability	$	(16,809	)	$	(14,286	)

The following is a roll-forward of the Company’s total gross unrecognized tax liabilities, not including interest and penalties, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013:

	Gross Unrecognized Tax Liabilities
Balance at December 31, 2012	$	282
Additions for tax positions related to the current year		1,290
Additions for tax positions related to the prior year		161
Deletion for tax positions related to the prior year		(41	)
Balance at December 31, 2013	$	1,692

The Company recognizes accrued interest and penalties related to contingent tax liabilities in the provision for income taxes in the Company’s consolidated financial statements. As of December 31, 2013, the Company had recognized approximately $120 in interest and penalties related to recognized tax benefits accrued.

It is expected that the amount of unrecognized tax benefits will change within the next 12 months; however we do not expect the change to have a significant impact on our consolidated statements of operations or consolidated balance sheet. These changes may be the result of settlement of ongoing audits. At this time, an estimate of the range of the reasonable possible outcomes cannot be made.

The Company believes it is more likely than not that the deferred tax assets detailed in the table above will be realized in the normal course of business. Undistributed earnings of foreign subsidiaries are considered to be indefinitely reinvested and, accordingly, no provision for United States federal and state income taxes has been provided thereon. This amounted to $16,202 as of December 31, 2013. Upon distribution of earnings in the form of dividends or otherwise, the Company would be subject to both United States income taxes (subject to adjustment for foreign tax credits) and withholding taxes payable to the various foreign countries. Determination of the unrecognized deferred United States income tax liability is not practical due to the complexities of a hypothetical calculation.

50

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS––(Continued)

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

The Company is subject to U.S. federal income tax as well as to income tax in multiple state jurisdictions. Federal income tax returns of the Company are subject to IRS examination for the 2010 through 2012 tax years. State income tax returns are subject to examination for the 2009 through 2012 tax years.

As of July 2013, the Internal Revenue Service audit for the year ended December 31, 2009 has been closed. The Internal Revenue Service concluded that there were no federal tax adjustments.

The Company’s research and development credit is currently under audit by the California Franchise Tax Board for the years ended December 31, 2004 through December 31, 2006. Currently the Company believes that it has set up an adequate reserve on its claim for refund.

(4) Litigation and Environmental

A. DBCP Cases

Over the course of the past 30 years, AMVAC and/or the Company have been named or otherwise implicated in a number of lawsuits concerning injuries allegedly arising from either contamination of water supplies or personal exposure to 1, 2-dibromo-3-chloropropane (“DBCP^®”). DBCP was manufactured by several chemical companies, including Dow Chemical Company, Shell Oil Company and AMVAC and was approved by the USEPA to control nematodes. DBCP was also applied on banana farms in Latin America. The USEPA suspended registrations of DBCP in October 1979, except for use on pineapples in Hawaii. The USEPA suspension was partially based on 1977 studies by other manufacturers that indicated a possible link between male fertility and exposure to DBCP among their factory production workers involved with producing the product.

At present, there are approximately 100 lawsuits, foreign and domestic, filed by former banana workers in which AMVAC has been named as a party. Fifteen of these suits have been filed in the United States (with prayers for unspecified damages) and the remainder have been filed in Nicaragua.

As described more fully below, activity in domestic cases during 2013 is as follows: in Hawaii, Patrickson, et. al. v. Dole Food Company, et. al which had been dismissed in 2011, remains on appeal; and Adams, from which co-defendant Dole was dismissed, is on appeal with respect to such dismissal and, at any rate, involves claims that pre-dated AMVAC’s sales into the relevant market. In Louisiana and Delaware, there has been much overlapping activity. Three actions filed in Louisiana state court (Soriano et al) in November 1999 have been dismissed due to expiration of the statute of limitations; however, plaintiffs appealed the dismissal in 2013. Seven cases filed by HendlerLaw, P.C. in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana (Aguilar et al) were dismissed (due to expiration of the statute of limitations), then appealed by plaintiffs, and the dismissal was upheld by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal in 2013. In Delaware, the Blanco case (involving a single Costa Rican claimant) survived defendants’ motion to dismiss for expiration of the statute of limitations, was then appealed to the Delaware Supreme Court by defendants, and upheld by that court which recognized the doctrine of cross jurisdictional tolling. Also, in Delaware, HendlerLaw, P.C. filed nine matters during 2012, eight with the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware and one before the Delaware state court (Chaverri). Six of the federal matters were identical to claims then pending before the Louisiana courts and, upon defendants’ motion, were dismissed by the Delaware federal court, then appealed by plaintiffs, and the dismissals were subsequently upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Two of the eight Delaware cases (Abad-Castillo and Marquinez) (involving claims brought on behalf of 2,700 plantation workers from Costa Rica, Ecuador, Guatemala and Panama) remain pending and are the subject of motions to dismiss.

Delaware Matters

On or about July 21, 2011, an action encaptioned, Blanco v. AMVAC Chemical Corporation et al., was filed with the Superior Court of the State of Delaware in and for New Castle County (No. N11C-07-149 JOH) on behalf of an individual plaintiff, residing in Costa Rica, against several defendants, including, among others, AMVAC, The Dow Chemical Company, Occidental Chemical Corporation, and Dole Food Company. In the action, plaintiff claims personal injury (sterility) arising from the alleged exposure to DBCP between 1979 and 1980 while working as a contract laborer in a banana plantation in Costa Rica. Defendant Dow filed a motion to dismiss the action as being barred under the applicable statute of limitations, as this same plaintiff filed the same claim in Florida in 1995 and subsequently withdrew the matter. Plaintiff contends that the statute of limitations was tolled by a prior motion for class certification, which was denied. On August 8,

51

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS––(Continued)

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

2012, the court denied Dow’s motion to dismiss based upon applicable statutes of limitation. In response to that denial, on August 20, 2012, defendants filed a motion for interlocutory appeal and, on September 18, 2012, the Delaware Supreme Court granted interlocutory appeal on the question of whether the State of Delaware will recognize cross jurisdictional tolling (that is, whether it is proper for a Delaware court to follow the class action tolling of another jurisdiction, in this case, Texas, rather than its own two year statute of limitations). On June 10, 2013, the Delaware Supreme Court denied the appeal and upheld the lower court ruling, holding that it was proper to extend the class action tolling exception to cross-jurisdictional class action cases. Thus, Blanco remains pending. AMVAC contends that the plaintiff could not have been exposed to any DBCP supplied by AMVAC in Costa Rica and intends to defend the matter vigorously. The Company does not believe that a loss is either probable or reasonably estimable and has not set up a loss contingency for the matter.

On or about May 31, 2012 (the day on which the trial court in Blanco denied defendants’ motion to dismiss), HendlerLaw, P.C., which represents plaintiffs in seven related matters that had been pending before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana (the “Hendler-Louisiana Cases” referred to in the Company’s Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2011 as Aguilar et al., v. Dole Fruit Company, Inc., et al (U.S.D.C., E.D. of LA No. CV-01305-CJB-SS)), filed nine separate actions, eight with the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (the “Hendler—Delaware Cases” (USCD DE No. 1:12-CV-00696-RGA)) and one with the Superior Court of the State of Delaware (which, for purposes of this filing shall be referred to as Chaverri et al. v. Dole Food Company, Inc. et al., case no. N12C-06-017-JOH). Six of the eight Hendler—Delaware cases and Chaverri involve claims for personal injury allegedly arising from exposure to DBCP on behalf of 235 banana workers from Costa Rica, Ecuador and Panama. Dole subsequently brought a motion to dismiss these seven matters under the “first-to-file” theory of jurisdiction, specifically in light of the fact that they involved identical claims and claimants as those appearing in the Hendler—Louisiana cases. On August 21, 2012, the U.S. District Court in the Hendler-Delaware cases granted defendants’ motion to dismiss six complaints (filed on behalf of 235 plaintiffs) finding that the same claimants and claims were pending in the Hendler-Louisiana cases where they had been first filed. Plaintiffs appealed the dismissal; however, on September 19, 2013, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal upheld the lower court’s decision, finding no reason to reverse the dismissal.

In October 2012, the federal district court in Louisiana granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the Hendler-Louisiana Cases for plaintiffs’ failure to bring the action within the applicable statute of limitations. On October 16, 2013, Plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal in the Hendler-Delaware cases. The Company believes that the appeal has no merit. Further, with respect to Chaverri, at this stage of the proceedings, the Company does not believe that a loss is either probable or reasonably estimable and has not set up a loss contingency.

Two of the eight Hendler-Delaware Cases (namely, Abad-Castillo and Marquinez) are unrelated to the Hendler-Louisiana Cases and, involve claims for physical injury arising from alleged exposure to DBCP over the course of the late 1960’s through the mid-1980’s on behalf of 2,700 banana plantation workers from Costa Rica, Ecuador, Guatemala and Panama. Defendant Dole brought a motion to dismiss 22 plaintiffs from the Abad-Castillo case on the ground that they were parties in the Hendler-Louisiana cases. On September 19, 2013, the appeals court granted, in part, and denied, in part, the motion to dismiss, holding that 14 of the 22 plaintiffs should be dismissed (as they were named as plaintiffs in a prior action filed by the Hendler law firm in Louisiana). As for the remaining eight plaintiffs, the court found that there was a question as to whether they were parties to earlier cases in Louisiana. Defendants are investigating possible defenses to Abad-Castillo and Marquinez, including whether any of the claimants had appeared in prior actions that may have been settled or dismissed, what statutes of limitations may apply, and whether claimants used any of defendants’ products. AMVAC intends to defend these matters vigorously. No discovery has commenced in either case, and it is too early to predict whether a loss is either probable or reasonably estimable; accordingly, the company has not set up a loss contingency on either of these matters.

Hawaiian Matters

Patrickson, et. al. v. Dole Food Company, et. al

In October 1997, AMVAC was served with two complaints in which it was named as a defendant, filed in the Circuit Court, First Circuit, State of Hawaii and in the Circuit Court of the Second Circuit, State of Hawaii (two identical suits) entitled Patrickson, et. al. v. Dole Food Company, et. al (“Patrickson Case”) alleging damages sustained from injuries (including sterility) to banana workers caused by plaintiffs’ exposure to DBCP while applying the product in their native countries. Other named defendants include: Dole Food Company, Shell Oil Company and Dow Chemical Company. The ten named plaintiffs are variously citizens of four countries—Guatemala, Costa Rica, Panama, and Ecuador. Punitive damages are sought against each defendant. The case was also filed as a class action on behalf of other workers allegedly so exposed in these four countries.

52

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS––(Continued)

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

After several years of law and motion activity, Dow filed a motion for summary adjudication as to the remaining plaintiffs based on the statute of limitations, as they had filed suit in Florida in 1995. All defendants joined in this motion. The court granted this motion on June 9, 2009. Plaintiffs’ counsel unsuccessfully argued that their claims were tolled by prior class action cases. On November 30, 2009, the court denied a motion for reconsideration. Judgment in favor of the defendants was entered on July 28, 2010. On August 24, 2010, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal, which is presently pending. In March 2011, Dow filed a brief in opposition to the appeal, arguing that plaintiffs are barred from this action by the applicable statute of limitations. Following the completion of briefing on April 8, 2011, counsel for plaintiffs filed a pleading to withdraw and to substitute new counsel. The court has not ruled on any of the pending motions, nor do the court rules require that the court rule by any particular date. The Company does not believe that a loss is either probable or reasonably estimable and, accordingly, has not set up a loss contingency for this matter.

Adams v. Dole Food Company et al

On approximately November 23, 2007, AMVAC was served with a suit filed by two former Hawaiian pineapple workers (and their spouses), alleging that they had testicular cancer due to DBCP exposure: Adams v. Dole Food Company et al in the First Circuit for the State of Hawaii. The complaint was filed on June 29, 2007 and names Dole Food Company, Standard Fruit and Steamship Company, Dole Fresh Food, Pineapple Growers Association, AMVAC, Shell Oil Company, Dow Chemical Company and Occidental Chemical Corporation. Plaintiff Mark Adams alleges he was exposed to DBCP in 1974 and 1975 while working on Dole’s plantation on Oahu. Plaintiff Nelson Ng alleges he was exposed between 1971 and 1973 while working in Lanai City, Lanai. AMVAC answered the complaint on or about December 14, 2007. While little discovery has taken place, AMVAC denies that any of its product could have been used at the times and locations alleged by these plaintiffs. Dole Food Company was dismissed on the basis of the exclusive remedy of worker’s compensation benefits, as it was the employer of plaintiffs. However, plaintiffs have been granted relief to seek an interim appeal as to the dismissal of Dole, which appeal is pending. A stay has been placed on discovery other than to obtain written records. Recent pleadings included a request for withdrawal of plaintiffs’ counsel and substitution of new counsel. The substitution was denied by the court on November 14, 2012. There is no estimated date of opinion. The Company does not believe that a loss is either probable or reasonably estimable and has not set up a loss contingency for this matter.

Louisiana Matters (Federal)

On June 1, 2011, seven separate actions were filed by HendlerLaw, P.C. in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana on behalf of 259 individual plaintiffs (banana plantation workers from Ecuador, Panama and Costa Rica) against Dole Food Company, the Dow Chemical Company, Shell Oil Company, and AMVAC Chemical Corporation (to name a few) which, for purposes of convenience here, are encaptioned Aguilar et al., v. Dole Food Company, Inc., et al (U.S.D.C., E.D. of Louisiana No. CV-01305-CJB-SS). These matters allege personal injury (including sterility, cancer, skin disorders and other conditions) arising from alleged exposure to DBCP within the time period from 1960 through 1985 or later. A number of the plaintiffs appear to have been drawn from earlier DBCP litigation matters filed by HendlerLaw, P.C., including, for example, the Mendez case that was dismissed from state court in Hawaii (see the Company’s Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011). In September 2012, the court granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment based upon the expiration of the applicable statute of limitations. Plaintiffs filed an appeal to the dismissal and, on September 19, 2013, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed the order of dismissal of the lower court, finding no basis for reversal. Thus, this matter is concluded.

Louisiana Matters (State)

In November 1999, AMVAC was served with three complaints filed in the 29^th Judicial District Court for the Parish of St. Charles, State of Louisiana; we have reported on these matters under the name of the lead case, Eduardo Soriano, et al. v. AMVAC, et al. These matters allege personal injuries to about 314 persons (approximately 167 from Ecuador, 102 from Costa Rica, and 45 from Guatemala) from alleged exposure to DBCP. With the United States Supreme Court holding there was no federal court jurisdiction in the Patrickson case, the federal court judge remanded the cases to Louisiana state court in June 2003. In state court, the three cases were assigned to two different judges. On November 17, 2006, the state court separated the cases handled by HendlerLaw, P.C. from the cases being pursued only against the growers handled by different counsel. Subsequently, the cases against the growers were settled and all those actions were dismissed. The cases handled by

53

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS––(Continued)

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

HendlerLaw, P.C. were supposed to be placed in a new action, which was not done. After a hearing on January 29, 2008, the court ruled on February 8, 2008 that these plaintiffs could still proceed in the existing cases rather than in a new action. In mid-June 2011, some 12 years after filing the actions, plaintiffs have propounded written discovery against defendants. In November 2012, the court granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment as to all of these cases on the ground that the applicable statute of limitations had expired. On October 16, 2013, plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal of the dismissal with the U.S. court of Appeal for the Third Circuit. AMVAC does not believe that the appeal has any merit and intends to defend it vigorously. With respect to these matters, the Company does not believe that a loss is either probable or reasonably estimable and has not set up a loss contingency for this matter.

Nicaraguan Matters

A review of court filings in Chinandega, Nicaragua, has found 85 suits alleging personal injury allegedly due to exposure to DBCP and involving approximately 3,592 plaintiffs have been filed against AMVAC and other parties. Of these cases, only two - Flavio Apolinar Castillo et al. v. AMVAC Chemical Corporation et al., No. 535/04 and Luis Cristobal Martinez Suazo et al. v. AMVAC Chemical Corporation et al., No. 679/04 Castillo and Suazo, (which were filed in 2004 and involve 15 banana workers) have been served on AMVAC. All but one of the suits in Nicaragua have been filed pursuant to Special Law 364, an October 2000 Nicaraguan statute that contains substantive and procedural provisions that Nicaragua’s Attorney General previously expressed as unconstitutional. Each of the Nicaraguan plaintiffs’ claims $1,000 in compensatory damages and $5,000 in punitive damages. In all of these cases, AMVAC is a joint defendant with Dow Chemical Company and Dole Food Company, Inc. AMVAC contends that the Nicaragua courts do not have jurisdiction over it and that Public Law 364 violates international due process of law. AMVAC has objected to personal jurisdiction and demanded under Law 364 that the claims be litigated in the United States. In 2007, the court denied these objections, and AMVAC appealed the denial. It is not presently known as to how many of these plaintiffs actually claim exposure to DBCP at the time AMVAC’s product was allegedly used nor is there any verification of the claimed injuries. Further, to date, plaintiffs have not had success in enforcing Nicaraguan judgments against domestic companies before U.S. courts. With respect to these Nicaraguan matters, AMVAC intends to defend any claim vigorously. Furthermore, the Company does not believe that a loss is either probable or reasonably estimable and has not set up a loss contingency for these matters.

B. Other Matters

Brazilian Citation. On or about October 5, 2009, IBAMA (the Brazilian equivalent of the USEPA) served AMVAC Brazil with a Notice of Violation alleging that two lots of Granutox 150 (formulated product having phorate as the active ingredient) stored at BASF S.A. (AMVAC’s exclusive distributor in Brazil) and FMC Quimica do Brasil Ltda. (which formulates end-use product in that country) were not in compliance with the end-use registration on file with IBAMA. Specifically, IBAMA alleged that the color of the lots (gray) was inconsistent with the description in IBAMA’s files (pink). IBAMA also indicated an intention to assess a fine of approximately $200 against AMVAC B. The Company has challenged the citation, for among other reasons, on the ground that the change in color has to do with the removal of a coloring component and that such removal poses no environmental or toxicity risk. In March 2011, IBAMA denied AMVAC B’s first appeal. The Company believes, however, that the agency is statutorily prevented from levying a fine of this magnitude for an infraction of this nature. Thus, the Company has filed another appeal on these grounds and expects to hear a response during 2014. At this stage, the Company believes that a loss of between $200 and $300 is probable and has set up a loss contingency in the amount of $200.

(5) Employee Deferred Compensation Plan and Employee Stock Purchase Plan

The Company maintains a deferred compensation plan (“the Plan”) for all eligible employees. The Plan calls for each eligible employee, at the employee’s election, to participate in an income deferral arrangement under Internal Revenue Code Section 401(k). The plan allows eligible employees to make contributions which cannot exceed 100% of compensation, or the annual dollar limit set by the Internal Revenue Code. The Company matches the first 5% of employee contributions. The Company’s contributions to the Plan amounted to $1,330, $982 and $870 in 2013, 2012 and 2011.

During 2001, the Company’s Board of Directors adopted the AVD Employee Stock Purchase Plan (the “Plan”). The Plan allows eligible employees to purchase shares of common stock through payroll deductions at a discounted price. An aggregate of approximately 1,000,000 shares of the Company’s Common Stock, par value $.10 per share (subject to adjustment for any stock dividend, stock split or other relevant changes in the Company’s capitalization) may be sold

54

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS––(Continued)

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

pursuant to the Plan, which is intended to qualify under Section 423 of the Internal Revenue Code. The Plan allows for purchases in a series of offering periods, each six months in duration, with new offering periods (other than the initial offering period) commencing on January 1 and July 1 of each year. The initial offering period commenced on July 1, 2001. Pursuant to action taken by the Company’s Board of Directors in December 10, 2010, the expiration of the Plan was extended to December 31, 2013. The Plan was amended and restated on June 30, 2011 following shareholders’ ratification of the extended expiration date. In December 2013, the Board of Directors resolved to extend the expiration date of the Plan five years, that is, until December 31, 2018. Under the Plan, as amended as of June 30, 2011, 995,000 shares of the Company’s common stock were authorized. As of December 31, 2013, 901,220 shares remained authorized under the plan.

Shares of common stock purchased through the Plan in 2013, 2012 and 2011 were 27,923, 40,116 and 54,933, respectively.

(6) Major Customers and Export Sales

In 2013, there were three companies that accounted for 17%, 13%, and 8% of the Company’s consolidated sales. In 2012, there were three companies that accounted for 19%, 10% and 8% of the Company’s consolidated sales. In 2011, there were three companies that accounted for 17%, 11%, and 9% of the Company’s consolidated sales.

The Company primarily sells its products to large distributors, buying cooperatives and groups and extends credit based on an evaluation of the customer’s financial condition. The Company had three significant customers who each accounted for approximately 14%, 10% and 8% of the Company’s receivables as of December 31, 2013. The Company had three significant customers who each accounted for approximately 20%, 11% and 7% of the Company’s receivables as of December 31, 2012 and approximately 17%, 15%, and 9% as of December 31, 2011. The Company has long-standing relationships with its customers and the Company considers the credit risk to be low.

Worldwide export sales for 2013, 2012 and 2011 were as follows:

	2013		2012		2011
Mexico	$	15,661	$	17,980	$	16,616
South & Central America		15,491		16,374		11,991
Europe		12,942		9,744		5,931
Asia		8,129		7,308		8,469
Africa		8,322		7,229		8,234
Australia		2,692		4,444		3,395
Canada		3,976		4,320		4,270
Middle East		2,500		2,495		3,876
Other		59		15		672
	$	69,772	$	69,909	$	63,454

(7) Royalties

The Company entered into a licensing agreement in December 2012 that requires a minimum annual royalty payable through 2022. In addition, the Company had other royalty agreements in place that extended through December 2013. Those agreements related to the acquisition of certain products as well as various licensing arrangements, none of which contained a minimum royalty provision. Certain royalty agreements contain confidentiality covenants. Royalty expenses were $116, $38 and $39 for 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively.

(8) Product Acquisitions

All product acquisitions made after January 1, 2009 have been accounted for pursuant to FASB ASC 805.

On October 7, 2011, AMVAC completed the acquisition of the international rights to cotton defoliant product tribufos (sold under the trade name Def ^®) from Bayer CropScience AG (“BCS AG”). The acquired assets include registrations and data rights, rights relating to manufacturing and formulation know-how, inventories, and the trademark Def. Def complements AMVAC’s existing cotton defoliant product Folex^®, which it has marketed since 2002. This acquisition also

55

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS––(Continued)

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

complements the U.S. rights to Def that the Company purchased from BCS AG in July 2010 (see below). Both Folex and Def are fast and effective cotton defoliants that facilitate the removal of leaves surrounding the cotton boll and in combination with other products function as a harvest aid.

The following schedule represents intangible assets recognized in connection with product acquisitions (See description of Business, Basis of Consolidation and Significant Accounting Policies for the Company’s accounting policy regarding intangible assets):

	Amount
Intangible assets at December 31, 2010	$	115,249
Acquisitions during fiscal 2011		316
Impact of movement in exchange rates and other adjustments		(161	)
Other adjustments related to deferred liabilities		6,802
Amortization expense		(6,017	)
Intangible assets at December 31, 2011		116,189
Acquisitions during fiscal 2012		3,473
Impact of movement in exchange rates		(118	)
Amortization expense		(6,023	)
Intangible assets at December 31, 2012		113,521
Acquisitions during fiscal 2013		—
Impact of movement in exchange rates		(162	)
Amortization expense		(6,352	)
Intangible assets at December 31, 2013	$	107,007

During 2012 the Company completed the acquisition of product licenses and recorded intangibles assets in the amount of $3,473, of which $2,400 was paid in the period. Furthermore, the Company made payments in the amount of $7,447 associated with product line acquisitions.

During 2011, the Company recorded final purchase accounting entries related to the product line acquisitions completed in the final quarter of 2010. As a result, the Company recorded $6,802 as additions to intangible assets and related liability. There was no cash impact on this transaction during this period.

The following schedule represents the gross carrying amount and accumulated amortization of the intangible assets. Product rights are amortized over their expected useful lives of 25 years. Customer lists are amortized over their expected useful lives of ten years, and trademarks are amortized over their expected useful lives of 25 years.

	2013						2012
$000’s	Gross		Accumulated Amortization		Net Book Value		Gross		Accumulated Amortization		Net Book Value
Product Rights	$	139,094	$	44,254	$	94,840	$	139,256	$	38,530	$	100,726
Customer Lists		1,091		328		763		1,091		218		873
Trademarks		12,941		1,537		11,404		12,941		1,019		11,922
Total Intangibles	$	153,126	$	46,119	$	107,007	$	153,288	$	39,767	$	113,521

56

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS––(Continued)

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

The following schedule represents future amortization charges related to intangible assets:

Year ending December 31,
2014	$	6,352
2015		6,352
2016		6,352
2017		6,352
2018		6,352
Thereafter		75,247
	$	107,007

The following schedule represents the Company’s obligations under product acquisitions and licensing agreements:

	Amount
Obligations under acquisition agreements at December 31, 2010		12,822
Additional obligations acquired		216
Addition of deferred liabilities		6,802
Adjustment to deferred liabilities		(2,857	)
FX impact		101
Amortization of discounted liabilities		1,341
Payments on existing obligations		(801	)
Obligations under acquisition agreements at December 31, 2011		17,624
Additional obligations acquired		1,073
Adjustment to deferred liabilities		(216	)
FX impact		48
Amortization of discounted liabilities		818
Payments on existing obligations		(7,447	)
Obligations under acquisition agreements at December 31, 2012		11,900
Additional obligations acquired		—
Adjustment to deferred liabilities		(294	)
FX impact		(1	)
Amortization of discounted liabilities		171
Payments on existing obligations		(7,890	)
Obligations under acquisition agreements at December 31, 2013	$	3,886

During 2013, the Company remeasured the fair value of the earn out liabilities related to the acquisitions completed in the first quarter of 2010. Based on the remeasurement, the fair value was reduced by $294. The fair value change had the effect of reducing operating expenses by $294.

During 2012, the Company remeasured the fair value of the earn out liabilities related to the acquisitions completed in the first quarter of 2010. Based on the remeasurement, the fair value was reduced by $216. The fair value change had the effect of reducing cost of sales by $0 and operating expenses by $216.

During 2011, the Company remeasured the fair value of the earn out liabilities related to the acquisitions completed in the first quarter of 2010. Based on the remeasurement, the fair value was reduced by $2,857. The fair value change had the effect of reducing cost of sales by $495 and operating expenses by $2,362.

As of December 31, 2013, the $3,886 in remaining obligations under product acquisitions and licensing agreements is included in other liabilities.

57

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS––(Continued)

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

(9) Commitments

The Company has various lease agreements for offices as well as long-term ground leases for its facilities at Axis, AL, Hannibal, MO and Marsing, ID. The office leases contain provisions to pass through to the Company its pro-rata share of certain of the building’s operating expenses. The long-term ground lease at Axis, AL is for twenty years (commencing May 2001) with up to five automatic renewals of three years each for a total of thirty-five years. The long-term ground lease at Hannibal, MO is for a period of 20 years (commencing December 2007) with automatic one year extensions thereafter, subject to termination with a twelve-month notice. The long-term ground lease at Marsing is for a period of 25 years (commencing in March 2008). Rent expense for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011 was $939, $727 and $550. Future minimum lease payments under the terms of the leases are as follows:

Year ending December 31,
2014	$	850
2015		868
2016		433
2017		135
2018		135
Thereafter		1,170
	$	3,591

(10) Research and Development

Research and development expenses which are included in operating expenses were $8,604, $7,648 and $6,555 for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011.

(11) Stock Options

Incentive Stock Option Plans (“ISOP”)

Under the terms of the Company’s ISOP, under which options to purchase 4,296,000 shares of common stock can be issued, all key employees are eligible to receive non-assignable and non-transferable options to purchase shares. The exercise price of any option may not be less than the fair market value of the shares on the date of grant; provided, however, that the exercise price of any option granted to an eligible employee owning more than 10% of the outstanding common stock may not be less than 110% of the fair market value of the shares underlying such option on the date of grant. No options granted may be exercisable more than ten years after the date of grant. The options granted generally vest evenly over a three to five year period, beginning on the date of the grant.

In 2011, the Company granted incentive stock options to purchase 20,000 shares of common stock to employees. Of those options, one third of the total option shares vest on each of the first, second, and third anniversaries of the date of grant. All options granted are non-assignable and non-transferable. In 2012 and 2013, no options were granted.

58

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS––(Continued)

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Nonstatutory Stock Options (“NSSO”)

The Company did not grant any non-statutory stock options during the three years ended December 31, 2013.

Option activity within each plan is as follows:

	Incentive Stock Option Plans			Non-Statutory Stock Options Plans		Weighted Average Price Per Share		Exercisable Weighted Average Price Per Share
Balance outstanding, December 31, 2010		1,487,331			—	$	7.65	$	7.77
Options granted, range from $11.32-$13.24		20,000			—		12.28
Options exercised, range from $8.10-$11.30		(48,000	)		—		8.63
Options expired		(70,817	)		—		12.38
Balance outstanding, December 31, 2011		1,388,514			—	$	7.44	$	7.26
Options exercised, range from $3.67-$14.99		(659,733	)		—		7.05
Options expired		(23,436	)		—		10.41
Balance outstanding, December 31, 2012		705,345			—	$	7.70	$	7.95
Options exercised, $7.50		(126,149	)		—		7.50
Options expired		(18,167	)		—		7.50
Balance outstanding, December 31, 2013		561,029			—	$	7.76	$	7.70

Information relating to stock options at December 31, 2013 summarized by exercise price is as follows:

	Outstanding Weighted Average						Exercisable Weighted Average
Exercise Price Per Share	Shares		Remaining Life (Months)		Exercise Price		Shares		Exercise Price
Incentive Stock Option Plan:
$7.50		534,350		83	$	7.50		534,350	$	7.50
$11.32-$14.75		26,679		80	$	12.90		20,012	$	13.10
		561,029			$	7.76		554,362	$	7.70

59

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS––(Continued)

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

The weighted average exercise prices for options granted and exercisable and the weighted average remaining contractual life for options outstanding as of December 31, 2012 and 2013 was as follows:

	Number of Shares		Weighted Average Exercise Price		Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Life (Months)		Intrinsic Value (thousands)
As of December 31, 2012:
Incentive Stock Option Plans:
Outstanding		705,345	$	7.70		91	$	16,481
Expected to Vest		699,537	$	7.70		91	$	16,345
Exercisable		179,345	$	7.95		78	$	4,147
As of December 31, 2013:
Incentive Stock Option Plans:
Outstanding		561,029	$	7.76		83	$	9,276
Expected to Vest		560,972	$	7.76		83	$	9,275
Exercisable		554,362	$	7.70		83	$	9,196

The total intrinsic value of options exercised during 2013, 2012 and 2011 was $2,365, $15,910, and $4, respectively. Cash received from stock options exercised during 2013, 2012, and 2011 was $946, $2,996, and $414 respectively. Upon exercise in 2012, the Company also received 49,638 shares which were valued on the day of exercise at $1,651.

Restricted Stock Grants

During 2013, the Company issued a total of 162,336 shares of common and restricted stock to certain employees and non-executive board members. Vesting ranges from immediate to three years from the date of grant. The fair values of the grants range from $23.43 to $31.83 per share based on the publicly traded share prices. The total fair value of $5,018 will be recognized over the related service periods. During 2013, 11,999 shares of common stock granted to employees were forfeited.

During 2012, the Company issued a total of 248,536 shares of common and restricted stock to certain employees and non-executive board members. Vesting ranges from immediate to three years from the date of grant. The fair values of the grants range from $13.34 to $34.04 per share based on the publicly traded share prices. The total fair value of $5,346 will be recognized over the related service periods. During 2012, 1,367 shares of common stock granted to employees were forfeited.

During 2011, the Company issued a total of 35,640 shares of common and restricted stock to certain employees and non-executive board members. Vesting ranges from immediate to three years from the date of grant. The fair values of the grants range from $11.26 to $12.89 per share based on the publicly traded share prices. The total fair value of $411 will be recognized over the related service periods. During 2011, 5,556 shares of common stock granted to employees were forfeited.

A status summary of non-vested shares as of December 31, 2013, is presented below:

	Number of Shares			Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair Value
Nonvested shares at January 1, 2013		245,817		$	20.23
Granted		162,336		$	30.91
Vested		(19,452	)	$	18.38
Forfeited		(11,999	)	$	22.75
Nonvested shares at December 31, 2013		376,702		$	24.85

60

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS––(Continued)

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Performance Based Stock Grants

During 2013, the Company granted a total of 24,637 performance based shares that will cliff vest after three years of service. 80% of these performance based shares are based upon net income and net sales for the period commencing April 1, 2013 and ending December 31, 2015; the remaining 20% of performance based shares are based upon the Company’s stock price appreciation over the course of the period commencing June 6, 2013 and ending on December 31, 2015. Both parts of these awards vest in three years, but are subject to reduction to a minimum (or even zero) for meeting less than the targeted performance and to increase to a maximum of 200% for meeting in excess of the targeted performance.

The performance based shares related to net income and net sales have an average fair value of $30.13 per share. The fair value was determined by using the publicly traded share price as of the date of grant. The performance based shares related to the Company’s stock price have an average fair value of $15.31 per share. The fair value was determined by using the Monte Carlo valuation method. For awards with performance conditions, the Company recognizes share-based compensation cost on a straight-line basis for each performance criteria over the implied service period when the Company believes it is probable that the performance targets, as defined in the agreements, will be achieved.

During 2013, the Company recognized stock-based compensation expense related to performance based shares of $90. There were no performance based shares issued by the Company prior to those issued during the quarter ended June 30, 2013.

As of December 31, 2013, the Company had approximately $564 of unamortized stock-based compensation expenses related to unvested performance based shares. This amount will be recognized over the weighted-average period of 2.4 years. This projected expense will change if any performance based shares are granted or cancelled prior to the respective reporting periods or if there are any changes required to be made for estimated forfeitures.

A status summary of non-vested shares as of December 31, 2013, is presented below:

	Number of Shares		Weighted Average Grant- Date Fair Value
Nonvested shares at January 1, 2013		—	$	—
Granted		24,637	$	28.43
Vested		—	$	—
Forfeited		—	$	—
Nonvested shares at December 31, 2013		24,637	$	28.43

61

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS––(Continued)

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

(12) Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)

The following table lists the beginning balance, annual activity and ending balance of each component of accumulated other comprehensive income:

	Interest Rate Swap			FX Translation			Total
Balance, December 31, 2010	$	(17	)	$	(431	)	$	(448	)
Other comprehensive income/(loss) before reclassifications		(2,005	)		(933	)		(2,938	)
Amounts reclassified from AOCI		571			—			571
Tax effect		565			—			565
Balance, December 31, 2011		(886	)		(1,364	)		(2,250	)
Other comprehensive income/(loss) before reclassifications		(472	)		330			(142	)
Amounts reclassified from AOCI		721			—			721
Tax effect		(91	)		—			(91	)
Balance, December 31, 2012		(728	)		(1,034	)		(1,762	)
Other comprehensive income/(loss) before reclassifications		(75	)		326			251
Amounts reclassified from AOCI		712			—			712
Tax effect		(249	)		—			(249	)
Balance, December 31, 2013	$	(340	)	$	(708	)	$	(1,048	)

(13) Equity method investment

On March 25, 2013, the Company made a $3,687 equity investment in TyraTech Inc. (“TyraTech”), a Delaware corporation that specializes in developing, marketing and selling pesticide products containing essential oils and other natural ingredients. As of December 31, 2013, the Company’s ownership position in TyraTech was approximately 29.27%. The Company utilizes the equity method of accounting with respect to this investment. As a result, our net income includes earnings (losses) from equity method investments, which represents our proportionate share of TyraTech’s estimated net earnings (losses) for the period from the time of the investment to the end of the accounting period. For the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company recognized a loss of $986 as a result of the Company’s ownership position in TyraTech.

The Company’s investment in TyraTech is included in other assets on the balance sheet. At December 31, 2013, the carrying value of the Company’s investment in TyraTech was $2,701 and the quoted market value was $4,073.

(14) Quarterly Data—Unaudited

Quarterly Data—2013	March 31		June 30		September 30		December 31
Net sales	$	121,537	$	86,761	$	97,201	$	75,522
Gross profit		53,781		42,066		43,159		32,341
Net income attributable to American Vanguard		16,915		8,386		8,870		278
Basic net income per share		0.60		0.29		0.32		0.01
Diluted net income per share		0.59		0.29		0.30		0.01
Quarterly Data—2012
Net sales	$	87,255	$	84,837	$	89,836	$	104,262
Gross profit		37,378		38,346		39,625		45,776
Net income		8,734		8,744		8,076		11,313
Basic net income per share		0.32		0.31		0.29		0.40
Diluted net income per share		0.31		0.30		0.28		0.39

Note: Totals may not agree with full year amounts due to rounding and separate calculations each quarter.

62

EXHIBIT INDEX

ITEM 15

Exhibit Number	Description of Exhibit
3.1	Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of American Vanguard Corporation (filed as Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003, which was filed on March 30, 2004 with the Securities Exchange Commission and incorporated herein by reference).
3.2	Certificate of Amendment of Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of American Vanguard Corporation (filed as Exhibit 3.2 to the Company’s Form 10-Q/A for the period ended June 30, 2004, which was filed with the Securities Exchange Commission on February 23, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference).
3.3	Amended and Restated Bylaws of American Vanguard Corporation (filed as Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2008, which was filed with the Securities Exchange Commission on May 12, 2008 and incorporated herein by reference.)
4	Form of Indenture (filed as Exhibit 4 to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-3 (File No. 333-122981) and incorporated herein by reference).
10.1	American Vanguard Corporation Employee Stock Purchase Plan (filed as Appendix B to the Company’s Proxy Statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 31, 2001 and incorporated herein by reference).
10.2	American Vanguard Corporation Fourth Amended and Restated Stock Incentive Plan (filed as Appendix A to the Company’s Proxy Statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 11, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference).
10.3	Form of Incentive Stock Option Agreement under the American Vanguard Corporation Fourth Amended and Restated Stock Incentive Plan , (filed as Exhibit 10.3 with the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004, which was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 16, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference).
10.4	Form of Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement under the American Vanguard Corporation Fourth Amended and Restated Stock Incentive Plan , (filed as Exhibit 10.4 with the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004, which was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 16, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference).
10.5	Employment Agreement between American Vanguard Corporation and Eric G. Wintemute dated January 15, 2008 (filed as Exhibit 10.5 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007, which was filed with the Securities Exchange Commission on March 17, 2008 and incorporated herein by reference).
10.8	Form of Change of Control Severance Agreement, dated effective as of January 1, 2004, between American Vanguard Corporation and its executive and senior officers (filed as Exhibit 10.2 to the Company’s Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004, which was filed with the Securities Exchange Commission on May 10, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference.)
10.9	Form of Amendment of Change of Control Severance Agreement, dated effective as of July 11, 2008, between American Vanguard Corporation and named executive officers and senior officers (filed as Exhibit 99.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K, which was filed on July 11, 2008 with the Securities and Exchange Commission and incorporated herein by reference).
10.10	Form of Indemnification Agreement between American Vanguard Corporation and its Directors (filed with the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004, which was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 16, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference).
10.11	Description of Compensatory Arrangements Applicable to Non-Employee Directors for 2005 (filed as Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K, which was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 15, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference).

63

Exhibit Number	Description of Exhibit
10.12	American Vanguard Corporation Employee Stock Purchase Plan amended and restated as of June 30, 2011 (incorporated herein by reference).
10.13	Form of Restricted Stock Agreement between American Vanguard Corporation and named executive officers (filed as Exhibit 99.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K, which was filed with the Securities Exchange Commission on July 24, 2008 and incorporated herein by reference).
10.14	Form of Amended and Restated Change of Control Severance Agreement effective as of January 1, 2014.*
10.15	Form of American Vanguard Corporation Amended and Restated Stock Incentive Plan TSR-Based Restricted Stock Units Award Agreement dated June 6, 2013.*
10.16	Form of American Vanguard Corporation Amended and Restated Stock Incentive Plan Performance-Based Restricted Stock Units Award Agreement dated June 6, 2013.*
10.17	Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement dated as of June 17, 2013 among AMVAC Chemical Corporation [and certain affiliates] and Bank of the West (as Agent, Swing Line Lender, L/C Issuer, Sole Arranger and Syndication Agent), BMO Harris Bank, N.A. and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (as Documentation Agents) and the Lenders (filed as Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K, which was filed with the Securities Exchange Commission on June 20, 2013 and incorporated herein by reference).
21	List of Subsidiaries of the Company.*
23	Consent of BDO USA, LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm.*
31.1	Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.*
31.2	Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.*
32.1	Certifications Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.*
101	The following materials from American Vanguard Corp’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012, formatted in XBRL (Extensible Business Reporting Language): (i) Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet; (ii) Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income; (iii) Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows; (iv) Condensed Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity; and (v) Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, tagged as blocks of text.*

* Filed herewith.

64

EX-10.14

Exhibit 10.14

AMENDED AND RESTATED

CHANGE OF CONTROL SEVERANCE AGREEMENT

This AMENDED AND RESTATED CHANGE OF CONTROL SEVERANCE AGREEMENT (this “Agreement”), effective as of January 1, 2014 (the “Effective Date”), is entered into by and between American Vanguard Corporation, a Delaware corporation (“American Vanguard”), and             (the “Executive”). Capitalized terms used but not defined in the context of this Agreement are defined in Section 8.

WHEREAS, the Executive provides valuable services as an employee of American Vanguard or one of its subsidiaries (as applicable, the “Company”); and

WHEREAS, the Company wishes to provide security to the Executive to induce the Executive to continue to provide services to the Company.

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises and the mutual covenants herein contained the value of which is hereby acknowledged, the Executive and the Company agree as follows:

1. Company Obligation. Subject to the limitations of this Agreement, if, during the Change of Control Period, the Company shall terminate the Executive’s employment or the Executive shall terminate his employment with the Company for Good Reason (in either case, a “Termination”), the Company shall: (a) pay to the Executive in a single sum within thirty (30) days after the Termination an amount equal to two (2) times the Executive’s Compensation; (b) provide Medical and Hospital Benefits at the Company’s cost for a period of the lesser of (x) twenty-four (24) consecutive months beginning with the date of Termination or (y) the maximum period of time permitted by law; (c) provide executive level outplacement assistance benefits in an amount not to exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000); and (d) accelerate all of the Executive’s options or rights to acquire securities of the Company that are outstanding immediately prior to the date of a Change of Control, whether or not then exercisable, so that they automatically become immediately exercisable in full thereafter. If the Executive’s employment is terminated with the Company during the Change of Control Period for any reason, excluding a termination for Good Reason, or if the Company shall terminate the Executive’s employment due to Cause, death or the Executive’s disability which renders the Executive unable to perform the essential functions of the position, this Agreement shall terminate without any obligation of the Company to the Executive hereunder. If the Executive is offered employment by a successor to the Company or its business or assets or by its Affiliate or a successor to such Affiliate or its business or assets on terms and conditions that are reasonably comparable to the Executive’s terms and conditions of employment with the Company (including this Agreement), the Company shall not have an obligation hereunder to the Executive. If any payment under this Agreement, either alone or together with any other payment, benefit or transfer of property which the Executive receives or has a right to receive

1

from the Company or its Affiliate (the “Total Payments”), would constitute a nondeductible “excess parachute payment” (as defined in Section 280G of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, amended (the “Code”)) or nondeductible “employee remuneration” under Section 162(m) of the Code, such payment under this Agreement shall be reduced to the largest amount as will result in no portion of the payment under this Agreement being such a nondeductible payment under the Code. The Company agrees to undertake such reasonable efforts as it may determine in its sole discretion to prevent any payment under this Agreement from constituting a nondeductible payment, provided the Company is not obligated to incur additional cost in order to make a payment nondeductible. The determination of any reduction under the preceding sentences shall be made by the Company in good faith, and such determination shall be binding on the Executive. The reduction provided by the fifth sentence of this Section 1 shall apply only if, after reduction for any applicable federal excise tax imposed by Section 4999 of the Code and federal income tax imposed by the Code, the total payment accruing to the Executive would be less than the amount of the Total Payments as reduced under said fifth sentence and after reduction for federal income taxes. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, the parties intend that no amount payable to the Executive hereunder shall be subject to the provisions of Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and this Agreement shall be interpreted and administered accordingly.

2. Executive Obligation. As condition of the Company’s performance of its obligations under Section 1, the Executive shall execute and deliver to the Company a written agreement, in form and substance reasonably satisfactory to the Company, releasing the Company and its representatives, agents and advisors from all past, then-current and future claims and liabilities, whether known or unknown, that the Executive may have.

3. Other Benefits. Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent or limit the Executive’s continuing or future participation in any other plan, program, policy, practice, contract or agreement of or with the Company or its Affiliate for which the Executive is a party or may qualify (collectively, the “Other Benefits”), nor shall anything in this Agreement limit or otherwise affect the rights of the Company or the Executive under any Other Benefits. Any amounts payable or rights or benefits furnished to the Executive under any Other Benefits existing at or subsequent to the Termination shall be payable in accordance with the terms of such Other Benefits and without regard to this Agreement, except as explicitly modified by this Agreement; provided, however, that to the extent the amounts payable or rights or benefits furnished to the Executive under such Other Benefits exceed or are more favorable to the Executive than this Agreement, such Other Benefits shall govern and control. Amounts payable or in respect of this Agreement shall not be taken into account with respect to any other employee benefit plan or arrangement.

4. Mitigation. The Executive shall not be obligated to seek other employment or take any other action by way of mitigation of the amounts payable to the Executive under this Agreement, and the amounts payable under this Agreement shall not be reduced whether or not the Executive obtains other employment. The

2

Company’s obligation to make the payment provided for in this Agreement and otherwise to perform its obligations hereunder shall not be affected by any set-off, counterclaim, recoupment, defense or other claim, right or action which the Company may have against the Executive or others.

5. Successors.

(a) This Agreement is personal to the Executive and shall not be assignable by the Executive. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be enforceable by the Executive’s legal representatives, including the Executive’s executor, trustee or administrator.

(b) This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the Company and its successors and assigns.

(c) The Company will require any successor (whether direct or indirect, by purchase, merger, consolidation or otherwise) to all or substantially all of the business and/or assets of the Company to assume expressly and agree to perform this Agreement.

6. Resolution of Disputes. Any dispute related to the interpretation or enforcement of this Agreement shall be enforceable only by arbitration in Orange County, California (or such other metropolitan area to which the Company’s principal executive officers may be relocated if such relocation does not result in Good Reason for the Executive to terminate employment), in accordance with the commercial arbitration rules then in effect of the American Arbitration Association, before a panel of three arbitrators, one of whom shall be selected by the Company, the second of whom shall be selected by the Executive and the third of whom shall be selected by the other two arbitrators. In the absence of the American Arbitration Association, or if for any reason arbitration under the arbitration rules of the American Arbitration Association cannot be initiated, or if one of the parties fails or refuses to select an arbitrator, or if the arbitrators selected by the Company and the Executive cannot agree on the selection of the third arbitrator within seven days after such time as the Company and the Executive have each been notified of the selection of the other’s arbitrator, the necessary arbitrator or arbitrators shall be selected by the presiding judge of the court of general jurisdiction in the metropolitan area where arbitration under this Section would otherwise have been conducted. The arbitrators shall award to the Executive his reasonable legal fees and expenses in connection with any arbitration proceeding hereunder if (i) the arbitration is commenced by the Company and the Company has no reasonable basis for initiating such proceeding, or (ii) the arbitration is commenced by the Executive and the Executive prevails on the Executive’s claim in the arbitration proceeding. The arbitrators shall award to the Company its legal fees and expenses incurred in connection with any arbitration proceeding hereunder if the arbitration proceeding is commenced by the Executive, and the Executive has no reasonable basis for initiating such proceeding. The parties agree that the arbitration panel shall construe this Section 6 to determine whether either party is entitled to recover its cost and fees hereunder. Any award entered by the arbitrators shall be formal, binding and nonappealable and judgment may be entered thereon by any party in accordance with applicable law in any court of competent jurisdiction. This arbitration provision shall be specifically enforceable.

3

7. Miscellaneous.

(a) This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without reference to principles of conflict of laws. The headings or captions of this Agreement are not part of the provisions hereof and shall have no force or effect. This Agreement may not be amended or modified otherwise than by a written agreement executed by the parties hereto or their respective successors and legal representatives.

(b) All notices and other communications hereunder shall be in writing and shall be given by hand delivery to the other party or by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, addressed as follows:

If to the Executive:

c/o Company address below

If to the Company:

American Vanguard Corporation

4695 MacArthur Court, Suite 1200

Newport Beach, California 92660

Attention: Chairperson of the Compensation Committee

or to such other address as either party shall have furnished to the other in writing in accordance herewith. Notices and communications shall be effective when actually received by the addressee.

(c) The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this Agreement shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision of this Agreement.

(d) The Company may withhold from any amounts payable under this Agreement such Federal, state or local taxes as shall be required to be withheld pursuant to any applicable law or regulation.

(e) The Executive and the Company acknowledge that, except and only as may otherwise be provided under any other written agreement between the Executive and the Company, if any, the employment of the Executive by the Company is ‘at will” and, may be terminated by either the Executive or the Company at any time. Moreover, if subsequent to the Change of Control Period, the Executive’s employment with the Company terminates, then the Executive shall have no rights under this Agreement.

4

(f) This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties hereto and contains all the agreements between such parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. This Agreement supersedes all other agreements, oral or in writing, between the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof.

(g) This Agreement shall only be effective if a Change of Control occurs during the Change of Control Period.

8. Defined Terms. For purposes of this Agreement, the following whenever used in the capitalized form shall have the meaning set forth below unless the context clearly indicates otherwise.

(a) “Affiliate” means, with respect to any person, any individual, corporation, partnership, association, joint-stock company, trust, unincorporated association or other entity (other than such person) that directly or indirectly through one or more intermediaries, controls, or is controlled by, or is under common control with that person.

(b) “Annual Bonus” means the gross, annual bonus payable to the Executive for the fiscal year of the Company ending immediately preceding the Effective Date, but annualized in the event the Executive was not employed for the entire fiscal year with respect to which such bonus was paid.

(c) “Cause” shall means termination because of (1) an act of fraud, embezzlement or theft in connection with the Employee’s duties or in the course of the Employee’s employment, (2) unreasonable neglect or refusal by the Employee to perform his/her duties (other than any such failure resulting from the Employee’s incapacity due to disability), (3) the engaging by the Employee in willful, reckless, or grossly negligent misconduct which is or may be materially injurious to the Company, or (4) the Employee’s conviction of or plea of guilty or nolo contendere to a felony.

(d) “Change of Control” means, and be deemed to have occurred, on the date of the first to occur of any of the following:

(A) upon the vote of the shareholders of the Company (or its Affiliate) approving a merger or consolidation in which the Company’s (or its Affiliate) shareholders immediately prior to the effective time of the merger or consolidation will beneficially own immediately after the effective time of the merger or consolidation securities of the surviving or new corporation having less than 50% of the “voting power” of the surviving or new corporation, including “voting power” exercisable on a contingent or deferred basis as well as immediately exercisable “voting power”;

5

 (B) upon the consummation of a sale, lease, exchange or other transfer or disposition by the Company (or its Affiliate) of all or substantially all of the assets of the Company (or its Affiliate) on a consolidated basis, provided, however, that the mortgage, pledge or hypothecation of all or substantially all of the assets of the Company (or its Affiliate) on a consolidated basis, in connection with a bona fide financing shall not constitute a Change of Control;

 (C) when any “person” (as such term is used in Sections 13(d) and 14(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) is or becomes the “beneficial owner” (as defined in Rule 13d-3 of the Securities Exchange Act as in effect on date hereof), directly or indirectly of more than fifty percent (50%) of the common stock of the Company (or its Affiliate);

 (D) in the event that, over the course of any twenty four (24) month period, a majority of the Board of Directors are replaced (through either appointment or election) by new members.

(e) “Change of Control Period” means the twenty four (24) month period commencing with a Change of Control, as defined herein.

(f) “Compensation” means the gross, annual base salary, but excluding the Annual Bonus, paid by the Company (including amounts accrued but not paid) to the Executive in accordance with the generally applied payroll practices of the Company for the completed fiscal year of the Company immediately preceding the Effective Date. Compensation, for purposes of applying the two (2) multiplier in Section 1 of this Agreement, does not include any accrued balances in any other compensation program the Executive participates in. For purposes of this Agreement, any amounts due the Executive under any compensation plan other than base salary, shall be paid out in accordance with the provisions of the specific plan governing those said programs.

(g) “Good Reason” shall mean the occurrence of any of the following events unless, (i) such event occurs with the Executive’s express prior written consent, (ii) the event is an isolated, insubstantial or inadvertent action or failure to act which was not in bad faith and which is remedied by the Company promptly after receipt of notice thereof given by the Executive, (iii) the event occurs in connection with the termination of the Executive’s employment for Cause, disability or death or (iv) the event occurs in connection with the Executive’s voluntary Termination of employment or other than due to the occurrence of one of the following events:

 (A) the assignment to the Executive of any duties which are inconsistent with, or are a diminution of, the Executive’s positions, duty, title, office, responsibility and status with the Company, including without limitation, any diminution of the Executive’s position or responsibility in the decision or management processes of the Company, or any removal of the Executive from, or any failure to reelect the Executive to, any of such positions;

6

 (B) a reduction in the Executive’s rate of base salary as in effect on a Change of Control or as the same may be increased from time to time during the term of this Agreement, other than a reduction which is a reduction generally applicable to all senior officers or executives of the Company and its Affiliates, including, without limitation, the Company’s Affiliates and successors after a Change of Control;

 (C) any failure either to continue in effect any material benefit or incentive plan or arrangement (including, without limitation, a plan meeting the applicable provisions of Section 401(a) of the Code, group life insurance plan, medical, dental, accident and disability plans) in which the Executive is participating or eligible to participate on the date of a Change of Control or to substitute and continue other plans providing the Executive with substantially similar benefits (all of the foregoing is hereinafter referred to as “Benefit Plans”), or the taking of any action which would substantially and adversely affect the Executive’s participation in or materially reduce the Executive’s benefits or compensation under any such Benefit Plan or deprive the Executive of any material fringe benefit enjoyed by the Executive on the date of a Change of Control other than a change in benefit that is generally applicable to all senior officers or executives of the Company and its Affiliates, including, without limitation, the Company’s Affiliates and successors after a Change of Control;

 (D) a relocation of more than 50 miles from the location of the principal executive offices of the Company, or the relocation of the Executive’s principal place of employment for the Company of more than 50 miles, to any place other than the location at which the Executive performed his duties on the date of a Change of Control; or

(E) any failure by any successor or assignee of the Company to continue this Agreement in full force and effect.

If the Executive does not notify the Company and incurs the Termination within 120 days of the date the Executive knew or should have reasonably known of the event giving rise to Good Reason, the Executive shall be deemed to have waived the Executive’s right to a Termination based upon such event or the continuing effect or occurrence of such event.

(h) “Medical and Hospital Benefits” mean the medical and hospital benefits that would have been offered to the Executive and the Executive’s family members if the Executive’s employment had not terminated based on the same terms and conditions applicable to non-terminated similarly situated executives (and their family member) of the Company or its successor. Notwithstanding anything

7

contained herein to the contrary, (A) any Medical and Hospital Benefits offered in accordance with this Agreement run simultaneously with any rights to health coverage continuation available to the Executive and the Executive’s family under applicable law and this Agreement shall constitute notice to the Executive and the Executive’s eligible family members of any right to elect health continuation coverage under the provisions of Section 4980B of the Code, Section 601 et. al. of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended, (to the extent applicable) following the expiration of the Medical and Hospital Benefits coverage period under this Agreement; and (B) if the Executive or any of the Executive’s family members are covered under a group health plan of another employer, nothing in this Agreement shall obligate a plan maintained by the Company to pay benefits on a primary basis with respect to such person.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Change of Control and Severance Agreement on the date first written above.

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION
a Delaware corporation
By:
Its:
EXECUTIVE
By:
	As an Individual

8

EX-10.15

Exhibit 10.15

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AMENDED AND RESTATED STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN

TSR-BASED RESTRICTED STOCK UNITS AWARD AGREEMENT

American Vanguard Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, (“Company”) hereby grants to             (“Grantee”), a Participant in the American Vanguard Corporation Amended and Restated Stock Incentive Plan, as amended from time-to-time (“Plan”), a Total Shareholder Return-Based Restricted Stock Units Award (“Award”) for Units (“Units”) representing shares of the common stock of the Company (“Stock”). This agreement to grant Stock Units (“Award Agreement” or “Grant Agreement”) is made effective as of the 6^th day of June, 2013 (“Grant Date”). If Grantee is a Covered Employee, this Award is designated as a “Performance Compensation Award” and as such is granted pursuant to Article 11 of the Plan.

RECITALS

A. The Board of Directors of the Company (“Board”) has adopted the Plan as an incentive to retain employees, officers, and non-employee Directors of, and Consultants to, the Company and to enhance the ability of the Company to attract, retain and motivate individuals upon whose judgment, interest and special effort the successful conduct of the Company’s operation is largely dependent.

B. Under the Plan, the Board has delegated its authority to administer the Plan to the Compensation Committee of the Board (“Committee”).

C. The Committee has approved the granting of Units to the Grantee pursuant to the Plan to provide an incentive to the Grantee to focus on the long-term growth of the Company.

D. To the extent not specifically defined herein or in the Grantee’s employment agreement or comparable agreement, as amended from time to time (“Employment Agreement”), all capitalized terms used in this Award Agreement shall have the meaning set forth in the Plan unless a contrary meaning is set forth in the Employment Agreement.

In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions hereinafter set forth and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Company and the Grantee agree as follows:

1. Grant of Units. The Company hereby grants to the Grantee a Total Shareholder Return-Based Restricted Stock Units Award for             Units (“Granted Units”), representing the right to receive payment of the same number of shares of Stock, subject to the terms and conditions of this Award Agreement and the provisions of the Plan, which terms are incorporated herein by reference.

2. Earning Units and Related Information.

2.1 Earning Units. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Grant Agreement, the Grantee shall be entitled to receive payment for the number of Units earned by the Grantee over the period that begins on June 6, 2013 and ends on December 31, 2015 (“TSR Period”).

2.2 TSR Goal: There shall be one goal, Total Shareholder Return or “TSR” used for purposes of determining the potential incentive units for each participant. TSR shall be the annualized return on the price of issuer’s common stock over the course of TSR Period. The TSR Goals are set forth in the table below, and the specific calculation for Units earned is set forth in section 2.2.1:

TSR GOALS

Performance Level	Annualized Return			Share Price (12/31/15 )		Percentage of Units Earned
Maximum		12	%	$	39.42		200	%
Target		10	%	$	37.87		100	%
Minimum		8	%	$	36.32		50	%
Below Minimum		<8	%	<$	36.32		0

The share prices set forth in the immediately preceding table were arrived at assuming a fair market value of $30.13 as of the start of the TSR Period as per the following formula:

((target share price) – ($30.13)) ÷ (($30.13) x (2.57*)) = annualized return

*2.57 is the number of days in the TSR Period divided by 365 days/year.

2.2.1 Calculation. The number of Units earned hereunder shall equal the product of (number of Granted Units) x (TSR Factor (as per section 2.2.2)). For purposes of making the calculation, where the TSR Factor is expressed as a range, a straight line interpolation between the range of the Annualized Return and the TSR Factor range shall be used. For example, if the annualized return is 8.5%, then one would calculate that such return is one quarter ((8.5% - 8.0%)/(10% - 8%) of the way up the applicable range. Accordingly, one would arrive at the TSR Factor by arriving at the sum of (0.5) + ((0.25) x (1.00 – 0.5)) = 0.625.

2.2.2 TSR Factor. A performance factor (“TSR Factor”) for Units based on total shareholder return shall be calculated based upon the table set forth below:

TSR FACTOR

Annualized Return (Percent Increase)	Target Share Price at end of TSR Period	TSR Factor
x <8%	x<$36.32	0
8%£ x £ 10%	$36.32£x£$37.87	0.50 to 1.00
10%< x £ 12%	$37.87<x£$39.42	1.00 to 2.00
x>12%	x>$39.42	2.00

2

Any Units that are unearned as of the end of the TSR Period will be forfeited. The number of earned Units that will become vested shall be determined pursuant to paragraph 3 below. Whether the TSR Goal has been achieved shall be determined by the Company or Committee, as applicable, pursuant to paragraph 2.6 below.

2.4 Final Determination of TSR Goal Attained. The Company, or the Committee with respect to grants to employees who are Covered Employees, shall be responsible for determining in good faith whether, and to what extent, the TSR Goal set forth in this Grant Agreement has been achieved. The Company, or the Committee, as applicable, may reasonably rely on information from, and representations by, individuals within the Company in making such determination and when made such determination shall be final and binding on the Grantee.

3. Vesting of Earned Units. Subject to section 4 below, the Units earned pursuant to paragraph 2.1 shall vest in their entirety on the third anniversary of the date of award, that is, on June 6, 2016.

4. Termination of Employment.

4.1 General. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 4.2 below, (a) if the Company terminates Grantee’s employment without Cause or Grantee’s employment is terminated due to death or disability prior to the Vesting Date, then Units shall vest on a pro-rated basis corresponding with Grantee’s actual service during the Performance Period; and (b) if Company terminates Grantee’s employment for Cause, or Grantee terminates employment with the Company voluntarily, any unvested Units will be canceled and forfeited as of the date of Grantee’s termination of employment. In other words, except as otherwise expressly provided to the contrary in paragraphs 4.1 and 4.2, Grantee must be continuously employed by the Company through the Vesting Date in order to receive any payment with respect to the Units that are scheduled to vest on such Vesting Date.

4.2 Change in Control. In the event the Company terminates the Grantee’s employment without Cause (including, if applicable, a termination for Good Reason as defined in the Grantee’s Employment Agreement or similar document) within two (2) years following a Change in Control, then all Units earned pursuant to paragraph 2.1 but unvested shall become immediately vested. The Vesting Date for any such earned Units that vest pursuant to this paragraph 4.2 shall be the date of the Grantee’s termination of employment.

5. Time and Form of Payment. Subject to the provisions of this Award Agreement and the Plan, as Units vest on the Vesting Dates set forth in paragraph 3, 4.1 or 4.2, as the case may be, the Company will deliver to the Grantee the same number of whole shares of Stock, rounded up or down. Subject to paragraph 21, the Company shall deliver the vested shares (if any) within 15 days of the applicable Vesting Date.

6. Nontransferability. The Units granted by this Grant Agreement shall not be transferable by the Grantee or any other person claiming through the Grantee, either voluntarily or involuntarily, except by will or the laws of descent and distribution or as otherwise provided under Article 13 of the Plan.

3

7. Adjustments. In the event of a stock dividend or in the event the Stock shall be changed into or exchanged for a different number or class of shares of stock of the Company or of another corporation, whether through reorganization, recapitalization, stock split-up, combination of shares, merger or consolidation, there shall be substituted for each such remaining share of Stock then subject to this Grant Agreement the number and class of shares of stock into which each outstanding share of Stock shall be so exchanged, all as set forth in Section 5.3 of the Plan.

8. Delivery of Shares. No shares of Stock shall be delivered under this Award Agreement until: (i) the Units vest pursuant to paragraph 3, 4.1 or 4.2 above, as the case may be; (ii) approval of any governmental authority required in connection with the Award Agreement, or the issuance of shares thereunder, has been received by the Company; (iii) if required by the Committee, the Grantee has delivered to the Company documentation (in form and content acceptable to the Company in its sole and absolute discretion) to assist the Company in concluding that the issuance to the Grantee of any share of Stock under this Grant Agreement would not violate the Securities Act of 1933 or any other applicable federal or state securities laws or regulations; (iv) the Grantee has complied with paragraph 14 below of this Award Agreement in order for the proper provision for required tax withholdings to be made; and (v) the Grantee has executed and returned this Grant Agreement to the Company (which, in the case of a Grant Agreement provided to the Grantee in electronic format, requires that the Grantee click the “ACCEPT” button). This Grant Agreement must be executed by Grantee no later than, the earlier of (i) ten (10) months from the Grant Date; or (ii) the date preceding the first Vesting Date described in paragraph 3 of this Grant Agreement.

9. Securities Act. The Company shall not be required to deliver any shares of Stock pursuant to the vesting of Units if, in the opinion of counsel for the Company, such issuance would violate the Securities Act of 1933 or any other applicable federal or state securities laws or regulations.

10. Voting and Other Stockholder Related Rights. The Grantee will have no voting rights or any other rights as a stockholder of the Company (e.g., no rights to cash dividends) with respect to unvested Units until the Units become vested and the Company issues shares of Stock to the Grantee.

11. Delivery of Documents and Notices. Any document relating to participation in the Plan or any notice required or permitted hereunder shall be given in writing and shall be deemed effectively given (except to the extent that this Grant Agreement provides for effectiveness only upon actual receipt of such notice) upon personal delivery, electronic delivery at the e-mail address, if any, provided for the Grantee by the Company or an Affiliate, or upon deposit in the U.S. Post Office or foreign postal service, or with a nationally recognized overnight courier service, with postage and fees prepaid, addressed to the other party at the current address on file with the Company or at such other address as such party may designate in writing from time-to-time to the other party.

11.1 Description of Electronic Delivery. The Plan documents, which may include but do not necessarily include: the Plan, a grant notice, this Grant Agreement, the Plan Prospectus, and any reports of the Company provided generally to the Company’s stockholders,

4

may be delivered to the Grantee electronically. In addition, the Grantee may deliver electronically any grant notice and this Grant Agreement to the Company or to such third party involved in administering the Plan as the Company may designate from time-to-time. Such means of electronic delivery may include but do not necessarily include the delivery of a link to a Company intranet or the internet site of a third party involved in administering the Plan, the delivery of the document via e-mail or such other means of electronic delivery specified by the Company.

11.2 Consent to Electronic Delivery. The Grantee acknowledges that Grantee has read paragraph 11.1 and consents to the electronic delivery of the Plan documents and any grant notice. The Grantee acknowledges that Grantee may receive from the Company a paper copy of any documents delivered electronically at no cost by contacting the Company by telephone or in writing.

12. Administration. This Award Agreement is subject to the terms and conditions of the Plan and the Plan shall in all respects be administered by the Committee in accordance with the terms and provisions of the Plan. The Committee shall have the sole and complete discretion with respect to all matters reserved to it by the Plan and decisions of the majority of the Committee with respect to the Plan and this Award Agreement shall be final and binding upon the Grantee and the Company. In the event of any conflict between the terms and conditions of this Grant Agreement and the Plan, the provisions of the Plan shall control.

13. Continuation of Employment. This Grant Agreement shall not be construed to confer upon the Grantee any right to continue employment with the Company and shall not limit the right of the Company, in its sole and absolute discretion, to terminate Grantee’s employment at any time.

14. Responsibility for Taxes and Withholdings. Regardless of any action the Company or the Grantee’s actual employer (“Employer”) takes with respect to any or all income tax, social insurance, payroll tax, payment on account or other tax-related items related to the Grantee’s participation in the Plan and legally applicable to the Grantee (“Tax-Related Items”), the Grantee acknowledges that the ultimate liability for all Tax-Related Items is and remains the Grantee’s responsibility and may exceed the amount actually withheld by the Company or the Employer. The Grantee further acknowledges that the Company and/or the Employer: (i) make no representations or undertakings regarding the treatment of any Tax-Related Items in connection with any aspect of the Units, including the grant of the Units, the vesting of Units, the conversion of the Units into shares or the receipt of an equivalent cash payment, the subsequent sale of any shares acquired at vesting and the receipt of any dividends and/or dividend equivalents; and (ii) do not commit to and are under no obligation to structure the terms of the grant or any aspect of the Units to reduce or eliminate the Grantee’s liability for Tax-Related Items or achieve any particular tax result. Further, if the Grantee has become subject to tax in more than one jurisdiction between the Grant Date and the date of any relevant taxable event, the Grantee acknowledges that the Company and/or the Employer (or former employer, as applicable) may be required to withhold or account for Tax-Related Items in more than one jurisdiction.

5

Prior to any relevant taxable or tax withholding event, as applicable, the Grantee shall pay, or make adequate arrangements satisfactory to the Company and/or the Employer to satisfy all Tax-Related Items. In this regard, pursuant to Article 17 of the Plan, if permissible under local law and unless otherwise provided by the Committee prior to the vesting of the shares, the Grantee authorizes the Company or the Employer, or their respective agents, to withhold all applicable Tax-Related Items in shares of Stock to be issued upon vesting/settlement of the Units. Alternatively, or in addition, the Grantee authorizes the Company and/or the Employer, or their respective agents, at the Company’s discretion, to satisfy the obligations with regard to all Tax-Related Items by one or a combination of the following: (i) withholding from the Grantee’s wages or other cash compensation paid to the Grantee by the Company and/or the Employer; (ii) withholding from proceeds of the sale of shares of Stock acquired upon vesting/settlement of the Units either through a voluntary sale or through a mandatory sale arranged by the Company (on the Grantee’s behalf pursuant to this authorization); (iii) personal check or other cash equivalent acceptable to the Company; or (iv) any other means as determined appropriate by the Company or the Committee.

The Company may withhold or account for Tax-Related Items by considering applicable minimum statutory withholding amounts or other applicable withholding rates. If the obligation for Tax-Related Items is satisfied by withholding a number of shares of Stock as described herein, for tax purposes, the Grantee shall be deemed to have been issued the full number of shares of Stock subject to the Award, notwithstanding that a number of the shares of Stock are held back solely for the purpose of paying the Tax-Related Items due as a result of the Grantee’s participation in the Plan.

Finally, the Grantee shall pay to the Company or to the Employer any amount of Tax-Related Items that the Company or the Employer may be required to withhold or account for as a result of the Grantee’s participation in the Plan that cannot be satisfied by the means previously described. The Company may refuse to issue or deliver shares or the proceeds of the sale of shares of Stock if the Grantee fails to comply with his or her obligation in connection with the Tax-Related Items.

15. Amendments. Unless otherwise provided in the Plan or this Grant Agreement, this Grant Agreement may be amended only by a written agreement executed by the Company and the Grantee.

16. Integrated Agreement. Any grant notice, this Grant Agreement and the Plan shall constitute the entire understanding and agreement of the Grantee and the Company with respect to the subject matter contained herein or therein and supersedes any prior agreements, understandings, restrictions, representations, or warranties between the Grantee and the Company with respect to such subject matter other than those as set forth or provided for herein or therein. To the extent contemplated herein or therein, the provisions of any grant notice and this Grant Agreement shall survive any settlement of the Award and shall remain in full force and effect.

17. Severability. If one or more of the provisions of this Grant Agreement shall be held invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby and the invalid, illegal or unenforceable provisions shall be deemed null and void; however, to the extent permissible by law, any provisions which could be deemed null and void shall first be construed, interpreted or revised retroactively to permit this Grant Agreement to be construed so as to foster the intent of this Grant Agreement and the Plan.

6

18. Counterparts. Any grant notice and this Grant Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument.

19. Governing Law and Venue. This Grant Agreement shall be interpreted and administered under the laws of the State of Delaware. For purposes of litigating any dispute that arises under this grant or this Award, the parties hereby submit to and consent to the jurisdiction of the State of California, agree that such litigation shall be conducted in the courts of Orange County, California, or the federal courts for the United States for the District of California, where this grant is made and/or to be performed.

20. Other. The Grantee represents that the Grantee has read and is familiar with the provisions of the Plan and this Grant Agreement, and hereby accepts the Award subject to all of their terms and conditions.

21. Section 409A Compliance. The Company believes, but does not and cannot warrant or guaranty, that the payments due pursuant to this Grant Agreement qualify for the short-term deferral exception to Section 409A of the Code as set forth in Treasury Regulation Section 1.409A-1(b)(4). Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Grant Agreement, if the Company determines that neither the short-term deferral exception nor any other exception to Section 409A applies to the payments due pursuant to this Grant Agreement, to the extent any payments are due on the Grantee’s termination of employment, the term “termination of employment” shall mean “separation from service” as defined in Treasury Regulation Section 1.409A-1(h). In addition, if Grantee is a “specified employee” (as defined in Treasury Regulation Section 1.409A-1(i)) and any payments due pursuant to this Award Agreement are payable on the Grantee’s “separation from service,” then such payments shall be paid on the first business day following the expiration of the six month period following the Grantee’s “separation from service.” This Grant Agreement shall be operated in compliance with Section 409A or an exception thereto and each provision of this Grant Agreement shall be interpreted, to the extent possible, to comply with Section 409A or to qualify for an applicable exception. The Grantee remains solely responsible for any adverse tax consequences imposed upon the Grantee by Section 409A.

22. Confidentiality. The Grantee acknowledges and agrees that the terms of this Award Agreement are considered proprietary information of the Company. The Grantee hereby agrees that Grantee shall maintain the confidentiality of these matters to the fullest extent permitted by law and shall not disclose them to any third party. If the Grantee violates this confidentiality provision, without waiving any other remedy available, the Company may revoke this Award without further obligation or liability, and the Grantee may be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including the Company’s termination of the Grantee’s employment for Cause.

7

23. Appendix. Notwithstanding any provisions in this Grant Agreement, the grant of the Units shall be subject to any special terms and conditions set forth in any appendix (or any appendices) to this Grant Agreement for the Grantee’s country (the “Appendix”). Moreover, if the Grantee relocates to one of the countries included in the Appendix, the special terms and conditions for such country will apply to the Grantee, to the extent the Company determines that the application of such terms and conditions is necessary or advisable in order to comply with local law or facilitate the administration of the Plan. The Appendix constitutes part of this Grant Agreement.

24. Imposition of Other Requirements. The Company reserves the right to impose other requirements on the Grantee’s participation in the Plan, on the Units and on any shares of Stock acquired under the Plan, to the extent the Company determines it is necessary or advisable in order to comply with local law or facilitate the administration of the Plan, and to require the Grantee to sign any additional agreements or undertakings that may be necessary to accomplish the foregoing. Further, the Award and profits under this Grant Agreement are subject to the Company’s compensation recovery policy or policies (and related Company practices) as such may be in effect from time-to-time, as a result of Section 954 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, as amended, and similar or related laws, rules and regulations.

8

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Grant Agreement to be signed by its duly authorized representative and the Grantee has signed this Grant Agreement as of the date first written above.

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION
By:
	Its:
GRANTEE
By:

9

EX-10.16

Exhibit 10.16

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

AMENDED AND RESTATED STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN

PERFORMANCE-BASED RESTRICTED STOCK UNITS AWARD AGREEMENT

American Vanguard Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, (“Company”) hereby grants to             (“Grantee”), a Participant in the American Vanguard Corporation Amended and Restated Stock Incentive Plan, as amended from time-to-time (“Plan”), a Performance-Based Restricted Stock Units Award (“Award”) for Units (“Units”) representing shares of the common stock of the Company (“Stock”). This agreement to grant Stock Units (“Award Agreement” or “Grant Agreement”) is made effective as of the 6^th day of June, 2013 (“Grant Date”). If Grantee is a Covered Employee, this Award is designated as a “Performance Compensation Award” and as such is granted pursuant to Article 11 of the Plan.

RECITALS

A. The Board of Directors of the Company (“Board”) has adopted the Plan as an incentive to retain employees, officers, and non-employee Directors of, and Consultants to, the Company and to enhance the ability of the Company to attract, retain and motivate individuals upon whose judgment, interest and special effort the successful conduct of the Company’s operation is largely dependent.

B. Under the Plan, the Board has delegated its authority to administer the Plan to the Compensation Committee of the Board (“Committee”).

C. The Committee has approved the granting of Units to the Grantee pursuant to the Plan to provide an incentive to the Grantee to focus on the long-term growth of the Company.

D. To the extent not specifically defined herein or in the Grantee’s employment agreement or comparable agreement, as amended from time to time (“Employment Agreement”), all capitalized terms used in this Award Agreement shall have the meaning set forth in the Plan unless a contrary meaning is set forth in the Employment Agreement.

In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions hereinafter set forth and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Company and the Grantee agree as follows:

1. Grant of Units. The Company hereby grants to the Grantee a Performance-Based Restricted Stock Units Award for          Units (“Granted Units”), representing the right to receive payment of the same number of shares of Stock, subject to the terms and conditions of this Award Agreement and the provisions of the Plan, which terms are incorporated herein by reference.

2. Earning Units and Related Information.

2.1 Earning Units. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Grant Agreement, the Grantee shall be entitled to receive payment for the number of Units earned by the Grantee over the period that begins on April 1, 2013 and ends on December 31, 2015 (“Performance Measurement Period”).

2.2 Performance Goals: There shall be two performance goals, weighted as follows for purposes of determining the potential incentive units for each participant: a Net Sales goal weighted at thirty seven and-a-half percent (37.5%) and a Net Income goal weighted at sixty two and-a-half percent (62.5%).

2.3 Net Sales Goal. The first financial performance goal shall be tied to the Company’s net sales for the Performance Period, as reported in the financial statements included in the Company’s Forms 10-Q and 10-K for the subject period. The Company’s reported net sales for the performance period, for purposes of determining performance goal attainment, shall be adjusted to factor out the effect of the adoption of any new accounting standards or other changes in accounting principles.

2.4 Net Income Goal: The second financial performance goal shall be tied to the Company’s net income for the Performance Period, as reported in the financial statements included in the Company’s Forms 10-Q and 10-K for the subject period. The Company’s reported net income for the Performance Period shall, for purposes of determining performance goal attainment, be adjusted as follows:

The following items shall be excluded without duplication:

(i) Any expense for the performance period with respect to the Performance-Based Stock Incentive Units granted during 2013.

(ii) Net Income shall be adjusted to factor out the effect of the adoption of any new accounting standards or other changes in accounting principles

2.5 Units Earned: The number of Units earned pursuant to this Grant Agreement is a function of the extent to which the corresponding Performance Goals described in the table below are achieved for each applicable goal.

PERFORMANCE GOALS

Performance Level	Revenue (in Millions)		Net Income (in Millions)		Percentage of Units Earned
Maximum	$	1,631	$	172		200	%
15% Above Target	$	1,563	$	164		150	%
10% Above Target	$	1,495	$	157		125	%
Target	$	1,359	$	143		100	%
Threshold	$	1,087	$	114		50	%
Below Threshold	<$	1,087	<$	114		0

2.5.1 Calculation. The number of Units earned hereunder shall equal the sum of (x) the product of ((number of Granted Units) x (Net Income Performance Factor) x (0.625)) plus (y) the product of ((number of Granted Units) x (Net Sales Performance Factor) x (0.375)).

2

2.5.2 Performance Factor. A performance factor (“Performance Factor”) for Units based on each of the Net Sales and Net Income shall be calculated based upon the table set forth below and as more fully described in Exhibit A hereto:

PERFORMANCE FACTORS

Net Sales (in Millions)	Net Income (in Millions)	Performance Factor
x <1,087	x <114	0
$1,087£ x£ $1,359	$114£ x £ $143	0.50 to 1.00
$1,359< x £ $1,495	$143< x < $157	1.00 to 1.25
$1,495< x £ $1,563	$157< x £ $164	1.25
$1,563< x < $1,631	$164< x < $172	1.50
$1,631£ x	$172£ x	2.00

Any Units that are unearned as of the end of the Performance Measurement Period will be forfeited. The number of earned Units that will become vested shall be determined pursuant to paragraph 3 below. Whether the Performance Goals for the Performance Measurement Period have been achieved shall be determined by the Company or Committee, as applicable, pursuant to paragraph 2.6 below.

2.6 Final Determination of Performance Goals Attained. The Company, or the Committee with respect to grants to employees who are Covered Employees, shall be responsible for determining in good faith whether, and to what extent, the Performance Goals set forth in this Grant Agreement have been achieved. The Company, or the Committee, as applicable, may reasonably rely on information from, and representations by, individuals within the Company in making such determination and when made such determination shall be final and binding on the Grantee.

3. Vesting of Earned Units. Subject to paragraph 4 below, the Units earned pursuant to paragraph 2.1 shall vest in their entirety on the third anniversary of the date of award, that is, on June 6, 2016.

4. Termination of Employment.

4.1 General. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 4.2 below, (a) if the Company terminates Grantee’s employment without Cause or Grantee’s employment is terminated due to death or disability prior to the Vesting Date, then Units shall vest on a pro-rate basis corresponding with Grantee’s actual service during the Performance Period; and (b) if Company terminates Grantee’s employment for Cause, or Grantee terminates employment with the Company voluntarily, any unvested Units will be canceled and forfeited as of the date of Grantee’s termination of employment. In other words, except as otherwise expressly provided to the contrary in paragraphs 4.1 and 4.2, Grantee must be continuously employed by the Company through the Vesting Date in order to receive any payment with respect to the Units that are scheduled to vest on such Vesting Date.

3

4.2 Change in Control. In the event the Company terminates the Grantee’s employment without Cause (including, if applicable, a termination for Good Reason as defined in the Grantee’s Employment Agreement or similar document) within two (2) years following a Change in Control, then all Units earned pursuant to paragraph 2.1 but unvested shall become immediately vested. The Vesting Date for any such earned Units that vest pursuant to this paragraph 4.2 shall be the date of the Grantee’s termination of employment.

5. Time and Form of Payment. Subject to the provisions of this Award Agreement and the Plan, as Units vest on the Vesting Dates set forth in paragraph 3, 4.1 or 4.2, as the case may be, the Company will deliver to the Grantee the same number of whole shares of Stock, rounded up or down. Subject to paragraph 21, the Company shall deliver the vested shares (if any) within 15 days of the applicable Vesting Date.

6. Nontransferability. The Units granted by this Grant Agreement shall not be transferable by the Grantee or any other person claiming through the Grantee, either voluntarily or involuntarily, except by will or the laws of descent and distribution or as otherwise provided under Article 13 of the Plan.

7. Adjustments. In the event of a stock dividend or in the event the Stock shall be changed into or exchanged for a different number or class of shares of stock of the Company or of another corporation, whether through reorganization, recapitalization, stock split-up, combination of shares, merger or consolidation, there shall be substituted for each such remaining share of Stock then subject to this Grant Agreement the number and class of shares of stock into which each outstanding share of Stock shall be so exchanged, all as set forth in Section 5.3 of the Plan.

8. Delivery of Shares. No shares of Stock shall be delivered under this Award Agreement until: (i) the Units vest pursuant to paragraph 3, 4.1 or 4.2 above, as the case may be; (ii) approval of any governmental authority required in connection with the Award Agreement, or the issuance of shares thereunder, has been received by the Company; (iii) if required by the Committee, the Grantee has delivered to the Company documentation (in form and content acceptable to the Company in its sole and absolute discretion) to assist the Company in concluding that the issuance to the Grantee of any share of Stock under this Grant Agreement would not violate the Securities Act of 1933 or any other applicable federal or state securities laws or regulations; (iv) the Grantee has complied with paragraph 14 below of this Award Agreement in order for the proper provision for required tax withholdings to be made; and (v) the Grantee has executed and returned this Grant Agreement to the Company (which, in the case of a Grant Agreement provided to the Grantee in electronic format, requires that the Grantee click the “ACCEPT” button). This Grant Agreement must be executed by Grantee no later than, the earlier of (i) ten (10) months from the Grant Date; or (ii) the date preceding the first Vesting Date described in paragraph 3 of this Grant Agreement.

9. Securities Act. The Company shall not be required to deliver any shares of Stock pursuant to the vesting of Units if, in the opinion of counsel for the Company, such issuance would violate the Securities Act of 1933 or any other applicable federal or state securities laws or regulations.

4

10. Voting and Other Stockholder Related Rights. The Grantee will have no voting rights or any other rights as a stockholder of the Company (e.g., no rights to cash dividends) with respect to unvested Units until the Units become vested and the Company issues shares of Stock to the Grantee.

11. Delivery of Documents and Notices. Any document relating to participation in the Plan or any notice required or permitted hereunder shall be given in writing and shall be deemed effectively given (except to the extent that this Grant Agreement provides for effectiveness only upon actual receipt of such notice) upon personal delivery, electronic delivery at the e-mail address, if any, provided for the Grantee by the Company or an Affiliate, or upon deposit in the U.S. Post Office or foreign postal service, or with a nationally recognized overnight courier service, with postage and fees prepaid, addressed to the other party at the current address on file with the Company or at such other address as such party may designate in writing from time-to-time to the other party.

11.1 Description of Electronic Delivery. The Plan documents, which may include but do not necessarily include: the Plan, a grant notice, this Grant Agreement, the Plan Prospectus, and any reports of the Company provided generally to the Company’s stockholders, may be delivered to the Grantee electronically. In addition, the Grantee may deliver electronically any grant notice and this Grant Agreement to the Company or to such third party involved in administering the Plan as the Company may designate from time-to-time. Such means of electronic delivery may include but do not necessarily include the delivery of a link to a Company intranet or the internet site of a third party involved in administering the Plan, the delivery of the document via e-mail or such other means of electronic delivery specified by the Company.

11.2 Consent to Electronic Delivery. The Grantee acknowledges that Grantee has read paragraph 11.1 and consents to the electronic delivery of the Plan documents and any grant notice. The Grantee acknowledges that Grantee may receive from the Company a paper copy of any documents delivered electronically at no cost by contacting the Company by telephone or in writing.

12. Administration. This Award Agreement is subject to the terms and conditions of the Plan and the Plan shall in all respects be administered by the Committee in accordance with the terms and provisions of the Plan. The Committee shall have the sole and complete discretion with respect to all matters reserved to it by the Plan and decisions of the majority of the Committee with respect to the Plan and this Award Agreement shall be final and binding upon the Grantee and the Company. In the event of any conflict between the terms and conditions of this Grant Agreement and the Plan, the provisions of the Plan shall control.

13. Continuation of Employment. This Grant Agreement shall not be construed to confer upon the Grantee any right to continue employment with the Company and shall not limit the right of the Company, in its sole and absolute discretion, to terminate Grantee’s employment at any time.

5

14. Responsibility for Taxes and Withholdings. Regardless of any action the Company or the Grantee’s actual employer (“Employer”) takes with respect to any or all income tax, social insurance, payroll tax, payment on account or other tax-related items related to the Grantee’s participation in the Plan and legally applicable to the Grantee (“Tax-Related Items”), the Grantee acknowledges that the ultimate liability for all Tax-Related Items is and remains the Grantee’s responsibility and may exceed the amount actually withheld by the Company or the Employer. The Grantee further acknowledges that the Company and/or the Employer: (i) make no representations or undertakings regarding the treatment of any Tax-Related Items in connection with any aspect of the Units, including the grant of the Units, the vesting of Units, the conversion of the Units into shares or the receipt of an equivalent cash payment, the subsequent sale of any shares acquired at vesting and the receipt of any dividends and/or dividend equivalents; and (ii) do not commit to and are under no obligation to structure the terms of the grant or any aspect of the Units to reduce or eliminate the Grantee’s liability for Tax-Related Items or achieve any particular tax result. Further, if the Grantee has become subject to tax in more than one jurisdiction between the Grant Date and the date of any relevant taxable event, the Grantee acknowledges that the Company and/or the Employer (or former employer, as applicable) may be required to withhold or account for Tax-Related Items in more than one jurisdiction.

Prior to any relevant taxable or tax withholding event, as applicable, the Grantee shall pay, or make adequate arrangements satisfactory to the Company and/or the Employer to satisfy all Tax-Related Items. In this regard, pursuant to Article 17 of the Plan, if permissible under local law and unless otherwise provided by the Committee prior to the vesting of the shares, the Grantee authorizes the Company or the Employer, or their respective agents, to withhold all applicable Tax-Related Items in shares of Stock to be issued upon vesting/settlement of the Units. Alternatively, or in addition, the Grantee authorizes the Company and/or the Employer, or their respective agents, at the Company’s discretion, to satisfy the obligations with regard to all Tax-Related Items by one or a combination of the following: (i) withholding from the Grantee’s wages or other cash compensation paid to the Grantee by the Company and/or the Employer; (ii) withholding from proceeds of the sale of shares of Stock acquired upon vesting/settlement of the Units either through a voluntary sale or through a mandatory sale arranged by the Company (on the Grantee’s behalf pursuant to this authorization); (iii) personal check or other cash equivalent acceptable to the Company; or (iv) any other means as determined appropriate by the Company or the Committee.

The Company may withhold or account for Tax-Related Items by considering applicable minimum statutory withholding amounts or other applicable withholding rates. If the obligation for Tax-Related Items is satisfied by withholding a number of shares of Stock as described herein, for tax purposes, the Grantee shall be deemed to have been issued the full number of shares of Stock subject to the Award, notwithstanding that a number of the shares of Stock are held back solely for the purpose of paying the Tax-Related Items due as a result of the Grantee’s participation in the Plan.

Finally, the Grantee shall pay to the Company or to the Employer any amount of Tax-Related Items that the Company or the Employer may be required to withhold or account for as a result of the Grantee’s participation in the Plan that cannot be satisfied by the means previously described. The Company may refuse to issue or deliver shares or the proceeds of the sale of shares of Stock if the Grantee fails to comply with his or her obligation in connection with the Tax-Related Items.

6

15. Amendments. Unless otherwise provided in the Plan or this Grant Agreement, this Grant Agreement may be amended only by a written agreement executed by the Company and the Grantee.

16. Integrated Agreement. Any grant notice, this Grant Agreement and the Plan shall constitute the entire understanding and agreement of the Grantee and the Company with respect to the subject matter contained herein or therein and supersedes any prior agreements, understandings, restrictions, representations, or warranties between the Grantee and the Company with respect to such subject matter other than those as set forth or provided for herein or therein. To the extent contemplated herein or therein, the provisions of any grant notice and this Grant Agreement shall survive any settlement of the Award and shall remain in full force and effect.

17. Severability. If one or more of the provisions of this Grant Agreement shall be held invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby and the invalid, illegal or unenforceable provisions shall be deemed null and void; however, to the extent permissible by law, any provisions which could be deemed null and void shall first be construed, interpreted or revised retroactively to permit this Grant Agreement to be construed so as to foster the intent of this Grant Agreement and the Plan.

18. Counterparts. Any grant notice and this Grant Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument.

19. Governing Law and Venue. This Grant Agreement shall be interpreted and administered under the laws of the State of Delaware. For purposes of litigating any dispute that arises under this grant or this Award, the parties hereby submit to and consent to the jurisdiction of the State of California, agree that such litigation shall be conducted in the courts of Orange County, California, or the federal courts for the United States for the District of California, where this grant is made and/or to be performed.

20. Other. The Grantee represents that the Grantee has read and is familiar with the provisions of the Plan and this Grant Agreement, and hereby accepts the Award subject to all of their terms and conditions.

21. Section 409A Compliance. The Company believes, but does not and cannot warrant or guaranty, that the payments due pursuant to this Grant Agreement qualify for the short-term deferral exception to Section 409A of the Code as set forth in Treasury Regulation Section 1.409A-1(b)(4). Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Grant Agreement, if the Company determines that neither the short-term deferral exception nor any other exception to Section 409A applies to the payments due pursuant to this Grant Agreement, to the extent any payments are due on the Grantee’s termination of employment, the term “termination of employment” shall mean “separation from service” as defined in Treasury Regulation Section 1.409A-1(h). In addition, if Grantee is a “specified employee” (as defined in Treasury Regulation Section 1.409A-1(i)) and any payments due pursuant to this Award Agreement are payable on the Grantee’s “separation from service,” then such payments shall be paid on the first

7

business day following the expiration of the six month period following the Grantee’s “separation from service.” This Grant Agreement shall be operated in compliance with Section 409A or an exception thereto and each provision of this Grant Agreement shall be interpreted, to the extent possible, to comply with Section 409A or to qualify for an applicable exception. The Grantee remains solely responsible for any adverse tax consequences imposed upon the Grantee by Section 409A.

22. Confidentiality. The Grantee acknowledges and agrees that the terms of this Award Agreement are considered proprietary information of the Company. The Grantee hereby agrees that Grantee shall maintain the confidentiality of these matters to the fullest extent permitted by law and shall not disclose them to any third party. If the Grantee violates this confidentiality provision, without waiving any other remedy available, the Company may revoke this Award without further obligation or liability, and the Grantee may be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including the Company’s termination of the Grantee’s employment for Cause.

23. Appendix. Notwithstanding any provisions in this Grant Agreement, the grant of the Units shall be subject to any special terms and conditions set forth in any appendix (or any appendices) to this Grant Agreement for the Grantee’s country (the “Appendix”). Moreover, if the Grantee relocates to one of the countries included in the Appendix, the special terms and conditions for such country will apply to the Grantee, to the extent the Company determines that the application of such terms and conditions is necessary or advisable in order to comply with local law or facilitate the administration of the Plan. The Appendix constitutes part of this Grant Agreement.

24. Imposition of Other Requirements. The Company reserves the right to impose other requirements on the Grantee’s participation in the Plan, on the Units and on any shares of Stock acquired under the Plan, to the extent the Company determines it is necessary or advisable in order to comply with local law or facilitate the administration of the Plan, and to require the Grantee to sign any additional agreements or undertakings that may be necessary to accomplish the foregoing. Further, the Award and profits under this Grant Agreement are subject to the Company’s compensation recovery policy or policies (and related Company practices) as such may be in effect from time-to-time, as a result of Section 954 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, as amended, and similar or related laws, rules and regulations.

8

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Grant Agreement to be signed by its duly authorized representative and the Grantee has signed this Grant Agreement as of the date first written above.

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION
By:
	Its:
GRANTEE
By:

9

EXHIBIT A

Performance Factor Calculation

If the Company’s performance for the Performance Measurement Period is less than the Threshold performance level (i.e., either $1,087 million in Revenue or $114 million in Net Income), the Performance Factor shall equal zero.

If the Company’s performance for the Performance Measurement Period is greater than or equal to the Threshold performance level (i.e., either $1,087 million in Revenue or $114 million in Net Income) but is less than or equal to the Target performance level (i.e., either $1,359 million in Revenue or $143 million in Net Income), the Performance Factor shall range between 0.5 and 1.0 and will be determined by applying straight line interpolation between the Threshold performance level and Target performance level.

If the Company’s performance for the Performance Measurement Period exceeds the Target performance level (i.e., either $1,358 million in Revenue or $143 million in Net Income) but is less than or equal to the “10% Above Target” performance level (i.e. either $1,495 million in Revenue or $157 million in Net Income), the Performance Factor shall range between 1.0 and 1.25 and will be determined by applying straight line interpolation between the Target performance level and 10% Above Target performance level.

If the Company’s performance for the Performance Measurement Period exceeds the 10% Above Target performance level (i.e., either $1,495 million in Revenue or $157 million in Net Income) but is less than or equal to the “15% Above Target” performance level (i.e. either $1,563 million in Revenue or $164 million in Net Income), the Performance Factor shall equal 1.25.

If the Company’s performance for the Performance Measurement Period exceeds the 15% Above Target performance level (i.e., either $1,563 million in Revenue or $164 million) but is less than the “20% Above Target” performance level (i.e., either $1,631 million in Revenue or $172 million in Net Income), the Performance Factor shall equal 1.5

If the Company’s performance for the Performance Measurement Period equals or exceeds the Maximum performance level (i.e., either $1,631 million in Revenue or $172 million in net Income), the Performance Factor shall equal 2.0.

10

EX-21

EXHIBIT 21

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

LISTING OF SUBSIDIARIES

Subsidiaries of the Company and the jurisdiction in which each company was incorporated are listed below. Unless otherwise indicated parenthetically, 100% of the voting securities of each subsidiary are owned by the Company. All companies indicated with an asterisk (*) are subsidiaries of AMVAC. All of the following subsidiaries are included in the Company’s consolidated financial statements:

AMVAC Chemical Corporation	California
GemChem, Inc.	California
2110 Davie Corporation (formerly ABSCO Distributing)	California
AMVAC Chemical UK Ltd.*	Surrey, England
AMVAC Switzerland GmbH*	Switzerland
AMVAC do Brasil Representácoes Ltda*	Brasil
Agroservicios Amvac, SA de CV*	Mexico
Quimica Amvac de Mexico SA de CV*	Mexico
AMVAC de Costa Rica Srl	Costa Rica
Environmental Mediation, Inc.	California
Manufacturers Mirror & Glass Co., Inc.	California
Todagco (80%)*	California
American Vanguard Corporation of Imperial Valley (90%)*	California
AMVAC Ag-Chem*	California
AVD International LLC*	Delaware
AMVAC CV*	Netherlands
AMVAC Netherlands BV*	Netherlands
Envance Technologies, LLC* (60%)	Delaware

EX-23

Exhibit 23

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

American Vanguard Corporation

Newport Beach, CA

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-125813, 333-102381, 333-76218 and 333-64220) of American Vanguard Corporation of our reports dated February 28, 2014, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule, and the effectiveness of American Vanguard Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting, which appear in this Form 10-K.

/s/ BDO USA, LLP

Los Angeles, CA

February 28, 2014

EX-31.1

Exhibit 31.1

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Eric G. Wintemute, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K of American Vanguard Corporation;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The Company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the Company and have:

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

(c) evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures, and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosures controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(d) disclosed in this report any change in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the Company’s most recent fiscal quarter (the Company’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an Annual Report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The Company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Company’s auditors and the audit committee of Company’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: February 28, 2014	/s/    ERIC G. WINTEMUTE
	Eric G. Wintemute Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board

EX-31.2

Exhibit 31.2

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, David T. Johnson, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K of American Vanguard Corporation;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The Company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the Company and have:

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

(c) evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures, and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosures controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(d) disclosed in this report any change in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the Company’s most recent fiscal quarter (the Company’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an Annual Report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The Company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Company’s auditors and the audit committee of Company’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: February 28, 2014	/s/    DAVID T. JOHNSON
	David T. Johnson Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer

EX-32.1

Exhibit 32.1

AMERICAN VANGUARD CORPORATION

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of American Vanguard Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that based on their knowledge (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (2) the information contained in the Report fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for the periods covered in the Report.

/s/    ERIC G. WINTEMUTE

  Eric G. Wintemute,

Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board

/s/    DAVID T. JOHNSON

  David T. Johnson

Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer

February 28, 2014

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to American Vanguard Corporation and will be retained by American Vanguard Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

The foregoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Form 10-K and shall not be considered filed as part of the Form 10-K.

XML

Components of Inventories (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Inventory [Line Items]
Finished products	$ 126,872	$ 74,900
Raw materials	12,958	13,051
Total Inventories	$ 139,830	$ 87,951

XML

Total Income Tax Expense Applying U.S. Federal Income Tax Rate (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Components Of Income Tax Expense Benefit [Line Items]
Computed tax expense at statutory federal rates	$ 18,678	$ 19,911	$ 12,328
Increase (decrease) in taxes resulting from:
State taxes, net of federal income tax benefit	1,983	1,947	1,374
Domestic production deduction	(1,142)	(1,661)	(826)
Income tax credits	(724)	(395)	(343)
Other expenses	121	224	622
Total income tax expense (benefit)	$ 18,916	$ 20,026	$ 13,155

XML

Summary of Long Term Debt (Parenthetical) (Detail) (USD $) In Millions, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013
Debt Instrument [Line Items]
Senior secured credit facility term	5 years
Senior secured credit facility, maturity date	June 17, 2018
Term Loan | Maximum
Debt Instrument [Line Items]
Accordion feature	$ 100
Revolving Credit Facility
Debt Instrument [Line Items]
Senior secured credit facility	$ 200

XML

Research and Development - Additional Information (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Schedule Of Research And Development [Line Items]
Research and development expenses	$ 21,644	$ 20,750	$ 18,041
Costs and Expenses
Schedule Of Research And Development [Line Items]
Research and development expenses	$ 8,604	$ 7,648	$ 6,555

XML

Components of Income (Loss) before Provision Benefit (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Schedule of Income Before Income Tax [Line Items]
Domestic	$ 46,520	$ 53,361	$ 33,399
Foreign	7,314	3,491	1,824
Income (loss) before income taxes total	$ 53,834	$ 56,852	$ 35,223

XML

Equity Method Investment - Additional Information (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	1 Months Ended	12 Months Ended
	Mar. 25, 2013	Dec. 31, 2013
Equity Method Investments [Line Items]
Equity investment	$ 3,687	$ 3,687
Equity investment ownership position		29.27%
Loss from equity method investment		986
Carrying value of equity investment		2,701
Quoted market value of equity investment		$ 4,073

XML

Summary of Long Term Debt (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2013		Dec. 31, 2012
Debt Instrument [Line Items]
Long term debt	$ 51,745		$ 52,443
Less current installments	(69)		(16,247)
Total debt	51,676		36,196
Term Loan
Debt Instrument [Line Items]
Long term debt			46,000
Less current installments			(10,000)
Total debt			36,000
Revolving line of credit
Debt Instrument [Line Items]
Long term debt	51,550	[1]
Total debt	51,550
Notes payable
Debt Instrument [Line Items]
Long term debt	195		6,443
Less current installments	(69)		(6,247)
Total debt	$ 126		$ 196

[1] On June 17, 2013, AMVAC Chemical Corporation ("AMVAC"), our principal operating subsidiary, as borrower, and affiliates (including the Company), as guarantors and/or borrowers, entered into a Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement (the "New Credit Agreement") with a group of commercial lenders led by Bank of the West (AMVAC's primary bank) as agent, swing line lender and L/C issuer. The New Credit Agreement supersedes the Amended and Restated Credit Agreement ("First Amendment") dated as of January 10, 2011. The New Credit Agreement is a senior secured lending facility with a five year term and consists of a revolving line of credit of $200 million and an accordion feature for up to $100 million. The new facility includes both AMVAC CV and AMVAC BV (both Dutch subsidiaries) as borrowers. In connection with AMVAC's entering into the New Credit Agreement, all outstanding indebtedness under the First Amendment was rolled over into the New Credit Agreement, and term loans were converted into revolving debt. Under the New Credit Agreement, revolving loans bear interest at a variable rate based, at borrower's election with proper notice, on either (i) LIBOR plus the "Applicable Rate" which is based upon the Consolidated Funded Debt Ratio ("Eurocurrency Rate Loan") or (ii) the greater of (x) the Prime Rate, (y) the Federal Funds Rate plus 0.5%, and (z) the Daily One-Month LIBOR Rate plus 1.00%, plus, in the case of (x), (y) or (z) the Applicable Rate ("Alternate Base Rate Loan"). Interest payments for Eurocurrency Rate Loans are payable on the last day of each interest period (either one, two, three or six months, as selected by the borrower) and the maturity date, while interest payments for Alternate Base Rate Loans are payable on the last business day of each month and the maturity date. The senior secured revolving line of credit matures on June 17, 2018.

XML

Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Beginning Balance, Annual Activity and Ending Balance of each Component of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income

The following table lists the beginning balance, annual activity and ending balance of each component of accumulated other comprehensive income:

	Interest Rate Swap			FX Translation			Total
Balance, December 31, 2010	$	(17	)	$	(431	)	$	(448	)
Other comprehensive income/(loss) before reclassifications		(2,005	)		(933	)		(2,938	)
Amounts reclassified from AOCI		571			—			571
Tax effect		565			—			565
Balance, December 31, 2011		(886	)		(1,364	)		(2,250	)
Other comprehensive income/(loss) before reclassifications		(472	)		330			(142	)
Amounts reclassified from AOCI		721			—			721
Tax effect		(91	)		—			(91	)
Balance, December 31, 2012		(728	)		(1,034	)		(1,762	)
Other comprehensive income/(loss) before reclassifications		(75	)		326			251
Amounts reclassified from AOCI		712			—			712
Tax effect		(249	)		—			(249	)
Balance, December 31, 2013	$	(340	)	$	(708	)	$	(1,048	)

XML

Schedule of Quarterly Data (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, except Per Share data, unless otherwise specified	3 Months Ended								12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Sep. 30, 2013	Jun. 30, 2013	Mar. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Sep. 30, 2012	Jun. 30, 2012	Mar. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Effect of Fourth Quarter Events [Line Items]
Net sales	$ 75,522	$ 97,201	$ 86,761	$ 121,537	$ 104,262	$ 89,836	$ 84,837	$ 87,255	$ 381,021	$ 366,190	$ 301,080
Gross profit	32,341	43,159	42,066	53,781	45,776	39,625	38,346	37,378	171,347	161,125	123,068
Net income attributable to American Vanguard	278	8,870	8,386	16,915					34,449	36,867	22,068
Net income					$ 11,313	$ 8,076	$ 8,744	$ 8,734	$ 33,932	$ 36,826	$ 22,068
Basic net income per share	$ 0.01	$ 0.32	$ 0.29	$ 0.60	$ 0.40	$ 0.29	$ 0.31	$ 0.32	$ 1.22	$ 1.32	$ 0.80
Diluted net income per share	$ 0.01	$ 0.30	$ 0.29	$ 0.59	$ 0.39	$ 0.28	$ 0.30	$ 0.31	$ 1.19	$ 1.28	$ 0.79

XML

Summary of Stock Options Summarized by Exercise Price (Detail) (USD $)					12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011	Dec. 31, 2010	Dec. 31, 2013 Incentive Stock Option Plan	Dec. 31, 2012 Incentive Stock Option Plan	Dec. 31, 2013 Incentive Stock Option Plan Range One	Dec. 31, 2013 Incentive Stock Option Plan Range Two
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Options exercised, Lower Range							$ 7.50	$ 11.32
Options exercised, Upper Range								$ 14.75
Outstanding Weighted Average, Shares					561,029	705,345	534,350	26,679
Outstanding Weighted Average, Remaining Life (Months)					83 months	91 months	83 months	80 months
Outstanding Weighted Average, Exercise Price	$ 7.76	$ 7.70	$ 7.44	$ 7.65	$ 7.76	$ 7.70	$ 7.50	$ 12.90
Exercisable Weighted Average, Shares					554,362	179,345	534,350	20,012
Exercisable Weighted Average, Exercise Price	$ 7.70	$ 7.95	$ 7.26	$ 7.77	$ 7.70	$ 7.95	$ 7.50	$ 13.10

XML

Gross Unrecognized Tax Liabilities (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013
Income Tax Contingency [Line Items]
Beginning Balance	$ 282
Additions for tax positions related to the current year	1,290
Additions for tax positions related to the prior year	161
Deletion for tax positions related to the prior year	(41)
Ending Balance	$ 1,692

XML

Status Summary of Non-Vested Shares (Detail) (Performance Shares, USD $)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013
Performance Shares
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Number of Shares, Granted	24,637
Number of Shares, Vested
Number of Shares, Forfeited
Number of Shares, Ending Balance	24,637
Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair Value, Granted	$ 28.43
Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair Value, Vested
Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair Value, Forfeited
Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair Value, Ending balance	$ 28.43

XML

Beginning Balance, Annual Activity and Ending Balance of each Component of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) [Line Items]
Beginning Balance	$ (1,762)	$ (2,250)	$ (448)
Other comprehensive income/(loss) before reclassifications	251	(142)	(2,938)
Amounts reclassified from AOCI	712	721	571
Tax effect	(249)	(91)	565
Ending Balance	(1,048)	(1,762)	(2,250)
Accumulated Translation Adjustment
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) [Line Items]
Beginning Balance	(1,034)	(1,364)	(431)
Other comprehensive income/(loss) before reclassifications	326	330	(933)
Ending Balance	(708)	(1,034)	(1,364)
Interest Rate Swap
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) [Line Items]
Beginning Balance	(728)	(886)	(17)
Other comprehensive income/(loss) before reclassifications	(75)	(472)	(2,005)
Amounts reclassified from AOCI	712	721	571
Tax effect	(249)	(91)	565
Ending Balance	$ (340)	$ (728)	$ (886)

XML

Stock Options - Additional Information (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, except Share data, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Incentive Stock Option Plans, Options granted			20,000
Number of shares received upon exercise of stock options		49,638
Value of shares received upon exercise of stock options		$ 1,651
Incentive Stock Option Plan
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Potential number of common stock issued under company's ISOP	4,296,000
Option Exercisable Maximum Period	10 years
Option Exercise Price as Percentage of Fair Value of Common Stock	10.00%
Option exercise price as percentage of fair value of common stock	110.00%
Total intrinsic value of options exercised	2,365	15,910	4
Cash received from stock option exercised	946	2,996	414
Incentive Stock Option Plan | Minimum
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Stock option granted vesting period	3 years
Incentive Stock Option Plan | Maximum
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Stock option granted vesting period	5 years
Incentive Stock Options
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Incentive Stock Option Plans, Options granted	0	0	20,000
Vesting Description			One third of the total option shares
Restricted Stock
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair Value, Granted	$ 30.91
Number of forfeited common stock that is granted	11,999
Number of Shares, Granted	162,336
Nonvested unamortized stock-based compensation expense, contractual term	1 year 10 months 24 days
Restricted Stock | Common Stock
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Stock option granted vesting period	3 years	3 years	3 years
Number of common and restricted stock issued to employees and non-executive board members	162,336	248,536	35,640
The total fair value recognized over the related service periods	5,018	5,346	411
Number of forfeited common stock that is granted	11,999	1,367	5,556
Restricted Stock | Minimum | Common Stock
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair Value, Granted	$ 23.43	$ 13.34	$ 11.26
Restricted Stock | Maximum | Common Stock
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair Value, Granted	$ 31.83	$ 34.04	$ 12.89
Performance Shares
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair Value, Granted	$ 28.43
Number of forfeited common stock that is granted
Number of Shares, Granted	24,637
Number of years of service before vesting	3 years
Targeted performance percentage	200.00%
Stock-based compensation expense	90
Unamortized stock-based compensation expense	$ 564
Nonvested unamortized stock-based compensation expense, contractual term	2 years 4 months 24 days
Performance Shares | Performance based shares based upon net income and net sales for the period commencing April 1, 2013 and ending December 31, 2015
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair Value, Granted	$ 30.13
Percentage of shares vesting based on Performance	80.00%
Performance Shares | Performance based shares based upon AVD stock price appreciation over the course of the period commencing June 6, 2013 and ending on December 31, 2015
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair Value, Granted	$ 15.31
Percentage of shares vesting based on Performance	20.00%

XML

Description of Business, Basis of Consolidation and Significant Accounting Policies (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Summary of Business Sales and Gross Profit Information

Based on similar economic and operational characteristics, the Company’s business is aggregated into one reportable segment. Selective enterprise information is as follows:

	2013		2012		2011
Net sales:
Insecticides	$	193,623	$	194,060	$	137,460
Herbicides/soil fumigants/fungicides		121,042		89,899		90,782
Other, including plant growth regulators		31,849		45,581		43,826
Total crop		346,514		329,540		272,068
Non-crop		34,507		36,650		29,012
	$	381,021	$	366,190	$	301,080
Gross profit:
Crop	$	155,275	$	142,019	$	110,348
Non-crop		16,072		19,106		12,720
	$	171,347	$	161,125	$	123,068

Summary of Operating Expense

Operating expenses include cost centers for Selling, General and Administrative, Research and Product Development, Regulatory/Registration, Freight, Delivery and Warehousing.

	2013		2012		2011
Selling	$	32,929	$	25,869	$	23,318
General and administrative		33,536		29,715		21,429
Research, product development and regulatory		21,644		20,750		18,041
Freight, delivery and warehousing		27,503		25,468		21,054
	$	115,612	$	101,802	$	83,842

Components of Inventories

The components of inventories consist of the following:

	2013		2012
Finished products	$	126,872	$	74,900
Raw materials	$	12,958		13,051
	$	139,830	$	87,951

Impact of Derivatives on Statement of Operations

The following tables illustrate the impact of derivatives on the Company’s statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2013.

The Effect of Derivative Instruments on the Statement of Financial Performance For the Period Ended December 31
Derivatives in ASC 815 Cash Flow	Amount of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in OCI on Derivative (Effective Portion)						Location of Gain or (Loss) Reclassified from Accumulated OCI into Income		Amount of Gain or (Loss) Reclassified from Accumulated OCI into Income (Effective Portion)						Location of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivative		Amount of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivative (Ineffective Portion)
Hedging Relationships	2013			2012			(Effective Portion)		2013			2012			(Ineffective Portion)		2013			2012
Interest rate contracts	$	(75	)	$	(472	)		Interest expense	$	(712	)	$	(721	)		Interest expense	$	(1	)	$	(1	)
Total	$	(75	)	$	(472	)			$	(712	)	$	(721	)			$	(1	)	$	(1	)

Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments	Location of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Income on	Amount of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivative
under ASC 815	Derivative	2013		2012
Foreign exchange contracts	Other income/(expense)	$	—	$	(160	)
Total		$	—	$	(160	)

Derivative Liabilities Recognized In Current Installments of Other Liabilities in Consolidated Balance Sheets

The gross amount of derivative liabilities is equal to the net amount recognized in current installments of other liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets, as shown in the below table:

									Gross Amounts Not Offset in the Statement of Financial Position
Description	Gross Amounts of Recognized Liabilities			Gross Amounts Offset in the Statement of Financial Position		Net Amounts of Liabilities Presented in the Statement of Financial Position			Financial Instruments		Cash Collateral Pledged		Net Amount
Derivatives by counterparty:
Bank of the West	$	(564	)	$	—	$	(564	)	$	—	$	—	$	(564	)
Total	$	(564	)	$	—	$	(564	)	$	—	$	—	$	(564	)

Foreign Currency Derivatives to Hedge Foreign Currency Balances Measured at Fair Value

	Fair Value Measurements Using Input Type
	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3
As of December 31, 2013:
Liability:
Interest rate derivative financial instruments (1)	$	—	$	564	$	—
Foreign currency derivative financial instrument	$	—	$	—	$	—
As of December 31, 2012:
Liability:
Interest rate derivative financial instruments (1)	$	—	$	1,201	$	—
Foreign currency derivative financial instrument	$	—	$	160	$	—

(1) Includes accrued interest expense.

Components of Basic and Diluted Earnings per Share

The components of basic and diluted earnings per share were as follows:

	2013		2012		2011
Numerator:
Net income attributable to American Vanguard	$	34,449	$	36,867	$	22,068
Denominator:
Weighted average shares outstanding—basic		28,301		27,914		27,559
Dilutive effect of stock options and grants		598		842		316
		28,899		28,756		27,875

Summary of Value Option Grants Using Weighted Average Assumptions

The Company uses the Black-Scholes option-pricing model (“Black-Scholes model”) to value option grants using the following weighted average assumptions:

	2011
Risk free interest rate		2.26	%
Dividend yield		0.05	%
Volatility factor		55.31	%
Weighted average life (years)		6.0 years

XML

Amount of Outstanding Debt and Notional Amount on Interest Rate Swap Contract (Detail) (Interest Rate Swap, USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Interest Rate Swap
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities Disclosures [Line Items]
Outstanding Variable Rate Debt	$ 51,550	$ 46,000	$ 54,000
Notional Amount on Interest Rate Swap	$ 36,750	$ 44,250	$ 45,000

XML

Cash Flow Hedge Related to Variable Debt Instrument and Outstanding Foreign Currency Derivatives to Hedge Foreign Currency Balances Measured at Fair Value on Recurring Basis, and Balances (Detail) (Fair Value, Measurements, Recurring, Cash Flow Hedging, Level 2, USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2013		Dec. 31, 2012
Fair Value, Measurements, Recurring | Cash Flow Hedging | Level 2
Liability:
Interest rate derivative financial instruments	$ 564	[1]	$ 1,201	[1]
Foreign currency derivative financial instrument			$ 160

[1] Includes accrued interest expense.

XML

Summary of Non-Vested Shares (Detail) (Restricted Stock, USD $)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013
Restricted Stock
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Number of Shares, Beginning balance	245,817
Number of Shares, Granted	162,336
Number of Shares, Vested	(19,452)
Number of Shares, Forfeited	(11,999)
Number of Shares, Ending Balance	376,702
Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair Value, Beginning balance	$ 20.23
Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair Value, Granted	$ 30.91
Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair Value, Vested	$ 18.38
Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair Value, Forfeited	$ 22.75
Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair Value, Ending balance	$ 24.85

XML

Summary of Operating Expense (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Components of Other Income (Expense) [Line Items]
Selling	$ 32,929	$ 25,869	$ 23,318
General and administrative	33,536	29,715	21,429
Research, product development and regulatory	21,644	20,750	18,041
Freight, delivery and warehousing	27,503	25,468	21,054
Operating expenses	$ 115,612	$ 101,802	$ 83,842

XML

Components of Income Tax Expense (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Current:
Federal	$ 12,285	$ 17,448	$ 6,070
State	3,007	2,528	1,275
Foreign	1,101	1,027	535
Deferred:
Federal	2,213	(590)	4,691
State	310	(387)	584
Total income tax expense (benefit)	$ 18,916	$ 20,026	$ 13,155

XML

Schedule of Company's Obligations Under Product Acquisitions and Licensing Agreements (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Business Acquisition, Contingent Consideration [Line Items]
Beginning Balance	$ 11,900	$ 17,624	$ 12,822
Additional obligations acquired		1,073	216
Addition of deferred liabilities			6,802
Adjustment to deferred liabilities	(294)	(216)	(2,857)
FX impact	(1)	48	101
Amortization of discounted liabilities	171	818	1,341
Payments on existing obligations	(7,890)	(7,447)	(801)
Ending Balance	$ 3,886	$ 11,900	$ 17,624

XML

Summary of Worldwide Export Sales (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Segment Reporting Information [Line Items]
Worldwide Export Sales	$ 69,772	$ 69,909	$ 63,454
Mexico
Segment Reporting Information [Line Items]
Worldwide Export Sales	15,661	17,980	16,616
Central & South America
Segment Reporting Information [Line Items]
Worldwide Export Sales	15,491	16,374	11,991
Europe
Segment Reporting Information [Line Items]
Worldwide Export Sales	12,942	9,744	5,931
Asia
Segment Reporting Information [Line Items]
Worldwide Export Sales	8,129	7,308	8,469
Africa
Segment Reporting Information [Line Items]
Worldwide Export Sales	8,322	7,229	8,234
Australia
Segment Reporting Information [Line Items]
Worldwide Export Sales	2,692	4,444	3,395
Canada
Segment Reporting Information [Line Items]
Worldwide Export Sales	3,976	4,320	4,270
Middle East
Segment Reporting Information [Line Items]
Worldwide Export Sales	2,500	2,495	3,876
Other
Segment Reporting Information [Line Items]
Worldwide Export Sales	$ 59	$ 15	$ 672

XML

Principal Payments on Long-Term Debt (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Debt Instrument [Line Items]
2014	$ 69
2015	71
2016	55
2017
2018	51,550
Total indebtedness	$ 51,745	$ 52,443

XML

Description of Business, Basis of Consolidation and Significant Accounting Policies

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Description of Business, Basis of Consolidation and Significant Accounting Policies

Description of Business, Basis of Consolidation and Significant Accounting Policies

American Vanguard Corporation (the “Company”) is primarily a specialty chemical manufacturer that develops and markets safe and effective products for agricultural, commercial and consumer uses. The Company manufactures and formulates chemicals for crops, human and animal protection. The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company, its wholly-owned subsidiaries and Envance, its majority owned subsidiary. All significant intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. The Company operates within a single operating segment.

Based on similar economic and operational characteristics, the Company’s business is aggregated into one reportable segment. Selective enterprise information is as follows:

	2013		2012		2011
Net sales:
Insecticides	$	193,623	$	194,060	$	137,460
Herbicides/soil fumigants/fungicides		121,042		89,899		90,782
Other, including plant growth regulators		31,849		45,581		43,826
Total crop		346,514		329,540		272,068
Non-crop		34,507		36,650		29,012
	$	381,021	$	366,190	$	301,080
Gross profit:
Crop	$	155,275	$	142,019	$	110,348
Non-crop		16,072		19,106		12,720
	$	171,347	$	161,125	$	123,068

Due to elements inherent to the Company’s business, such as differing and unpredictable weather patterns, crop growing cycles, changes in product mix of sales and ordering patterns that may vary in timing, measuring the Company’s performance on a quarterly basis (gross profit margins on a quarterly basis may vary significantly) even when such comparisons are favorable, is not as good an indicator as full-year comparisons.

Cost of Sales—In addition to normal cost centers (i.e., direct labor, raw materials) included in cost of sales, the Company also includes such cost centers as Health and Safety, Environmental, Maintenance and Quality Control in cost of sales.

Other Than Cost of Sales—Operating Expenses—Operating expenses include cost centers for Selling, General and Administrative, Research and Product Development, Regulatory/Registration, Freight, Delivery and Warehousing.

	2013		2012		2011
Selling	$	32,929	$	25,869	$	23,318
General and administrative		33,536		29,715		21,429
Research, product development and regulatory		21,644		20,750		18,041
Freight, delivery and warehousing		27,503		25,468		21,054
	$	115,612	$	101,802	$	83,842

Freight, Delivery and Warehousing Expense—Freight, delivery and warehousing costs incurred by the Company are reported as operating expenses.

Advertising Expense—The Company expenses advertising costs in the period invoiced. Advertising expenses, which include promotional costs, are recognized in operating costs (specifically in selling expenses) in the consolidated statements of operations and were $4,011 in 2013, $2,680 in 2012 and $2,095 in 2011.

Inventories—The Company values its inventories at lower of cost or market. Cost is determined by the first-in, first-out (“FIFO”) method, including material, labor, factory overhead and subcontracting services. The Company writes down and makes adjustments to its inventory carrying values as a result of the effects of unutilized capacity, net realizable value assessments of slow moving and obsolete inventory and other annual adjustments to ensure that our standard costs continue to closely reflect manufacturing cost.

The components of inventories consist of the following:

	2013		2012
Finished products	$	126,872	$	74,900
Raw materials	$	12,958		13,051
	$	139,830	$	87,951

Revenue Recognition and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts—Revenue from sales is recognized at the time title and the risks of ownership pass. This is when the customer has made the fixed commitment to purchase the goods, the products are shipped per the customer’s instructions, the sales price is fixed and determinable, and collection is reasonably assured. The Company has in place procedures to ensure that revenue is recognized when earned. The procedures are subject to management’s review and from time to time certain sales are excluded until it is clear that the title has passed and there is no further recourse to the Company. Allowance for doubtful accounts is established based on estimates of losses related to customer receivable balances. Estimates are developed using either standard quantitative measures based on historical losses, adjusted for current economic conditions or by evaluating specific customer accounts for risk of loss.

Accrued Program Costs—In accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 605, the Company classifies certain payments to its customers as a reduction of sales revenues. The Company describes these payments as “Programs.” Programs are a critical part of doing business in the agricultural chemicals business market place. For accounting purposes, programs are recorded as a reduction in gross sales and include market pricing adjustments, volume take up or other key performance indicator, driven payments made to distributors, retailers or growers at the end of a growing season. Each quarter management compares each sale transaction with published programs to determine what program liability has been incurred. Once this initial calculation is made for the specific quarter, sales and marketing management along with executive and financial management review the accumulated program balance and make assessments of whether or not customers are tracking in a manner that indicates that they will meet the requirements set out in the terms and conditions attached to each program. If management believes that customers are falling short of their annual goals then periodic adjustments will be made to the accumulated accrual to properly reflect the Company’s best estimate of the liability at the balance sheet date. The majority of adjustments are made at the end of the crop season, at which time customer performance can be fully assessed. Programs are paid out predominantly on an annual basis, usually in the final quarter of the financial year or the first quarter of the following year.

Long-lived Assets—The carrying value of long-lived assets is reviewed for impairment quarterly and/or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of such assets may not be recoverable. Measurement of the impairment loss is based on the fair value of the asset. Generally, the fair value will be determined using valuation techniques such as the present value of expected future cash flows. There was no impairment of long-lived assets in 2013 or 2012.

Property, Plant and Equipment and Depreciation—Property, plant and equipment includes the cost of land, buildings, machinery and equipment, office furniture and fixtures, automobiles, construction projects and significant improvements to existing plant and equipment. Interest costs related to significant construction projects are capitalized at the Company’s current weighted effective interest rate. Expenditures for maintenance and minor repairs are expensed as incurred. When property or equipment is sold or otherwise disposed of, the related cost and accumulated depreciation is removed from the respective accounts, and the gain or loss realized on disposition is reflected in earnings. All plant and equipment is depreciated using the straight-line method, utilizing the estimated useful property lives. Building lives range from 10 to 30 years; machinery and equipment lives range from 3 to 15 years; office furniture and fixture lives range from 3 to 10 years; automobile lives range from 3 to 6 years; construction projects and significant improvements to existing plant and equipment lives range from 3 to 15 years when placed in service. The agricultural chemicals business involves complex manufacturing processes that drive high capital cost plant.

Foreign Currency Translation—Assets and liabilities of foreign subsidiaries, where the local currency is the functional currency, have been translated at period end exchange rates, and profit and loss accounts have been translated using weighted average yearly exchange rates. Adjustments resulting from translation have been recorded in the equity section of the balance sheet as cumulative translation adjustments in other comprehensive income (loss). The effects of foreign currency exchange gains and losses on transactions that are denominated in currencies other than the entity’s functional currency are remeasured to the functional currency using the end of the period exchange rates. The effects of remeasurement related to foreign currency transactions are included in current profit and loss accounts.

Derivative financial instruments and hedge activities—In accordance with FASB ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging, the Company recognizes all derivative instruments as either other assets or other liabilities at fair value on the balance sheet. In accordance with the hierarchy contained in FASB ASC 820, Fair Value Measurements, the Company calculated fair value using observable inputs other than Level 1 quoted prices (Level 2). During 2011, the Company entered into a Euro exchange forward contract in the amount of €4,500 for Euro-denominated liabilities that was settled in January 2013. These transactions were accounted for in accordance with the ASC 815, as non-designated hedges. During the period that the Company held the forward contract, the fair value was recorded in the Balance Sheet, with the change in value recorded in earnings, and generally offset by the gains and losses associated with the underlying foreign-currency-denominated balances, which were also reported in earnings.

At December 31, 2013, the Company had in place one interest rate swap contract with an amortizing notional amount of $36,750 that is accounted for under FASB ASC 815 as a cash flow hedge. The effective portion of the gains or losses on the interest rate swap are reported as a component of other comprehensive income and reclassified into earnings in the same period or periods during which the hedged transactions affect earnings. Amounts in other comprehensive income expected to be reclassified to earnings in the coming 12 months are $(564). Amounts recorded in earnings for hedge ineffectiveness for the period ending December 2013 were immaterial.

The following tables illustrate the impact of derivatives on the Company’s statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2013.

The Effect of Derivative Instruments on the Statement of Financial Performance For the Period Ended December 31
Derivatives in ASC 815 Cash Flow	Amount of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in OCI on Derivative (Effective Portion)						Location of Gain or (Loss) Reclassified from Accumulated OCI into Income		Amount of Gain or (Loss) Reclassified from Accumulated OCI into Income (Effective Portion)						Location of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivative		Amount of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivative (Ineffective Portion)
Hedging Relationships	2013			2012			(Effective Portion)		2013			2012			(Ineffective Portion)		2013			2012
Interest rate contracts	$	(75	)	$	(472	)		Interest expense	$	(712	)	$	(721	)		Interest expense	$	(1	)	$	(1	)
Total	$	(75	)	$	(472	)			$	(712	)	$	(721	)			$	(1	)	$	(1	)

Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments	Location of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Income on	Amount of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivative
under ASC 815	Derivative	2013		2012
Foreign exchange contracts	Other income/(expense)	$	—	$	(160	)
Total		$	—	$	(160	)

The counterparty to the Company’s interest rate derivative financial instrument is Bank of the West, the Company’s primary bank. Pledged cash collateral is not required under the interest rate swap contract. At December 31, 2013, the Company did not hold any other derivative financial instruments. As a result, there occurs no offsetting of derivative liabilities in the Company’s financial statements. The gross amount of derivative liabilities is equal to the net amount recognized in current installments of other liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets, as shown in the below table:

									Gross Amounts Not Offset in the Statement of Financial Position
Description	Gross Amounts of Recognized Liabilities			Gross Amounts Offset in the Statement of Financial Position		Net Amounts of Liabilities Presented in the Statement of Financial Position			Financial Instruments		Cash Collateral Pledged		Net Amount
Derivatives by counterparty:
Bank of the West	$	(564	)	$	—	$	(564	)	$	—	$	—	$	(564	)
Total	$	(564	)	$	—	$	(564	)	$	—	$	—	$	(564	)

Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets—The primary identifiable intangible assets of the Company relate to assets associated with its product acquisitions. The Company adopted the provisions of FASB ASC 350, under which identifiable intangibles with finite lives are amortized and those with indefinite lives are not amortized. The estimated useful life of an identifiable intangible asset to the Company is based upon a number of factors including the effects of demand, competition, and expected changes in the marketability of the Company’s products. The Company re-evaluates whether these intangible assets are impaired on an annual basis, relying on a number of factors including operating results, business plans and future cash flows. Identifiable intangible assets that are subject to amortization are evaluated for impairment using a process similar to that used to evaluate elements of property. The impairment test for identifiable intangible assets not subject to amortization consists of either a qualitative assessment or a comparison of the fair value of the intangible asset with its carrying amount. An impairment loss, if any, is recognized for the amount by which the carrying value exceeds the fair value of the asset. Fair value is typically estimated using a discounted cash flow analysis, which requires the Company to estimate the future cash flows anticipated to be generated by the particular asset(s) being tested for impairment as well as selecting a discount rate to measure the present value of the anticipated cash flows. When determining future cash flow estimates, the Company considers historical results adjusted to reflect current and anticipated operating conditions. Estimating future cash flows requires significant judgment by the Company, in such areas as: future economic conditions, industry-specific conditions, product pricing and necessary capital expenditures. The use of different assumptions or estimates for future cash flows could produce different impairment amounts (or none at all) for long-lived assets, goodwill and identifiable intangible assets. The Company has performed an impairment review for the years ending December 31, 2013 and 2012, and there were no impairment losses recorded.

Fair Value of Equity Investment—The Company utilizes the equity method of accounting with respect to its investment in TyraTech Inc. (“TyraTech”), a Delaware corporation that specializes in developing, marketing and selling pesticide products containing essential oils and other natural ingredients. At December 31, 2013, the carrying value of the Company’s investment in TyraTech was $2,701 and the quoted market value based on TyraTech’s share price (Level 1 input) was $4,073. The Company’s equity investment is included in other assets on the balance sheet.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments—The carrying values of cash, receivables and accounts payable approximate their fair values because of the short maturity of these instruments. The fair value of the Company’s long-term debt and note payable to our lender group is estimated based on the quoted market prices for the same or similar issues or on the current rates offered to the Company for debt of the same remaining maturities. Such fair value approximates the respective carrying values of the Company’s long-term debt and note payable to bank.

The Company measures fair value based on the prices that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Fair value measurements are based on a three-tier hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value. These tiers include the following:

Level 1: Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that are accessible at the measurement date. The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to Level 1 inputs.

Level 2: Observable prices that are based on inputs not quoted on active markets, but corroborated by market data. These inputs include quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; quoted market prices in markets that are not active; or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities.

Level 3: Unobservable inputs are used when little or no market data is available. The fair value hierarchy gives the lowest priority to Level 3 inputs.

In determining fair value, the Company utilizes valuation techniques that maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs to the extent possible, as well as considering counterparty credit risk in the assessment of fair value.

	Fair Value Measurements Using Input Type
	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3
As of December 31, 2013:
Liability:
Interest rate derivative financial instruments (1)	$	—	$	564	$	—
Foreign currency derivative financial instrument	$	—	$	—	$	—
As of December 31, 2012:
Liability:
Interest rate derivative financial instruments (1)	$	—	$	1,201	$	—
Foreign currency derivative financial instrument	$	—	$	160	$	—

(1) Includes accrued interest expense.

Income Taxes—The Company utilizes the liability method of accounting for income taxes as set forth in ASC 740. Under the liability method, deferred taxes are determined based on the temporary differences between the financial statement and tax basis of assets and liabilities using tax rates expected to be in effect during the years in which the basis differences reverse. A valuation allowance is recorded when it is more likely than not that some of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. In determining the need for valuation allowances, the Company considers projected future taxable income and the availability of tax planning strategies. If in the future the Company determines that it would not be able to realize its recorded deferred tax assets, an increase in the valuation allowance would be recorded, decreasing earnings in the period in which such determination is made.

The Company assesses its income tax positions and records tax benefits for all years subject to examination based upon the Company’s evaluation of the facts, circumstances and information available at the reporting date. For those tax positions where there is greater than 50% likelihood that a tax benefit will be sustained, the Company has recorded the largest amount of tax benefit that may potentially be realized upon ultimate settlement with a taxing authority that has full knowledge of all relevant information. For those income tax positions where there is less than 50% likelihood that a tax benefit will be sustained, no tax benefit has been recognized in the financial statements.

Per Share Information—FASB ASC 260, requires dual presentation of basic earnings per share (“EPS”) and diluted EPS on the face of all income statements. Basic EPS is computed as net income divided by the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period. Diluted EPS reflects potential dilution that could occur if securities or other contracts, which, for the Company, consists of options to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock, are exercised as calculated using the treasury stock method.

The components of basic and diluted earnings per share were as follows:

	2013		2012		2011
Numerator:
Net income attributable to American Vanguard	$	34,449	$	36,867	$	22,068
Denominator:
Weighted average shares outstanding—basic		28,301		27,914		27,559
Dilutive effect of stock options and grants		598		842		316
		28,899		28,756		27,875

Accounting Estimates—The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S. GAAP”) requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues, and expenses at the date that the financial statements are prepared. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Reclassifications—Certain prior year’s amounts have been reclassified to conform to the current year’s presentation.

Total comprehensive income—In addition to net income, total comprehensive income includes changes in equity that are excluded from the consolidated statements of operations and are recorded directly into a separate section of stockholders’ equity on the consolidated balance sheets. For the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, total comprehensive income consisted of net income attributable to American Vanguard, the change in fair value of interest rate swaps and foreign currency translation adjustments.

Stock-Based Compensation—The Company accounts for stock-based awards to employees and directors using FASB ASC 718. When applying the provisions of FASB ASC 718, the Company also applies the provisions of Staff Accounting Bulletin (“SAB”) No. 107 and SAB No. 110.

FASB ASC 718 requires companies to estimate the fair value of share-based payment awards on the date of grant. The value of the portion of the award that is ultimately expected to vest is recognized as expense over the requisite service periods in the Company’s Consolidated Statement of Operations.

Stock-based compensation expense recognized during the period is based on the fair value of the portion of share-based payment awards that is ultimately expected to vest during the period. Stock-based compensation expense recognized is reduced for forfeitures as required by FASB ASC 718. Estimated forfeitures recognized in the Company’s Consolidated Statement of Operations reduced compensation expense for the year ended December 31, 2013 by $247. The Company estimates that 8% of all restricted stock grants that are currently vesting will be forfeited. The Company estimates that 28.6% of the performance based shares that are currently vesting will be forfeited. The Company estimates that 0.8% of all stock option grants that are currently vesting will be forfeited. These estimates are reviewed quarterly and revised as necessary.

As of December 31, 2013, the Company had approximately $21 of unamortized stock-based compensation expenses related to unvested options, which will be recognized over the weighted-average period of 0.5 years. As of December 31, 2013, the Company had approximately $5,550 of unamortized stock-based compensation expenses related to unvested restricted stock, which will be recognized over the weighted-average period of 1.9 years. As of December 31, 2013, the Company had approximately $564 of unamortized stock-based compensation expenses related to unvested performance based stock, which will be recognized over the weighted-average period of 2.4 years. This projected expense will change if any stock options and restricted stock are granted or cancelled prior to the respective reporting periods or if there are any changes required to be made for estimated forfeitures.

The Company uses the Black-Scholes option-pricing model (“Black-Scholes model”) to value option grants using the following weighted average assumptions:

	2011
Risk free interest rate		2.26	%
Dividend yield		0.05	%
Volatility factor		55.31	%
Weighted average life (years)		6.0 years

There were no option shares granted during 2013 and 2012. The weighted average grant-date fair values of options granted during 2011 was $6.62.

The expected volatility and expected life assumptions are highly complex and use subjective variables. The variables take into consideration, among other things, actual and projected employee stock option exercise behavior. The Company estimates expected term using the “safe harbor” provisions of SAB 107 and SAB 110. The Company used historical volatility as a proxy for estimating expected volatility.

In December 2012, two employees retired, both of whom held options to acquire common stock. At the time of their retirement, options to acquire a total of 13,334 shares of common stock at $7.50 per share were unvested. The Company modified these unvested awards allowing the retiring employees to fully vest. Additionally, the retired employees were given one year to exercise these newly vested awards. At the time of modification, these modified awards were treated as a new grant and their fair value was measured as of the modification date using the Black Scholes model at $23.55 per share, resulting in $314 of additional stock-based compensation expense being recognized in 2012.

The Company values restricted stock grants using the Company’s traded stock price on the date of grant. The weighted average grant-date fair values of restricted stock grants during 2013, 2012, and 2011 were $30.91, $21.51, and $12.30, respectively.

Recently Issued Accounting Guidance

In February 2013, The Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2013-02, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Reporting of Amounts Reclassified Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income, establishes new requirements for disclosing reclassifications of items out of accumulated other comprehensive income (OCI). Specifically, (1) disclosure is required of the changes in components of accumulated OCI, (2) disclosure is required of the effects on individual line items in net income for each item of accumulated OCI that is reclassified in its entirety to net income, and (3) cross references are required to other disclosures that provide additional details for OCI items that are not reclassified in their entirety to net income. The requirements of ASU 2013-02 apply to all entities (i.e., both public and nonpublic) that report items of OCI in any period presented. ASU 2013-02 is effective prospectively for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2012. The Company adopted this standard effective January 1, 2013.

In October 2012, the FASB issued ASU No. 2012-04, Technical Corrections and Improvements. This update primarily makes amendments to various Codifications to (1) conform the format and writing style of certain guidance carried forward without modification from pre-Codification pronouncements, (2) to correct references and provide clarification through updated language, and (3) to relocate guidance within the Codification to a more appropriate location. In addition, ASU No. 2012-4 conforms the use of the term fair value throughout the Codification to reflect fully the measurement and disclosure requirements of FASB ASC Topic 820, Fair Value Measurement and Disclosures (e.g. to replace the terms “market value” and “mark-to-market” with “fair value” and “subsequently measure at fair value,” respectively). The majority of the amendments do not change the accounting practice. However, where applicable, the Company has applied the updates.

XML

Royalties - Additional Information (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Other Income Expense [Line Items]
Royalty expense	$ 116	$ 38	$ 39

XML

Components of Basic and Diluted Earnings Per Share (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	3 Months Ended				12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Sep. 30, 2013	Jun. 30, 2013	Mar. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Numerator:
Net income attributable to American Vanguard	$ 278	$ 8,870	$ 8,386	$ 16,915	$ 34,449	$ 36,867	$ 22,068
Denominator:
Weighted average shares outstanding-basic					28,301	27,914	27,559
Weighted average shares outstanding-assuming dilution					28,899	28,756	27,875
Stock Options
Denominator:
Dilutive effect of stock options and grants					598	842	316

XML

Major Customers and Export Sales (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Summary of Worldwide Export Sales

Worldwide export sales for 2013, 2012 and 2011 were as follows:

	2013		2012		2011
Mexico	$	15,661	$	17,980	$	16,616
South & Central America		15,491		16,374		11,991
Europe		12,942		9,744		5,931
Asia		8,129		7,308		8,469
Africa		8,322		7,229		8,234
Australia		2,692		4,444		3,395
Canada		3,976		4,320		4,270
Middle East		2,500		2,495		3,876
Other		59		15		672
	$	69,772	$	69,909	$	63,454

XML

Income Taxes (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Components of Income Tax Expense

The components of income tax expense are:

	2013		2012			2011
Current:
Federal	$	12,285	$	17,448		$	6,070
State		3,007		2,528			1,275
Foreign		1,101		1,027			535
Deferred:
Federal		2,213		(590	)		4,691
State		310		(387	)		584
	$	18,916	$	20,026		$	13,155

Total Income Tax Expense Applying U.S.Federal Income Tax Rate

Total income tax expense differed from the amounts computed by applying the U.S. Federal income tax rate of 35.0% to income before income tax expense as a result of the following:

	2013			2012			2011
Computed tax expense at statutory federal rates	$	18,678		$	19,911		$	12,328
Increase (decrease) in taxes resulting from:
State taxes, net of federal income tax benefit		1,983			1,947			1,374
Domestic production deduction		(1,142	)		(1,661	)		(826	)
Income tax credits		(724	)		(395	)		(343	)
Other expenses		121			224			622
	$	18,916		$	20,026		$	13,155

Components of Income before Provision

The components of income before provision for income taxes are as follows:

	2013		2012		2011
Domestic	$	46,520	$	53,361	$	33,399
Foreign		7,314		3,491		1,824
	$	53,834	$	56,852	$	35,223

Deferred Tax Assets and Liability

Temporary differences between the financial statement carrying amounts and tax bases of assets and liabilities that give rise to significant portions of the net deferred tax liability at December 31, 2013 and 2012 relate to the following:

	2013			2012
Current:
Inventories	$	4,398		$	3,490
State income taxes		(331	)		(431	)
Vacation pay accrual		648			354
Accrued bonuses		1,791			2,289
Bad debt		169			192
Prepaid expenses		(1,929	)		(1,490	)
Other		1,775			473
Net deferred tax asset		6,521			4,877
Non-Current:
Plant and equipment, principally due to differences in depreciation and capitalized interest		(25,662	)		(21,993	)
Tax credit		14			73
Fair value adjustment		207			460
Other		2,111			2,297
Net deferred tax liability		(23,330	)		(19,163	)
Total net deferred tax liability	$	(16,809	)	$	(14,286	)

Gross Unrecognized Tax Liabilities

The following is a roll-forward of the Company’s total gross unrecognized tax liabilities, not including interest and penalties, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013:

	Gross Unrecognized Tax Liabilities
Balance at December 31, 2012	$	282
Additions for tax positions related to the current year		1,290
Additions for tax positions related to the prior year		161
Deletion for tax positions related to the prior year		(41	)
Balance at December 31, 2013	$	1,692

XML

Temporary Differences in Financial Statement Carrying Amounts and Tax Bases of Assets and Liabilities (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Deferred Tax Assets And Liabilities [Line Items]
Inventories	$ 4,398	$ 3,490
State income taxes	(331)	(431)
Vacation pay accrual	648	354
Accrued bonuses	1,791	2,289
Bad debt	169	192
Prepaid expenses	(1,929)	(1,490)
Other	1,775	473
Net deferred tax asset	6,521	4,877
Plant and equipment, principally due to differences in depreciation and capitalized interest	(25,662)	(21,993)
Tax credit	14	73
Fair value adjustment	207	460
Other	2,111	2,297
Net deferred tax liability	(23,330)	(19,163)
Total net deferred tax liability	$ (16,809)	$ (14,286)

XML

Summary of Value Option Grants Using Weighted Average Assumptions (Detail)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2011
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Risk free interest rate	2.26%
Dividend yield	0.05%
Volatility factor	55.31%
Weighted average life (years)	6 years

XML

Product Acquisitions (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Schedule of Intangible Assets Recognized in Connection with Product Acquisitions

The following schedule represents intangible assets recognized in connection with product acquisitions (See description of Business, Basis of Consolidation and Significant Accounting Policies for the Company’s accounting policy regarding intangible assets):

	Amount
Intangible assets at December 31, 2010	$	115,249
Acquisitions during fiscal 2011		316
Impact of movement in exchange rates and other adjustments		(161	)
Other adjustments related to deferred liabilities		6,802
Amortization expense		(6,017	)
Intangible assets at December 31, 2011		116,189
Acquisitions during fiscal 2012		3,473
Impact of movement in exchange rates		(118	)
Amortization expense		(6,023	)
Intangible assets at December 31, 2012		113,521
Acquisitions during fiscal 2013		—
Impact of movement in exchange rates		(162	)
Amortization expense		(6,352	)
Intangible assets at December 31, 2013	$	107,007

Schedule of Gross Carrying Amount and Accumulated Amortization of Intangible Assets

The following schedule represents the gross carrying amount and accumulated amortization of the intangible assets. Product rights are amortized over their expected useful lives of 25 years. Customer lists are amortized over their expected useful lives of ten years, and trademarks are amortized over their expected useful lives of 25 years.

	2013						2012
$000’s	Gross		Accumulated Amortization		Net Book Value		Gross		Accumulated Amortization		Net Book Value
Product Rights	$	139,094	$	44,254	$	94,840	$	139,256	$	38,530	$	100,726
Customer Lists		1,091		328		763		1,091		218		873
Trademarks		12,941		1,537		11,404		12,941		1,019		11,922
Total Intangibles	$	153,126	$	46,119	$	107,007	$	153,288	$	39,767	$	113,521

Schedule of Future Amortization Charges Related to Intangible Assets

The following schedule represents future amortization charges related to intangible assets:

Year ending December 31,
2014	$	6,352
2015		6,352
2016		6,352
2017		6,352
2018		6,352
Thereafter		75,247
	$	107,007

Schedule of Company's Obligations under Product Acquisitions and Licensing Agreements

The following schedule represents the Company’s obligations under product acquisitions and licensing agreements:

	Amount
Obligations under acquisition agreements at December 31, 2010		12,822
Additional obligations acquired		216
Addition of deferred liabilities		6,802
Adjustment to deferred liabilities		(2,857	)
FX impact		101
Amortization of discounted liabilities		1,341
Payments on existing obligations		(801	)
Obligations under acquisition agreements at December 31, 2011		17,624
Additional obligations acquired		1,073
Adjustment to deferred liabilities		(216	)
FX impact		48
Amortization of discounted liabilities		818
Payments on existing obligations		(7,447	)
Obligations under acquisition agreements at December 31, 2012		11,900
Additional obligations acquired		—
Adjustment to deferred liabilities		(294	)
FX impact		(1	)
Amortization of discounted liabilities		171
Payments on existing obligations		(7,890	)
Obligations under acquisition agreements at December 31, 2013	$	3,886

XML

Commitments (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Future Minimum Lease Payments Under the Terms of the Leases

Future minimum lease payments under the terms of the leases are as follows:

Year ending December 31,
2014	$	850
2015		868
2016		433
2017		135
2018		135
Thereafter		1,170
	$	3,591

XML

Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

Schedule II-A—Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

Allowance for Doubtful Accounts Receivable (in thousands)

Fiscal Year Ended	Balance at Beginning of Period		Additions Charged to					Deductions		Balance at End of Period
			Costs and Expenses		Other
December 31, 2013	$	623		—	$	(231	)		—	$	392
December 31, 2012	$	340		—	$	283			—	$	623
December 31, 2011	$	447		—	$	(107	)		—	$	340

XML

Stock Options (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Summary of Option Activity

Option activity within each plan is as follows:

	Incentive Stock Option Plans			Non-Statutory Stock Options Plans		Weighted Average Price Per Share		Exercisable Weighted Average Price Per Share
Balance outstanding, December 31, 2010		1,487,331			—	$	7.65	$	7.77
Options granted, range from $11.32-$13.24		20,000			—		12.28
Options exercised, range from $8.10-$11.30		(48,000	)		—		8.63
Options expired		(70,817	)		—		12.38
Balance outstanding, December 31, 2011		1,388,514			—	$	7.44	$	7.26
Options exercised, range from $3.67-$14.99		(659,733	)		—		7.05
Options expired		(23,436	)		—		10.41
Balance outstanding, December 31, 2012		705,345			—	$	7.70	$	7.95
Options exercised, $7.50		(126,149	)		—		7.50
Options expired		(18,167	)		—		7.50
Balance outstanding, December 31, 2013		561,029			—	$	7.76	$	7.70

Summary of Stock Options Summarized by Exercise Price

Information relating to stock options at December 31, 2013 summarized by exercise price is as follows:

	Outstanding Weighted Average						Exercisable Weighted Average
Exercise Price Per Share	Shares		Remaining Life (Months)		Exercise Price		Shares		Exercise Price
Incentive Stock Option Plan:
$7.50		534,350		83	$	7.50		534,350	$	7.50
$11.32-$14.75		26,679		80	$	12.90		20,012	$	13.10
		561,029			$	7.76		554,362	$	7.70

Weighted Average Exercise Prices for Options Granted and Exercisable and Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Life for Options Outstanding

The weighted average exercise prices for options granted and exercisable and the weighted average remaining contractual life for options outstanding as of December 31, 2012 and 2013 was as follows:

	Number of Shares		Weighted Average Exercise Price		Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Life (Months)		Intrinsic Value (thousands)
As of December 31, 2012:
Incentive Stock Option Plans:
Outstanding		705,345	$	7.70		91	$	16,481
Expected to Vest		699,537	$	7.70		91	$	16,345
Exercisable		179,345	$	7.95		78	$	4,147
As of December 31, 2013:
Incentive Stock Option Plans:
Outstanding		561,029	$	7.76		83	$	9,276
Expected to Vest		560,972	$	7.76		83	$	9,275
Exercisable		554,362	$	7.70		83	$	9,196

Summary of Non-Vested Shares

A status summary of non-vested shares as of December 31, 2013, is presented below:

	Number of Shares			Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair Value
Nonvested shares at January 1, 2013		245,817		$	20.23
Granted		162,336		$	30.91
Vested		(19,452	)	$	18.38
Forfeited		(11,999	)	$	22.75
Nonvested shares at December 31, 2013		376,702		$	24.85

Performance Shares

Summary of Non-Vested Shares

A status summary of non-vested shares as of December 31, 2013, is presented below:

	Number of Shares		Weighted Average Grant- Date Fair Value
Nonvested shares at January 1, 2013		—	$	—
Granted		24,637	$	28.43
Vested		—	$	—
Forfeited		—	$	—
Nonvested shares at December 31, 2013		24,637	$	28.43

XML

Impact of Derivatives on Statement of Operations (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Derivative Instruments, Gain (Loss) [Line Items]
Amount of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in OCI on Derivative (Effective Portion)	$ (75)	$ (472)
Amount of Gain or (Loss) Reclassified from Accumulated OCI into Income (Effective Portion)	(712)	(721)
Amount of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivative (Ineffective Portion)	(1)	(1)
Amount of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivative		(160)
Designated as Hedging | Cash Flow Hedging | Interest Rate Contracts
Derivative Instruments, Gain (Loss) [Line Items]
Amount of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in OCI on Derivative (Effective Portion)	(75)	(472)
Designated as Hedging | Cash Flow Hedging | Interest Rate Contracts | Interest Expense
Derivative Instruments, Gain (Loss) [Line Items]
Amount of Gain or (Loss) Reclassified from Accumulated OCI into Income (Effective Portion)	(712)	(721)
Amount of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivative (Ineffective Portion)	(1)	(1)
Not Designated as Hedging Instrument | Foreign Exchange Contract | Other income/(expense)
Derivative Instruments, Gain (Loss) [Line Items]
Amount of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivative		$ (160)

XML

Income Taxes - Additional Information (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013
Income Taxes [Line Items]
Federal Income Tax Rate	35.00%
Interest and penalties recognized related to accrued taxes	$ 120
Undistributed foreign earnings reinvested	$ 16,202
State and Local Jurisdiction | Minimum
Income Taxes [Line Items]
Income Tax Examination Period	2009
State and Local Jurisdiction | Maximum
Income Taxes [Line Items]
Income Tax Examination Period	2012
Federal | Minimum
Income Taxes [Line Items]
Income Tax Examination Period	2010
Federal | Maximum
Income Taxes [Line Items]
Income Tax Examination Period	2012

XML

Summary of Option Activity (Detail) (USD $)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Incentive Stock Option Plans Beginning balance	705,345	1,388,514	1,487,331
Incentive Stock Option Plans Options granted			20,000
Incentive Stock Option Plans, Option exercised	(126,149)	(659,733)	(48,000)
Incentive Stock Option Plans, Option expired or forfeited	(18,167)	(23,436)	(70,817)
Incentive Stock Option Plans, Ending balance	561,029	705,345	1,388,514
Weighted Average Price Per Share, Beginning balance	$ 7.70	$ 7.44	$ 7.65
Weighted Average Price Per Share, Option granted			$ 12.28
Weighted Average Price Per Share, Option exercised	$ 7.50	$ 7.05	$ 8.63
Weighted Average Price Per Share, Option expired or forfeited	$ 7.50	$ 10.41	$ 12.38
Weighted Average Price Per Share, Ending balance	$ 7.76	$ 7.70	$ 7.44
Exercisable Weighted Average Price Per Share, Beginning balance	$ 7.95	$ 7.26	$ 7.77
Exercisable Weighted Average Price Per Share, Ending balance	$ 7.70	$ 7.95	$ 7.26
Minimum
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Options Granted, Lower Range			$ 11.32
Options exercised, Lower Range		$ 3.67	$ 8.10
Maximum
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Options Granted, Upper Range			$ 13.24
Options exercised, Upper Range		$ 14.99	$ 11.30

XML

Consolidated Balance Sheets (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Current assets:
Cash	$ 6,680	$ 38,476
Receivables:
Trade, net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $392 and $623, respectively	74,060	76,073
Other	892	1,230
Receivables, net	74,952	77,303
Inventories	139,830	87,951
Prepaid expenses	11,435	13,710
Income taxes receivable	10,088
Deferred income tax assets	6,521	4,877
Total current assets	249,506	222,317
Property, plant and equipment, net	52,468	45,701
Intangible assets, net of applicable amortization	107,007	113,521
Other assets	38,462	18,351
Total assets	447,443	399,890
Current liabilities:
Current installments of long-term debt	69	16,247
Current installments of other liabilities	2,132	1,839
Accounts payable	40,702	32,838
Deferred revenue	3,788	20,427
Accrued program costs	53,630	32,335
Tax payable		1,313
Accrued expenses and other payables	10,178	8,671
Total current liabilities	110,499	113,670
Long-term debt, excluding current installments	51,676	36,196
Other liabilities, excluding current installments	4,143	5,425
Deferred income tax liabilities	23,330	19,163
Total liabilities	189,648	174,454
Commitments and contingent liabilities
Stockholders' equity:
Preferred stock, $.10 par value per share; authorized 400,000 shares; none issued
Common stock, $.10 par value per share; authorized 40,000,000 shares; issued 31,092,782 shares in 2013 and 30,766,730 shares in 2012	3,109	3,077
Additional paid-in capital	60,160	54,323
Accumulated other comprehensive loss	(1,048)	(1,762)
Retained earnings	202,470	174,243
Total stockholders' equity including treasury stock	264,691	229,881
Less treasury stock at cost, 2,380,634 shares in 2013 and 2,310,634 shares in 2012	(6,738)	(4,804)
American Vanguard Corporation stockholders' equity	257,953	225,077
Non-controlling interest	(158)	359
Total stockholders' equity	257,795	225,436
Total liabilities and stockholders' equity	$ 447,443	$ 399,890

XML

Summary of Property, Plant and Equipment (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified							12 Months Ended				12 Months Ended				12 Months Ended				12 Months Ended				12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2013 Land	Dec. 31, 2012 Land	Dec. 31, 2013 Buildings and improvements	Dec. 31, 2012 Buildings and improvements	Dec. 31, 2013 Buildings and improvements Minimum	Dec. 31, 2013 Buildings and improvements Maximum	Dec. 31, 2013 Machinery and equipment	Dec. 31, 2012 Machinery and equipment	Dec. 31, 2013 Machinery and equipment Minimum	Dec. 31, 2013 Machinery and equipment Maximum	Dec. 31, 2013 Office furniture, fixtures and equipment	Dec. 31, 2012 Office furniture, fixtures and equipment	Dec. 31, 2013 Office furniture, fixtures and equipment Minimum	Dec. 31, 2013 Office furniture, fixtures and equipment Maximum	Dec. 31, 2013 Automotive equipment	Dec. 31, 2012 Automotive equipment	Dec. 31, 2013 Automotive equipment Minimum	Dec. 31, 2013 Automotive equipment Maximum	Dec. 31, 2013 Construction in progress	Dec. 31, 2012 Construction in progress	Dec. 31, 2013 Construction in progress Minimum	Dec. 31, 2013 Construction in progress Maximum
Property, Plant and Equipment [Line Items]
Property, Plant and Equipment Useful Life							10 years	30 years			3 years	15 years			3 years	10 years			3 years	6 years			3 years	15 years
Property, plant and equipment, Gross	$ 131,419	$ 116,159	$ 2,458	$ 2,458	$ 14,167	$ 12,537			$ 94,184	$ 89,089			$ 9,717	$ 8,400			$ 278	$ 312			$ 10,615	$ 3,363
Less accumulated depreciation	(78,951)	(70,458)
Total Property, plant and equipment	$ 52,468	$ 45,701

XML

Consolidated Statements of Stockholders' Equity (Parenthetical) (USD $)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Cash dividends on common stock, per share	$ 0.22	$ 0.22	$ 0.08

XML

Employee Deferred Compensation Plan and Employee Stock Purchase Plan - Additional Information (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, except Share data, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended			1 Months Ended			12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011	Jun. 30, 2001 Employee Stock Purchase Plan	Dec. 31, 2013 Employee Stock Purchase Plan	Jun. 30, 2011 Employee Stock Purchase Plan	Dec. 31, 2013 Employee Stock Purchase Plan	Dec. 31, 2012 Employee Stock Purchase Plan	Dec. 31, 2011 Employee Stock Purchase Plan
Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP) Disclosures [Line Items]
Percentage contribution, compensation	100.00%
Matching percentage, employee contribution	5.00%
Company's contributions amount	$ 1,330	$ 982	$ 870
Number of common stock shares under employee stock purchase plan				1,000,000
Common stock under employee stock purchase plan, par value	$ 0.10	$ 0.10		$ 0.10
Employee stock purchase plan offering period				January 1 and July 1 of each year
Commons stock plan available for sale under plan						995,000
Authorized common stock under plan					901,220
Shares of common stock purchased through the plan							27,923	40,116	54,933

XML

Valuation and Qualifying Accounts (Detail) (Allowance for Doubtful Accounts, USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
Valuation and Qualifying Accounts Disclosure [Line Items]
Balance at Beginning of Period	$ 623	$ 340	$ 447
Additions Charged to Costs and Expenses
Charge to Other	(231)	283	(107)
Deductions
Balance at End of Period	$ 392	$ 623	$ 340

XML

Schedule of Gross Carrying Amount and Accumulated Amortization of Intangible Assets (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Finite-Lived Intangible Assets And Liabilities [Line Items]
Gross	$ 153,126	$ 153,288
Accumulated Amortization	46,119	39,767
Net Book Value	107,007	113,521
Product Rights
Finite-Lived Intangible Assets And Liabilities [Line Items]
Gross	139,094	139,256
Accumulated Amortization	44,254	38,530
Net Book Value	94,840	100,726
Customer Lists
Finite-Lived Intangible Assets And Liabilities [Line Items]
Gross	1,091	1,091
Accumulated Amortization	328	218
Net Book Value	763	873
Trademarks
Finite-Lived Intangible Assets And Liabilities [Line Items]
Gross	12,941	12,941
Accumulated Amortization	1,537	1,019
Net Book Value	$ 11,404	$ 11,922

XML

Equity method investment

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Equity method investment

(13) Equity method investment

On March 25, 2013, the Company made a $3,687 equity investment in TyraTech Inc. (“TyraTech”), a Delaware corporation that specializes in developing, marketing and selling pesticide products containing essential oils and other natural ingredients. As of December 31, 2013, the Company’s ownership position in TyraTech was approximately 29.27%. The Company utilizes the equity method of accounting with respect to this investment. As a result, our net income includes earnings (losses) from equity method investments, which represents our proportionate share of TyraTech’s estimated net earnings (losses) for the period from the time of the investment to the end of the accounting period. For the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company recognized a loss of $986 as a result of the Company’s ownership position in TyraTech.

The Company’s investment in TyraTech is included in other assets on the balance sheet. At December 31, 2013, the carrying value of the Company’s investment in TyraTech was $2,701 and the quoted market value was $4,073.

XML

Summary of Business Sales Segmentation as per Product (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	3 Months Ended								12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Sep. 30, 2013	Jun. 30, 2013	Mar. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Sep. 30, 2012	Jun. 30, 2012	Mar. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Net sales:
Total crop									$ 346,514	$ 329,540	$ 272,068
Non-crop									34,507	36,650	29,012
Total Sales	75,522	97,201	86,761	121,537	104,262	89,836	84,837	87,255	381,021	366,190	301,080
Gross profit	32,341	43,159	42,066	53,781	45,776	39,625	38,346	37,378	171,347	161,125	123,068
Crop
Net sales:
Gross profit									155,275	142,019	110,348
Non-crop
Net sales:
Gross profit									16,072	19,106	12,720
Insecticides
Net sales:
Total crop									193,623	194,060	137,460
Herbicides/Soil Fumigants/Fungicides
Net sales:
Total crop									121,042	89,899	90,782
Other Including Plant Growth Regulators
Net sales:
Total crop									$ 31,849	$ 45,581	$ 43,826

XML

Description of Business, Basis of Consolidation and Significant Accounting Policies (Policies)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Cost of Sales

Cost of Sales—In addition to normal cost centers (i.e., direct labor, raw materials) included in cost of sales, the Company also includes such cost centers as Health and Safety, Environmental, Maintenance and Quality Control in cost of sales.

Other Than Cost of Sales-Operating Expenses

Other Than Cost of Sales—Operating Expenses—Operating expenses include cost centers for Selling, General and Administrative, Research and Product Development, Regulatory/Registration, Freight, Delivery and Warehousing.

	2013		2012		2011
Selling	$	32,929	$	25,869	$	23,318
General and administrative		33,536		29,715		21,429
Research, product development and regulatory		21,644		20,750		18,041
Freight, delivery and warehousing		27,503		25,468		21,054
	$	115,612	$	101,802	$	83,842

Freight, Delivery and Warehousing Expense

Freight, Delivery and Warehousing Expense—Freight, delivery and warehousing costs incurred by the Company are reported as operating expenses.

Advertising Expense

Advertising Expense—The Company expenses advertising costs in the period invoiced. Advertising expenses, which include promotional costs, are recognized in operating costs (specifically in selling expenses) in the consolidated statements of operations and were $4,011 in 2013, $2,680 in 2012 and $2,095 in 2011.

Inventories

Inventories—The Company values its inventories at lower of cost or market. Cost is determined by the first-in, first-out (“FIFO”) method, including material, labor, factory overhead and subcontracting services. The Company writes down and makes adjustments to its inventory carrying values as a result of the effects of unutilized capacity, net realizable value assessments of slow moving and obsolete inventory and other annual adjustments to ensure that our standard costs continue to closely reflect manufacturing cost.

The components of inventories consist of the following:

	2013		2012
Finished products	$	126,872	$	74,900
Raw materials	$	12,958		13,051
	$	139,830	$	87,951

Revenue Recognition and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts

Revenue Recognition and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts—Revenue from sales is recognized at the time title and the risks of ownership pass. This is when the customer has made the fixed commitment to purchase the goods, the products are shipped per the customer’s instructions, the sales price is fixed and determinable, and collection is reasonably assured. The Company has in place procedures to ensure that revenue is recognized when earned. The procedures are subject to management’s review and from time to time certain sales are excluded until it is clear that the title has passed and there is no further recourse to the Company. Allowance for doubtful accounts is established based on estimates of losses related to customer receivable balances. Estimates are developed using either standard quantitative measures based on historical losses, adjusted for current economic conditions or by evaluating specific customer accounts for risk of loss.

Accrued Program Costs

Accrued Program Costs—In accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 605, the Company classifies certain payments to its customers as a reduction of sales revenues. The Company describes these payments as “Programs.” Programs are a critical part of doing business in the agricultural chemicals business market place. For accounting purposes, programs are recorded as a reduction in gross sales and include market pricing adjustments, volume take up or other key performance indicator, driven payments made to distributors, retailers or growers at the end of a growing season. Each quarter management compares each sale transaction with published programs to determine what program liability has been incurred. Once this initial calculation is made for the specific quarter, sales and marketing management along with executive and financial management review the accumulated program balance and make assessments of whether or not customers are tracking in a manner that indicates that they will meet the requirements set out in the terms and conditions attached to each program. If management believes that customers are falling short of their annual goals then periodic adjustments will be made to the accumulated accrual to properly reflect the Company’s best estimate of the liability at the balance sheet date. The majority of adjustments are made at the end of the crop season, at which time customer performance can be fully assessed. Programs are paid out predominantly on an annual basis, usually in the final quarter of the financial year or the first quarter of the following year.

Long-lived Assets

Long-lived Assets—The carrying value of long-lived assets is reviewed for impairment quarterly and/or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of such assets may not be recoverable. Measurement of the impairment loss is based on the fair value of the asset. Generally, the fair value will be determined using valuation techniques such as the present value of expected future cash flows. There was no impairment of long-lived assets in 2013 or 2012.

Property, Plant and Equipment and Depreciation

Property, Plant and Equipment and Depreciation—Property, plant and equipment includes the cost of land, buildings, machinery and equipment, office furniture and fixtures, automobiles, construction projects and significant improvements to existing plant and equipment. Interest costs related to significant construction projects are capitalized at the Company’s current weighted effective interest rate. Expenditures for maintenance and minor repairs are expensed as incurred. When property or equipment is sold or otherwise disposed of, the related cost and accumulated depreciation is removed from the respective accounts, and the gain or loss realized on disposition is reflected in earnings. All plant and equipment is depreciated using the straight-line method, utilizing the estimated useful property lives. Building lives range from 10 to 30 years; machinery and equipment lives range from 3 to 15 years; office furniture and fixture lives range from 3 to 10 years; automobile lives range from 3 to 6 years; construction projects and significant improvements to existing plant and equipment lives range from 3 to 15 years when placed in service. The agricultural chemicals business involves complex manufacturing processes that drive high capital cost plant.

Foreign Currency Translation

Foreign Currency Translation—Assets and liabilities of foreign subsidiaries, where the local currency is the functional currency, have been translated at period end exchange rates, and profit and loss accounts have been translated using weighted average yearly exchange rates. Adjustments resulting from translation have been recorded in the equity section of the balance sheet as cumulative translation adjustments in other comprehensive income (loss). The effects of foreign currency exchange gains and losses on transactions that are denominated in currencies other than the entity’s functional currency are remeasured to the functional currency using the end of the period exchange rates. The effects of remeasurement related to foreign currency transactions are included in current profit and loss accounts.

Derivative Financial Instruments and Hedge Activities

Derivative financial instruments and hedge activities—In accordance with FASB ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging, the Company recognizes all derivative instruments as either other assets or other liabilities at fair value on the balance sheet. In accordance with the hierarchy contained in FASB ASC 820, Fair Value Measurements, the Company calculated fair value using observable inputs other than Level 1 quoted prices (Level 2). During 2011, the Company entered into a Euro exchange forward contract in the amount of €4,500 for Euro-denominated liabilities that was settled in January 2013. These transactions were accounted for in accordance with the ASC 815, as non-designated hedges. During the period that the Company held the forward contract, the fair value was recorded in the Balance Sheet, with the change in value recorded in earnings, and generally offset by the gains and losses associated with the underlying foreign-currency-denominated balances, which were also reported in earnings.

At December 31, 2013, the Company had in place one interest rate swap contract with an amortizing notional amount of $36,750 that is accounted for under FASB ASC 815 as a cash flow hedge. The effective portion of the gains or losses on the interest rate swap are reported as a component of other comprehensive income and reclassified into earnings in the same period or periods during which the hedged transactions affect earnings. Amounts in other comprehensive income expected to be reclassified to earnings in the coming 12 months are $(564). Amounts recorded in earnings for hedge ineffectiveness for the period ending December 2013 were immaterial.

The following tables illustrate the impact of derivatives on the Company’s statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2013.

The Effect of Derivative Instruments on the Statement of Financial Performance For the Period Ended December 31
Derivatives in ASC 815 Cash Flow	Amount of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in OCI on Derivative (Effective Portion)						Location of Gain or (Loss) Reclassified from Accumulated OCI into Income		Amount of Gain or (Loss) Reclassified from Accumulated OCI into Income (Effective Portion)						Location of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivative		Amount of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivative (Ineffective Portion)
Hedging Relationships	2013			2012			(Effective Portion)		2013			2012			(Ineffective Portion)		2013			2012
Interest rate contracts	$	(75	)	$	(472	)		Interest expense	$	(712	)	$	(721	)		Interest expense	$	(1	)	$	(1	)
Total	$	(75	)	$	(472	)			$	(712	)	$	(721	)			$	(1	)	$	(1	)

Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments	Location of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Income on	Amount of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivative
under ASC 815	Derivative	2013		2012
Foreign exchange contracts	Other income/(expense)	$	—	$	(160	)
Total		$	—	$	(160	)

The counterparty to the Company’s interest rate derivative financial instrument is Bank of the West, the Company’s primary bank. Pledged cash collateral is not required under the interest rate swap contract. At December 31, 2013, the Company did not hold any other derivative financial instruments. As a result, there occurs no offsetting of derivative liabilities in the Company’s financial statements. The gross amount of derivative liabilities is equal to the net amount recognized in current installments of other liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets, as shown in the below table:

									Gross Amounts Not Offset in the Statement of Financial Position
Description	Gross Amounts of Recognized Liabilities			Gross Amounts Offset in the Statement of Financial Position		Net Amounts of Liabilities Presented in the Statement of Financial Position			Financial Instruments		Cash Collateral Pledged		Net Amount
Derivatives by counterparty:
Bank of the West	$	(564	)	$	—	$	(564	)	$	—	$	—	$	(564	)
Total	$	(564	)	$	—	$	(564	)	$	—	$	—	$	(564	)

Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets

Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets—The primary identifiable intangible assets of the Company relate to assets associated with its product acquisitions. The Company adopted the provisions of FASB ASC 350, under which identifiable intangibles with finite lives are amortized and those with indefinite lives are not amortized. The estimated useful life of an identifiable intangible asset to the Company is based upon a number of factors including the effects of demand, competition, and expected changes in the marketability of the Company’s products. The Company re-evaluates whether these intangible assets are impaired on an annual basis, relying on a number of factors including operating results, business plans and future cash flows. Identifiable intangible assets that are subject to amortization are evaluated for impairment using a process similar to that used to evaluate elements of property. The impairment test for identifiable intangible assets not subject to amortization consists of either a qualitative assessment or a comparison of the fair value of the intangible asset with its carrying amount. An impairment loss, if any, is recognized for the amount by which the carrying value exceeds the fair value of the asset. Fair value is typically estimated using a discounted cash flow analysis, which requires the Company to estimate the future cash flows anticipated to be generated by the particular asset(s) being tested for impairment as well as selecting a discount rate to measure the present value of the anticipated cash flows. When determining future cash flow estimates, the Company considers historical results adjusted to reflect current and anticipated operating conditions. Estimating future cash flows requires significant judgment by the Company, in such areas as: future economic conditions, industry-specific conditions, product pricing and necessary capital expenditures. The use of different assumptions or estimates for future cash flows could produce different impairment amounts (or none at all) for long-lived assets, goodwill and identifiable intangible assets. The Company has performed an impairment review for the years ending December 31, 2013 and 2012, and there were no impairment losses recorded.

Fair Value of Equity Investment

Fair Value of Equity Investment—The Company utilizes the equity method of accounting with respect to its investment in TyraTech Inc. (“TyraTech”), a Delaware corporation that specializes in developing, marketing and selling pesticide products containing essential oils and other natural ingredients. At December 31, 2013, the carrying value of the Company’s investment in TyraTech was $2,701 and the quoted market value based on TyraTech’s share price (Level 1 input) was $4,073. The Company’s equity investment is included in other assets on the balance sheet.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

Fair Value of Financial Instruments—The carrying values of cash, receivables and accounts payable approximate their fair values because of the short maturity of these instruments. The fair value of the Company’s long-term debt and note payable to our lender group is estimated based on the quoted market prices for the same or similar issues or on the current rates offered to the Company for debt of the same remaining maturities. Such fair value approximates the respective carrying values of the Company’s long-term debt and note payable to bank.

The Company measures fair value based on the prices that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Fair value measurements are based on a three-tier hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value. These tiers include the following:

Level 1: Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that are accessible at the measurement date. The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to Level 1 inputs.

Level 2: Observable prices that are based on inputs not quoted on active markets, but corroborated by market data. These inputs include quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; quoted market prices in markets that are not active; or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities.

Level 3: Unobservable inputs are used when little or no market data is available. The fair value hierarchy gives the lowest priority to Level 3 inputs.

In determining fair value, the Company utilizes valuation techniques that maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs to the extent possible, as well as considering counterparty credit risk in the assessment of fair value.

	Fair Value Measurements Using Input Type
	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3
As of December 31, 2013:
Liability:
Interest rate derivative financial instruments (1)	$	—	$	564	$	—
Foreign currency derivative financial instrument	$	—	$	—	$	—
As of December 31, 2012:
Liability:
Interest rate derivative financial instruments (1)	$	—	$	1,201	$	—
Foreign currency derivative financial instrument	$	—	$	160	$	—

(1) Includes accrued interest expense.

Income Taxes

Income Taxes—The Company utilizes the liability method of accounting for income taxes as set forth in ASC 740. Under the liability method, deferred taxes are determined based on the temporary differences between the financial statement and tax basis of assets and liabilities using tax rates expected to be in effect during the years in which the basis differences reverse. A valuation allowance is recorded when it is more likely than not that some of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. In determining the need for valuation allowances, the Company considers projected future taxable income and the availability of tax planning strategies. If in the future the Company determines that it would not be able to realize its recorded deferred tax assets, an increase in the valuation allowance would be recorded, decreasing earnings in the period in which such determination is made.

The Company assesses its income tax positions and records tax benefits for all years subject to examination based upon the Company’s evaluation of the facts, circumstances and information available at the reporting date. For those tax positions where there is greater than 50% likelihood that a tax benefit will be sustained, the Company has recorded the largest amount of tax benefit that may potentially be realized upon ultimate settlement with a taxing authority that has full knowledge of all relevant information. For those income tax positions where there is less than 50% likelihood that a tax benefit will be sustained, no tax benefit has been recognized in the financial statements.

Per Share Information

Per Share Information—FASB ASC 260, requires dual presentation of basic earnings per share (“EPS”) and diluted EPS on the face of all income statements. Basic EPS is computed as net income divided by the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period. Diluted EPS reflects potential dilution that could occur if securities or other contracts, which, for the Company, consists of options to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock, are exercised as calculated using the treasury stock method.

The components of basic and diluted earnings per share were as follows:

	2013		2012		2011
Numerator:
Net income attributable to American Vanguard	$	34,449	$	36,867	$	22,068
Denominator:
Weighted average shares outstanding—basic		28,301		27,914		27,559
Dilutive effect of stock options and grants		598		842		316
		28,899		28,756		27,875

Accounting Estimates

Accounting Estimates—The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S. GAAP”) requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues, and expenses at the date that the financial statements are prepared. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Reclassifications

Reclassifications—Certain prior year’s amounts have been reclassified to conform to the current year’s presentation.

Total Comprehensive Income

Total comprehensive income—In addition to net income, total comprehensive income includes changes in equity that are excluded from the consolidated statements of operations and are recorded directly into a separate section of stockholders’ equity on the consolidated balance sheets. For the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, total comprehensive income consisted of net income attributable to American Vanguard, the change in fair value of interest rate swaps and foreign currency translation adjustments.

Stock-Based Compensation

Stock-Based Compensation—The Company accounts for stock-based awards to employees and directors using FASB ASC 718. When applying the provisions of FASB ASC 718, the Company also applies the provisions of Staff Accounting Bulletin (“SAB”) No. 107 and SAB No. 110.

FASB ASC 718 requires companies to estimate the fair value of share-based payment awards on the date of grant. The value of the portion of the award that is ultimately expected to vest is recognized as expense over the requisite service periods in the Company’s Consolidated Statement of Operations.

Stock-based compensation expense recognized during the period is based on the fair value of the portion of share-based payment awards that is ultimately expected to vest during the period. Stock-based compensation expense recognized is reduced for forfeitures as required by FASB ASC 718. Estimated forfeitures recognized in the Company’s Consolidated Statement of Operations reduced compensation expense for the year ended December 31, 2013 by $247. The Company estimates that 8% of all restricted stock grants that are currently vesting will be forfeited. The Company estimates that 28.6% of the performance based shares that are currently vesting will be forfeited. The Company estimates that 0.8% of all stock option grants that are currently vesting will be forfeited. These estimates are reviewed quarterly and revised as necessary.

As of December 31, 2013, the Company had approximately $21 of unamortized stock-based compensation expenses related to unvested options, which will be recognized over the weighted-average period of 0.5 years. As of December 31, 2013, the Company had approximately $5,550 of unamortized stock-based compensation expenses related to unvested restricted stock, which will be recognized over the weighted-average period of 1.9 years. As of December 31, 2013, the Company had approximately $564 of unamortized stock-based compensation expenses related to unvested performance based stock, which will be recognized over the weighted-average period of 2.4 years. This projected expense will change if any stock options and restricted stock are granted or cancelled prior to the respective reporting periods or if there are any changes required to be made for estimated forfeitures.

The Company uses the Black-Scholes option-pricing model (“Black-Scholes model”) to value option grants using the following weighted average assumptions:

	2011
Risk free interest rate		2.26	%
Dividend yield		0.05	%
Volatility factor		55.31	%
Weighted average life (years)		6.0 years

There were no option shares granted during 2013 and 2012. The weighted average grant-date fair values of options granted during 2011 was $6.62.

The expected volatility and expected life assumptions are highly complex and use subjective variables. The variables take into consideration, among other things, actual and projected employee stock option exercise behavior. The Company estimates expected term using the “safe harbor” provisions of SAB 107 and SAB 110. The Company used historical volatility as a proxy for estimating expected volatility.

In December 2012, two employees retired, both of whom held options to acquire common stock. At the time of their retirement, options to acquire a total of 13,334 shares of common stock at $7.50 per share were unvested. The Company modified these unvested awards allowing the retiring employees to fully vest. Additionally, the retired employees were given one year to exercise these newly vested awards. At the time of modification, these modified awards were treated as a new grant and their fair value was measured as of the modification date using the Black Scholes model at $23.55 per share, resulting in $314 of additional stock-based compensation expense being recognized in 2012.

The Company values restricted stock grants using the Company’s traded stock price on the date of grant. The weighted average grant-date fair values of restricted stock grants during 2013, 2012, and 2011 were $30.91, $21.51, and $12.30, respectively.

Recently Issued Accounting Guidance

Recently Issued Accounting Guidance

In February 2013, The Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2013-02, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Reporting of Amounts Reclassified Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income, establishes new requirements for disclosing reclassifications of items out of accumulated other comprehensive income (OCI). Specifically, (1) disclosure is required of the changes in components of accumulated OCI, (2) disclosure is required of the effects on individual line items in net income for each item of accumulated OCI that is reclassified in its entirety to net income, and (3) cross references are required to other disclosures that provide additional details for OCI items that are not reclassified in their entirety to net income. The requirements of ASU 2013-02 apply to all entities (i.e., both public and nonpublic) that report items of OCI in any period presented. ASU 2013-02 is effective prospectively for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2012. The Company adopted this standard effective January 1, 2013.

In October 2012, the FASB issued ASU No. 2012-04, Technical Corrections and Improvements. This update primarily makes amendments to various Codifications to (1) conform the format and writing style of certain guidance carried forward without modification from pre-Codification pronouncements, (2) to correct references and provide clarification through updated language, and (3) to relocate guidance within the Codification to a more appropriate location. In addition, ASU No. 2012-4 conforms the use of the term fair value throughout the Codification to reflect fully the measurement and disclosure requirements of FASB ASC Topic 820, Fair Value Measurement and Disclosures (e.g. to replace the terms “market value” and “mark-to-market” with “fair value” and “subsequently measure at fair value,” respectively). The majority of the amendments do not change the accounting practice. However, where applicable, the Company has applied the updates.

XML

Commitments - Additional Information (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Schedule Of Commitments And Contingencies [Line Items]
Rent Expense	$ 939	$ 727	$ 550
Hannibal, Missouri
Schedule Of Commitments And Contingencies [Line Items]
Long Term Ground Leases Expiration Period		20 years
Marsing
Schedule Of Commitments And Contingencies [Line Items]
Long Term Ground Leases Expiration Period		25 years
Minimum | Axis, Alabama
Schedule Of Commitments And Contingencies [Line Items]
Long Term Ground Leases Expiration Period	20 years
Maximum | Axis, Alabama
Schedule Of Commitments And Contingencies [Line Items]
Long Term Ground Leases Expiration Period	35 years

XML

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net income	$ 33,932	$ 36,826	$ 22,068
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash (used in) provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization of fixed and intangible assets	14,845	13,487	13,546
Amortization of other long term assets	4,598	2,925	1,983
Amortization of discounted liabilities	174	818	1,371
Stock-based compensation	3,819	2,950	1,994
Tax benefit from exercise of stock options	(440)	(621)
Increase (decrease) in deferred income taxes	2,523	(886)	4,711
Loss from equity method investment	986
Changes in assets and liabilities associated with operations:
Decrease (increase) in net receivables	2,351	(7,505)	(35,021)
(Increase) decrease in inventories	(51,879)	(16,883)	2,986
(Increase) decrease in income tax receivable/payable, net	(10,961)	2,137	6,512
Increase in prepaid expenses and other assets	(19,733)	(23,725)	(1,823)
Increase in accounts payable	8,252	9,781	8,384
(Decrease) increase in deferred revenue	(16,639)	12,856	2,003
Increase in other payables and accrued expenses	21,958	8,264	10,552
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities	(6,214)	40,424	39,266
Cash flows from investing activities:
Capital expenditures	(15,260)	(17,628)	(6,261)
Investment	(3,687)
Acquisitions of intangible assets		(3,473)	(316)
Net cash used in investing activities	(18,947)	(21,101)	(6,577)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Net borrowings (repayments) under line of credit agreement	51,550		(7,300)
Payments on long-term debt	(46,000)	(8,443)	(8,429)
Payment on other long-term liabilities	(1,831)	(6,035)	(401)
Tax benefit from exercise of stock options	440	621
(Increase) decrease in other notes payable	(6,154)	(51)	20,063
Repurchases of common stock	(1,934)
Proceeds from the issuance of common stock (sale of stock under ESPP and exercise of stock options)	1,610	3,227	580
Non-controlling interest contribution		400
Payment of cash dividends	(4,804)	(6,148)	(2,205)
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities	(7,123)	(16,429)	2,308
Net (decrease) increase in cash	(32,284)	2,894	34,997
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash	488	497	(1,070)
Cash at beginning of year	38,476	35,085	1,158
Cash at end of year	6,680	38,476	35,085
Cash paid during the year for:
Interest	1,777	1,891	2,055
Income taxes	25,271	18,048	6,359
Supplemental schedule of non-cash investing and financing activities:
Product Line Acquisitions			316
Additions to intangible assets and related liabilities		$ 1,073	$ 6,802

XML

Consolidated Balance Sheets (Parenthetical) (USD $) In Thousands, except Share data, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Allowance for doubtful accounts	$ 392	$ 623
Preferred stock, par value per share	$ 0.10	$ 0.10
Preferred stock, shares authorized	400,000	400,000
Preferred stock, shares issued
Common stock, par value per share	$ 0.10	$ 0.10
Common stock, shares authorized	40,000,000	40,000,000
Common stock, shares issued	31,092,782	30,766,730
Treasury stock, shares	2,380,634	2,310,634

XML

Product Acquisitions

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Product Acquisitions

(8) Product Acquisitions

All product acquisitions made after January 1, 2009 have been accounted for pursuant to FASB ASC 805.

On October 7, 2011, AMVAC completed the acquisition of the international rights to cotton defoliant product tribufos (sold under the trade name Def ^®) from Bayer CropScience AG (“BCS AG”). The acquired assets include registrations and data rights, rights relating to manufacturing and formulation know-how, inventories, and the trademark Def. Def complements AMVAC’s existing cotton defoliant product Folex^®, which it has marketed since 2002. This acquisition also

complements the U.S. rights to Def that the Company purchased from BCS AG in July 2010 (see below). Both Folex and Def are fast and effective cotton defoliants that facilitate the removal of leaves surrounding the cotton boll and in combination with other products function as a harvest aid.

The following schedule represents intangible assets recognized in connection with product acquisitions (See description of Business, Basis of Consolidation and Significant Accounting Policies for the Company’s accounting policy regarding intangible assets):

	Amount
Intangible assets at December 31, 2010	$	115,249
Acquisitions during fiscal 2011		316
Impact of movement in exchange rates and other adjustments		(161	)
Other adjustments related to deferred liabilities		6,802
Amortization expense		(6,017	)
Intangible assets at December 31, 2011		116,189
Acquisitions during fiscal 2012		3,473
Impact of movement in exchange rates		(118	)
Amortization expense		(6,023	)
Intangible assets at December 31, 2012		113,521
Acquisitions during fiscal 2013		—
Impact of movement in exchange rates		(162	)
Amortization expense		(6,352	)
Intangible assets at December 31, 2013	$	107,007

During 2012 the Company completed the acquisition of product licenses and recorded intangibles assets in the amount of $3,473, of which $2,400 was paid in the period. Furthermore, the Company made payments in the amount of $7,447 associated with product line acquisitions.

During 2011, the Company recorded final purchase accounting entries related to the product line acquisitions completed in the final quarter of 2010. As a result, the Company recorded $6,802 as additions to intangible assets and related liability. There was no cash impact on this transaction during this period.

The following schedule represents the gross carrying amount and accumulated amortization of the intangible assets. Product rights are amortized over their expected useful lives of 25 years. Customer lists are amortized over their expected useful lives of ten years, and trademarks are amortized over their expected useful lives of 25 years.

	2013						2012
$000’s	Gross		Accumulated Amortization		Net Book Value		Gross		Accumulated Amortization		Net Book Value
Product Rights	$	139,094	$	44,254	$	94,840	$	139,256	$	38,530	$	100,726
Customer Lists		1,091		328		763		1,091		218		873
Trademarks		12,941		1,537		11,404		12,941		1,019		11,922
Total Intangibles	$	153,126	$	46,119	$	107,007	$	153,288	$	39,767	$	113,521

The following schedule represents future amortization charges related to intangible assets:

Year ending December 31,
2014	$	6,352
2015		6,352
2016		6,352
2017		6,352
2018		6,352
Thereafter		75,247
	$	107,007

The following schedule represents the Company’s obligations under product acquisitions and licensing agreements:

	Amount
Obligations under acquisition agreements at December 31, 2010		12,822
Additional obligations acquired		216
Addition of deferred liabilities		6,802
Adjustment to deferred liabilities		(2,857	)
FX impact		101
Amortization of discounted liabilities		1,341
Payments on existing obligations		(801	)
Obligations under acquisition agreements at December 31, 2011		17,624
Additional obligations acquired		1,073
Adjustment to deferred liabilities		(216	)
FX impact		48
Amortization of discounted liabilities		818
Payments on existing obligations		(7,447	)
Obligations under acquisition agreements at December 31, 2012		11,900
Additional obligations acquired		—
Adjustment to deferred liabilities		(294	)
FX impact		(1	)
Amortization of discounted liabilities		171
Payments on existing obligations		(7,890	)
Obligations under acquisition agreements at December 31, 2013	$	3,886

During 2013, the Company remeasured the fair value of the earn out liabilities related to the acquisitions completed in the first quarter of 2010. Based on the remeasurement, the fair value was reduced by $294. The fair value change had the effect of reducing operating expenses by $294.

During 2012, the Company remeasured the fair value of the earn out liabilities related to the acquisitions completed in the first quarter of 2010. Based on the remeasurement, the fair value was reduced by $216. The fair value change had the effect of reducing cost of sales by $0 and operating expenses by $216.

During 2011, the Company remeasured the fair value of the earn out liabilities related to the acquisitions completed in the first quarter of 2010. Based on the remeasurement, the fair value was reduced by $2,857. The fair value change had the effect of reducing cost of sales by $495 and operating expenses by $2,362.

As of December 31, 2013, the $3,886 in remaining obligations under product acquisitions and licensing agreements is included in other liabilities.

XML

Document and Entity Information (USD $)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Feb. 20, 2014	Jun. 30, 2013
Document Information [Line Items]
Document Type	10-K
Amendment Flag	false
Document Period End Date	Dec. 31, 2013
Document Fiscal Year Focus	2013
Document Fiscal Period Focus	FY
Trading Symbol	AVD
Entity Registrant Name	AMERICAN VANGUARD CORP
Entity Central Index Key	0000005981
Current Fiscal Year End Date	--12-31
Entity Well-known Seasoned Issuer	No
Entity Current Reporting Status	Yes
Entity Voluntary Filers	No
Entity Filer Category	Large Accelerated Filer
Entity Common Stock, Shares Outstanding		28,772,622
Entity Public Float			$ 656,200,000

XML

Commitments

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Commitments

(9) Commitments

The Company has various lease agreements for offices as well as long-term ground leases for its facilities at Axis, AL, Hannibal, MO and Marsing, ID. The office leases contain provisions to pass through to the Company its pro-rata share of certain of the building’s operating expenses. The long-term ground lease at Axis, AL is for twenty years (commencing May 2001) with up to five automatic renewals of three years each for a total of thirty-five years. The long-term ground lease at Hannibal, MO is for a period of 20 years (commencing December 2007) with automatic one year extensions thereafter, subject to termination with a twelve-month notice. The long-term ground lease at Marsing is for a period of 25 years (commencing in March 2008). Rent expense for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011 was $939, $727 and $550. Future minimum lease payments under the terms of the leases are as follows:

Year ending December 31,
2014	$	850
2015		868
2016		433
2017		135
2018		135
Thereafter		1,170
	$	3,591

XML

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income (USD $) In Thousands, except Per Share data, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Net sales	$ 381,021	$ 366,190	$ 301,080
Cost of sales	209,674	205,065	178,012
Gross profit	171,347	161,125	123,068
Operating expenses	115,612	101,802	83,842
Operating income	55,735	59,323	39,226
Interest expense	2,176	2,872	3,569
Interest income	(1)	(1)	(3)
Interest capitalized	(274)	(400)	(109)
Extinguishment of debt			546
Income (loss) before income taxes total	53,834	56,852	35,223
Income taxes expense	18,916	20,026	13,155
Income before loss on equity investment	34,918	36,826	22,068
Loss from equity method investment	986
Net income	33,932	36,826	22,068
Add back net loss attributable to non-controlling interest	517	41
Net income attributable to American Vanguard	34,449	36,867	22,068
Change in fair value of interest rate swaps	388	158	(869)
Foreign currency translation adjustment	326	330	(933)
Comprehensive income	$ 35,163	$ 37,355	$ 20,266
Earnings per common share-basic	$ 1.22	$ 1.32	$ 0.80
Earnings per common share-assuming dilution	$ 1.19	$ 1.28	$ 0.79
Weighted average shares outstanding-basic	28,301	27,914	27,559
Weighted average shares outstanding-assuming dilution	28,899	28,756	27,875

XML

Income Taxes

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Income Taxes

(3) Income Taxes

The components of income tax expense are:

	2013		2012			2011
Current:
Federal	$	12,285	$	17,448		$	6,070
State		3,007		2,528			1,275
Foreign		1,101		1,027			535
Deferred:
Federal		2,213		(590	)		4,691
State		310		(387	)		584
	$	18,916	$	20,026		$	13,155

Total income tax expense differed from the amounts computed by applying the U.S. Federal income tax rate of 35.0% to income before income tax expense as a result of the following:

	2013			2012			2011
Computed tax expense at statutory federal rates	$	18,678		$	19,911		$	12,328
Increase (decrease) in taxes resulting from:
State taxes, net of federal income tax benefit		1,983			1,947			1,374
Domestic production deduction		(1,142	)		(1,661	)		(826	)
Income tax credits		(724	)		(395	)		(343	)
Other expenses		121			224			622
	$	18,916		$	20,026		$	13,155

The components of income before provision for income taxes are as follows:

	2013		2012		2011
Domestic	$	46,520	$	53,361	$	33,399
Foreign		7,314		3,491		1,824
	$	53,834	$	56,852	$	35,223

Temporary differences between the financial statement carrying amounts and tax bases of assets and liabilities that give rise to significant portions of the net deferred tax liability at December 31, 2013 and 2012 relate to the following:

	2013			2012
Current:
Inventories	$	4,398		$	3,490
State income taxes		(331	)		(431	)
Vacation pay accrual		648			354
Accrued bonuses		1,791			2,289
Bad debt		169			192
Prepaid expenses		(1,929	)		(1,490	)
Other		1,775			473
Net deferred tax asset		6,521			4,877
Non-Current:
Plant and equipment, principally due to differences in depreciation and capitalized interest		(25,662	)		(21,993	)
Tax credit		14			73
Fair value adjustment		207			460
Other		2,111			2,297
Net deferred tax liability		(23,330	)		(19,163	)
Total net deferred tax liability	$	(16,809	)	$	(14,286	)

The following is a roll-forward of the Company’s total gross unrecognized tax liabilities, not including interest and penalties, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013:

	Gross Unrecognized Tax Liabilities
Balance at December 31, 2012	$	282
Additions for tax positions related to the current year		1,290
Additions for tax positions related to the prior year		161
Deletion for tax positions related to the prior year		(41	)
Balance at December 31, 2013	$	1,692

The Company recognizes accrued interest and penalties related to contingent tax liabilities in the provision for income taxes in the Company’s consolidated financial statements. As of December 31, 2013, the Company had recognized approximately $120 in interest and penalties related to recognized tax benefits accrued.

It is expected that the amount of unrecognized tax benefits will change within the next 12 months; however we do not expect the change to have a significant impact on our consolidated statements of operations or consolidated balance sheet. These changes may be the result of settlement of ongoing audits. At this time, an estimate of the range of the reasonable possible outcomes cannot be made.

The Company believes it is more likely than not that the deferred tax assets detailed in the table above will be realized in the normal course of business. Undistributed earnings of foreign subsidiaries are considered to be indefinitely reinvested and, accordingly, no provision for United States federal and state income taxes has been provided thereon. This amounted to $16,202 as of December 31, 2013. Upon distribution of earnings in the form of dividends or otherwise, the Company would be subject to both United States income taxes (subject to adjustment for foreign tax credits) and withholding taxes payable to the various foreign countries. Determination of the unrecognized deferred United States income tax liability is not practical due to the complexities of a hypothetical calculation.

The Company is subject to U.S. federal income tax as well as to income tax in multiple state jurisdictions. Federal income tax returns of the Company are subject to IRS examination for the 2010 through 2012 tax years. State income tax returns are subject to examination for the 2009 through 2012 tax years.

As of July 2013, the Internal Revenue Service audit for the year ended December 31, 2009 has been closed. The Internal Revenue Service concluded that there were no federal tax adjustments.

The Company’s research and development credit is currently under audit by the California Franchise Tax Board for the years ended December 31, 2004 through December 31, 2006. Currently the Company believes that it has set up an adequate reserve on its claim for refund.

XML

Long-Term Debt

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Long-Term Debt

(2) Long-Term Debt

Long-term debt of the Company at December 31, 2013 and 2012 is summarized as follows:

	2013			2012
Term loan		—			46,000
Revolving line of credit(a)		51,550			—
Notes payable		195			6,443
		51,745			52,443
Less current installments		(69	)		(16,247	)
	$	51,676		$	36,196

Approximate principal payments on long-term debt at December 31, 2013 are as follows:

2014	$	69
2015		71
2016		55
2017		—
2018		51,550
	$	51,745

(a) On June 17, 2013, AMVAC Chemical Corporation (“AMVAC”), our principal operating subsidiary, as borrower, and affiliates (including the Company), as guarantors and/or borrowers, entered into a Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement (the “New Credit Agreement”) with a group of commercial lenders led by Bank of the West (AMVAC’s primary bank) as agent, swing line lender and L/C issuer. The New Credit Agreement supersedes the Amended and Restated Credit Agreement (“First Amendment”) dated as of January 10, 2011. The New Credit Agreement is a senior secured lending facility with a five year term and consists of a revolving line of credit of $200 million and an accordion feature for up to $100 million. The new facility includes both AMVAC CV and AMVAC BV (both Dutch subsidiaries) as borrowers. In connection with AMVAC’s entering into the New Credit Agreement, all outstanding indebtedness under the First Amendment was rolled over into the New Credit Agreement, and term loans were converted into revolving debt. Under the New Credit Agreement, revolving loans bear interest at a variable rate based, at borrower’s election with proper notice, on either (i) LIBOR plus the “Applicable Rate” which is based upon the Consolidated Funded Debt Ratio (“Eurocurrency Rate Loan”) or (ii) the greater of (x) the Prime Rate, (y) the Federal Funds Rate plus 0.5%, and (z) the Daily One-Month LIBOR Rate plus 1.00%, plus, in the case of (x), (y) or (z) the Applicable Rate (“Alternate Base Rate Loan”). Interest payments for Eurocurrency Rate Loans are payable on the last day of each interest period (either one, two, three or six months, as selected by the borrower) and the maturity date, while interest payments for Alternate Base Rate Loans are payable on the last business day of each month and the maturity date. The senior secured revolving line of credit matures on June 17, 2018.

The Company uses a pay fixed, receive 1M LIBOR (London Interbank Offered Rate) interest rate swap to manage the interest expense generated by variable rate debt. At December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, the Company had in place an interest rate swap, the use of which results in a fixed interest rate of 3.39% for the portion of variable rate debt that is covered by the interest rate swap contract. The current interest rate swap contract was put in place on March 30, 2011 and terminates on December 31, 2014. The table below shows the amount of outstanding debt and the related notional amount on the interest rate swap contract at each of the balance sheet dates:

	Outstanding Variable Rate Debt		Notional Amount on Interest Rate Swap
At December 31, 2011	$	54,000	$	45,000
At December 31, 2012		46,000		44,250
At December 31, 2013		51,550		36,750

Under the New Credit Agreement, the Company has three key covenants (with which it was in compliance throughout the year and as of December 31, 2013). The covenants are as follows: (1) the Company must maintain its borrowings below a certain consolidated funded debt ratio, (2) the Company has a limitation on its annual spending on the acquisition of fixed asset capital additions, and (3) the Company must maintain a certain consolidated fixed charge coverage ratio.

At December 31, 2013 total indebtedness is $51,745 as compared to $52,443 at December 31, 2012. At December 31, 2013, based on its performance against the most restrictive covenants listed above, the Company has the capacity to increase its borrowings by up to the maximum limit of $148,450 under the Credit Agreement.

Substantially all of the Company’s assets are pledged as collateral under the Credit Agreement.

The Company’s main bank is Bank of the West, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the French bank, BNP Paribas. Bank of the West has been the Company’s bank for more than 30 years. Bank of the West is the syndication manager for the Company’s loans and acts as the counterparty on the Company’s derivative transactions.

The Company has various loans in place that together constitute the short-term and long-term loan balances shown in the balance sheet at December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012. These are summarized in the following table:

Indebtedness	December 31, 2013						December 31, 2012
$000’s	Long-term		Short-term		Total		Long-term		Short-term		Total
Term loan	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	36,000	$	10,000	$	46,000
Revolving line of credit		51,550		—		51,550		—		—		—
Notes payable		126		69		195		196		6,247		6,443
Total indebtedness	$	51,676	$	69	$	51,745	$	36,196	$	16,247	$	52,443

On June 17, 2013, all outstanding term loans were converted into revolving debt. The average amount outstanding on the term loan during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 was $23,318 and $50,957, respectively. The weighted average interest rate on the term loan during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 was 3.8% and 3.7%, respectively.

The average amount outstanding on the senior secured revolving line of credit during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 was $29,284 and $0. The weighted average interest rate on the revolving credit line during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 was 3.1% and 0.0% respectively.

XML

Quarterly Data-Unaudited

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Quarterly Data-Unaudited

(14) Quarterly Data—Unaudited

Quarterly Data—2013	March 31		June 30		September 30		December 31
Net sales	$	121,537	$	86,761	$	97,201	$	75,522
Gross profit		53,781		42,066		43,159		32,341
Net income attributable to American Vanguard		16,915		8,386		8,870		278
Basic net income per share		0.60		0.29		0.32		0.01
Diluted net income per share		0.59		0.29		0.30		0.01
Quarterly Data—2012
Net sales	$	87,255	$	84,837	$	89,836	$	104,262
Gross profit		37,378		38,346		39,625		45,776
Net income		8,734		8,744		8,076		11,313
Basic net income per share		0.32		0.31		0.29		0.40
Diluted net income per share		0.31		0.30		0.28		0.39

Note: Totals may not agree with full year amounts due to rounding and separate calculations each quarter.

XML

Research and Development

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Research and Development

(10) Research and Development

Research and development expenses which are included in operating expenses were $8,604, $7,648 and $6,555 for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011.

XML

Major Customers and Export Sales

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Major Customers and Export Sales

(6) Major Customers and Export Sales

In 2013, there were three companies that accounted for 17%, 13%, and 8% of the Company’s consolidated sales. In 2012, there were three companies that accounted for 19%, 10% and 8% of the Company’s consolidated sales. In 2011, there were three companies that accounted for 17%, 11%, and 9% of the Company’s consolidated sales.

The Company primarily sells its products to large distributors, buying cooperatives and groups and extends credit based on an evaluation of the customer’s financial condition. The Company had three significant customers who each accounted for approximately 14%, 10% and 8% of the Company’s receivables as of December 31, 2013. The Company had three significant customers who each accounted for approximately 20%, 11% and 7% of the Company’s receivables as of December 31, 2012 and approximately 17%, 15%, and 9% as of December 31, 2011. The Company has long-standing relationships with its customers and the Company considers the credit risk to be low.

Worldwide export sales for 2013, 2012 and 2011 were as follows:

	2013		2012		2011
Mexico	$	15,661	$	17,980	$	16,616
South & Central America		15,491		16,374		11,991
Europe		12,942		9,744		5,931
Asia		8,129		7,308		8,469
Africa		8,322		7,229		8,234
Australia		2,692		4,444		3,395
Canada		3,976		4,320		4,270
Middle East		2,500		2,495		3,876
Other		59		15		672
	$	69,772	$	69,909	$	63,454

XML

Major Customers and Export Sales - Additional Information (Detail)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Customer One
Segment Reporting Information [Line Items]
Percentage to company consolidated sales	17.00%	19.00%	17.00%
Percentage of customer receivables	14.00%	20.00%	17.00%
Customer Two
Segment Reporting Information [Line Items]
Percentage to company consolidated sales	13.00%	10.00%	11.00%
Percentage of customer receivables	10.00%	11.00%	15.00%
Customer Three
Segment Reporting Information [Line Items]
Percentage to company consolidated sales	8.00%	8.00%	9.00%
Percentage of customer receivables	8.00%	7.00%	9.00%

XML

Litigation and Environmental

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Litigation and Environmental

(4) Litigation and Environmental

A. DBCP Cases

Over the course of the past 30 years, AMVAC and/or the Company have been named or otherwise implicated in a number of lawsuits concerning injuries allegedly arising from either contamination of water supplies or personal exposure to 1, 2-dibromo-3-chloropropane (“DBCP^®”). DBCP was manufactured by several chemical companies, including Dow Chemical Company, Shell Oil Company and AMVAC and was approved by the USEPA to control nematodes. DBCP was also applied on banana farms in Latin America. The USEPA suspended registrations of DBCP in October 1979, except for use on pineapples in Hawaii. The USEPA suspension was partially based on 1977 studies by other manufacturers that indicated a possible link between male fertility and exposure to DBCP among their factory production workers involved with producing the product.

At present, there are approximately 100 lawsuits, foreign and domestic, filed by former banana workers in which AMVAC has been named as a party. Fifteen of these suits have been filed in the United States (with prayers for unspecified damages) and the remainder have been filed in Nicaragua.

As described more fully below, activity in domestic cases during 2013 is as follows: in Hawaii, Patrickson, et. al. v. Dole Food Company, et. al which had been dismissed in 2011, remains on appeal; and Adams, from which co-defendant Dole was dismissed, is on appeal with respect to such dismissal and, at any rate, involves claims that pre-dated AMVAC’s sales into the relevant market. In Louisiana and Delaware, there has been much overlapping activity. Three actions filed in Louisiana state court (Soriano et al) in November 1999 have been dismissed due to expiration of the statute of limitations; however, plaintiffs appealed the dismissal in 2013. Seven cases filed by HendlerLaw, P.C. in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana (Aguilar et al) were dismissed (due to expiration of the statute of limitations), then appealed by plaintiffs, and the dismissal was upheld by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal in 2013. In Delaware, the Blanco case (involving a single Costa Rican claimant) survived defendants’ motion to dismiss for expiration of the statute of limitations, was then appealed to the Delaware Supreme Court by defendants, and upheld by that court which recognized the doctrine of cross jurisdictional tolling. Also, in Delaware, HendlerLaw, P.C. filed nine matters during 2012, eight with the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware and one before the Delaware state court (Chaverri). Six of the federal matters were identical to claims then pending before the Louisiana courts and, upon defendants’ motion, were dismissed by the Delaware federal court, then appealed by plaintiffs, and the dismissals were subsequently upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Two of the eight Delaware cases (Abad-Castillo and Marquinez) (involving claims brought on behalf of 2,700 plantation workers from Costa Rica, Ecuador, Guatemala and Panama) remain pending and are the subject of motions to dismiss.

Delaware Matters

On or about July 21, 2011, an action encaptioned, Blanco v. AMVAC Chemical Corporation et al., was filed with the Superior Court of the State of Delaware in and for New Castle County (No. N11C-07-149 JOH) on behalf of an individual plaintiff, residing in Costa Rica, against several defendants, including, among others, AMVAC, The Dow Chemical Company, Occidental Chemical Corporation, and Dole Food Company. In the action, plaintiff claims personal injury (sterility) arising from the alleged exposure to DBCP between 1979 and 1980 while working as a contract laborer in a banana plantation in Costa Rica. Defendant Dow filed a motion to dismiss the action as being barred under the applicable statute of limitations, as this same plaintiff filed the same claim in Florida in 1995 and subsequently withdrew the matter. Plaintiff contends that the statute of limitations was tolled by a prior motion for class certification, which was denied. On August 8,

2012, the court denied Dow’s motion to dismiss based upon applicable statutes of limitation. In response to that denial, on August 20, 2012, defendants filed a motion for interlocutory appeal and, on September 18, 2012, the Delaware Supreme Court granted interlocutory appeal on the question of whether the State of Delaware will recognize cross jurisdictional tolling (that is, whether it is proper for a Delaware court to follow the class action tolling of another jurisdiction, in this case, Texas, rather than its own two year statute of limitations). On June 10, 2013, the Delaware Supreme Court denied the appeal and upheld the lower court ruling, holding that it was proper to extend the class action tolling exception to cross-jurisdictional class action cases. Thus, Blanco remains pending. AMVAC contends that the plaintiff could not have been exposed to any DBCP supplied by AMVAC in Costa Rica and intends to defend the matter vigorously. The Company does not believe that a loss is either probable or reasonably estimable and has not set up a loss contingency for the matter.

On or about May 31, 2012 (the day on which the trial court in Blanco denied defendants’ motion to dismiss), HendlerLaw, P.C., which represents plaintiffs in seven related matters that had been pending before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana (the “Hendler-Louisiana Cases” referred to in the Company’s Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2011 as Aguilar et al., v. Dole Fruit Company, Inc., et al (U.S.D.C., E.D. of LA No. CV-01305-CJB-SS)), filed nine separate actions, eight with the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (the “Hendler—Delaware Cases” (USCD DE No. 1:12-CV-00696-RGA)) and one with the Superior Court of the State of Delaware (which, for purposes of this filing shall be referred to as Chaverri et al. v. Dole Food Company, Inc. et al., case no. N12C-06-017-JOH). Six of the eight Hendler—Delaware cases and Chaverri involve claims for personal injury allegedly arising from exposure to DBCP on behalf of 235 banana workers from Costa Rica, Ecuador and Panama. Dole subsequently brought a motion to dismiss these seven matters under the “first-to-file” theory of jurisdiction, specifically in light of the fact that they involved identical claims and claimants as those appearing in the Hendler—Louisiana cases. On August 21, 2012, the U.S. District Court in the Hendler-Delaware cases granted defendants’ motion to dismiss six complaints (filed on behalf of 235 plaintiffs) finding that the same claimants and claims were pending in the Hendler-Louisiana cases where they had been first filed. Plaintiffs appealed the dismissal; however, on September 19, 2013, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal upheld the lower court’s decision, finding no reason to reverse the dismissal.

In October 2012, the federal district court in Louisiana granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the Hendler-Louisiana Cases for plaintiffs’ failure to bring the action within the applicable statute of limitations. On October 16, 2013, Plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal in the Hendler-Delaware cases. The Company believes that the appeal has no merit. Further, with respect to Chaverri, at this stage of the proceedings, the Company does not believe that a loss is either probable or reasonably estimable and has not set up a loss contingency.

Two of the eight Hendler-Delaware Cases (namely, Abad-Castillo and Marquinez) are unrelated to the Hendler-Louisiana Cases and, involve claims for physical injury arising from alleged exposure to DBCP over the course of the late 1960’s through the mid-1980’s on behalf of 2,700 banana plantation workers from Costa Rica, Ecuador, Guatemala and Panama. Defendant Dole brought a motion to dismiss 22 plaintiffs from the Abad-Castillo case on the ground that they were parties in the Hendler-Louisiana cases. On September 19, 2013, the appeals court granted, in part, and denied, in part, the motion to dismiss, holding that 14 of the 22 plaintiffs should be dismissed (as they were named as plaintiffs in a prior action filed by the Hendler law firm in Louisiana). As for the remaining eight plaintiffs, the court found that there was a question as to whether they were parties to earlier cases in Louisiana. Defendants are investigating possible defenses to Abad-Castillo and Marquinez, including whether any of the claimants had appeared in prior actions that may have been settled or dismissed, what statutes of limitations may apply, and whether claimants used any of defendants’ products. AMVAC intends to defend these matters vigorously. No discovery has commenced in either case, and it is too early to predict whether a loss is either probable or reasonably estimable; accordingly, the company has not set up a loss contingency on either of these matters.

Hawaiian Matters

Patrickson, et. al. v. Dole Food Company, et. al

In October 1997, AMVAC was served with two complaints in which it was named as a defendant, filed in the Circuit Court, First Circuit, State of Hawaii and in the Circuit Court of the Second Circuit, State of Hawaii (two identical suits) entitled Patrickson, et. al. v. Dole Food Company, et. al (“Patrickson Case”) alleging damages sustained from injuries (including sterility) to banana workers caused by plaintiffs’ exposure to DBCP while applying the product in their native countries. Other named defendants include: Dole Food Company, Shell Oil Company and Dow Chemical Company. The ten named plaintiffs are variously citizens of four countries—Guatemala, Costa Rica, Panama, and Ecuador. Punitive damages are sought against each defendant. The case was also filed as a class action on behalf of other workers allegedly so exposed in these four countries.

After several years of law and motion activity, Dow filed a motion for summary adjudication as to the remaining plaintiffs based on the statute of limitations, as they had filed suit in Florida in 1995. All defendants joined in this motion. The court granted this motion on June 9, 2009. Plaintiffs’ counsel unsuccessfully argued that their claims were tolled by prior class action cases. On November 30, 2009, the court denied a motion for reconsideration. Judgment in favor of the defendants was entered on July 28, 2010. On August 24, 2010, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal, which is presently pending. In March 2011, Dow filed a brief in opposition to the appeal, arguing that plaintiffs are barred from this action by the applicable statute of limitations. Following the completion of briefing on April 8, 2011, counsel for plaintiffs filed a pleading to withdraw and to substitute new counsel. The court has not ruled on any of the pending motions, nor do the court rules require that the court rule by any particular date. The Company does not believe that a loss is either probable or reasonably estimable and, accordingly, has not set up a loss contingency for this matter.

Adams v. Dole Food Company et al

On approximately November 23, 2007, AMVAC was served with a suit filed by two former Hawaiian pineapple workers (and their spouses), alleging that they had testicular cancer due to DBCP exposure: Adams v. Dole Food Company et al in the First Circuit for the State of Hawaii. The complaint was filed on June 29, 2007 and names Dole Food Company, Standard Fruit and Steamship Company, Dole Fresh Food, Pineapple Growers Association, AMVAC, Shell Oil Company, Dow Chemical Company and Occidental Chemical Corporation. Plaintiff Mark Adams alleges he was exposed to DBCP in 1974 and 1975 while working on Dole’s plantation on Oahu. Plaintiff Nelson Ng alleges he was exposed between 1971 and 1973 while working in Lanai City, Lanai. AMVAC answered the complaint on or about December 14, 2007. While little discovery has taken place, AMVAC denies that any of its product could have been used at the times and locations alleged by these plaintiffs. Dole Food Company was dismissed on the basis of the exclusive remedy of worker’s compensation benefits, as it was the employer of plaintiffs. However, plaintiffs have been granted relief to seek an interim appeal as to the dismissal of Dole, which appeal is pending. A stay has been placed on discovery other than to obtain written records. Recent pleadings included a request for withdrawal of plaintiffs’ counsel and substitution of new counsel. The substitution was denied by the court on November 14, 2012. There is no estimated date of opinion. The Company does not believe that a loss is either probable or reasonably estimable and has not set up a loss contingency for this matter.

Louisiana Matters (Federal)

On June 1, 2011, seven separate actions were filed by HendlerLaw, P.C. in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana on behalf of 259 individual plaintiffs (banana plantation workers from Ecuador, Panama and Costa Rica) against Dole Food Company, the Dow Chemical Company, Shell Oil Company, and AMVAC Chemical Corporation (to name a few) which, for purposes of convenience here, are encaptioned Aguilar et al., v. Dole Food Company, Inc., et al (U.S.D.C., E.D. of Louisiana No. CV-01305-CJB-SS). These matters allege personal injury (including sterility, cancer, skin disorders and other conditions) arising from alleged exposure to DBCP within the time period from 1960 through 1985 or later. A number of the plaintiffs appear to have been drawn from earlier DBCP litigation matters filed by HendlerLaw, P.C., including, for example, the Mendez case that was dismissed from state court in Hawaii (see the Company’s Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011). In September 2012, the court granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment based upon the expiration of the applicable statute of limitations. Plaintiffs filed an appeal to the dismissal and, on September 19, 2013, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed the order of dismissal of the lower court, finding no basis for reversal. Thus, this matter is concluded.

Louisiana Matters (State)

In November 1999, AMVAC was served with three complaints filed in the 29^th Judicial District Court for the Parish of St. Charles, State of Louisiana; we have reported on these matters under the name of the lead case, Eduardo Soriano, et al. v. AMVAC, et al. These matters allege personal injuries to about 314 persons (approximately 167 from Ecuador, 102 from Costa Rica, and 45 from Guatemala) from alleged exposure to DBCP. With the United States Supreme Court holding there was no federal court jurisdiction in the Patrickson case, the federal court judge remanded the cases to Louisiana state court in June 2003. In state court, the three cases were assigned to two different judges. On November 17, 2006, the state court separated the cases handled by HendlerLaw, P.C. from the cases being pursued only against the growers handled by different counsel. Subsequently, the cases against the growers were settled and all those actions were dismissed. The cases handled by

HendlerLaw, P.C. were supposed to be placed in a new action, which was not done. After a hearing on January 29, 2008, the court ruled on February 8, 2008 that these plaintiffs could still proceed in the existing cases rather than in a new action. In mid-June 2011, some 12 years after filing the actions, plaintiffs have propounded written discovery against defendants. In November 2012, the court granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment as to all of these cases on the ground that the applicable statute of limitations had expired. On October 16, 2013, plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal of the dismissal with the U.S. court of Appeal for the Third Circuit. AMVAC does not believe that the appeal has any merit and intends to defend it vigorously. With respect to these matters, the Company does not believe that a loss is either probable or reasonably estimable and has not set up a loss contingency for this matter.

Nicaraguan Matters

A review of court filings in Chinandega, Nicaragua, has found 85 suits alleging personal injury allegedly due to exposure to DBCP and involving approximately 3,592 plaintiffs have been filed against AMVAC and other parties. Of these cases, only two - Flavio Apolinar Castillo et al. v. AMVAC Chemical Corporation et al., No. 535/04 and Luis Cristobal Martinez Suazo et al. v. AMVAC Chemical Corporation et al., No. 679/04 Castillo and Suazo, (which were filed in 2004 and involve 15 banana workers) have been served on AMVAC. All but one of the suits in Nicaragua have been filed pursuant to Special Law 364, an October 2000 Nicaraguan statute that contains substantive and procedural provisions that Nicaragua’s Attorney General previously expressed as unconstitutional. Each of the Nicaraguan plaintiffs’ claims $1,000 in compensatory damages and $5,000 in punitive damages. In all of these cases, AMVAC is a joint defendant with Dow Chemical Company and Dole Food Company, Inc. AMVAC contends that the Nicaragua courts do not have jurisdiction over it and that Public Law 364 violates international due process of law. AMVAC has objected to personal jurisdiction and demanded under Law 364 that the claims be litigated in the United States. In 2007, the court denied these objections, and AMVAC appealed the denial. It is not presently known as to how many of these plaintiffs actually claim exposure to DBCP at the time AMVAC’s product was allegedly used nor is there any verification of the claimed injuries. Further, to date, plaintiffs have not had success in enforcing Nicaraguan judgments against domestic companies before U.S. courts. With respect to these Nicaraguan matters, AMVAC intends to defend any claim vigorously. Furthermore, the Company does not believe that a loss is either probable or reasonably estimable and has not set up a loss contingency for these matters.

B. Other Matters

Brazilian Citation. On or about October 5, 2009, IBAMA (the Brazilian equivalent of the USEPA) served AMVAC Brazil with a Notice of Violation alleging that two lots of Granutox 150 (formulated product having phorate as the active ingredient) stored at BASF S.A. (AMVAC’s exclusive distributor in Brazil) and FMC Quimica do Brasil Ltda. (which formulates end-use product in that country) were not in compliance with the end-use registration on file with IBAMA. Specifically, IBAMA alleged that the color of the lots (gray) was inconsistent with the description in IBAMA’s files (pink). IBAMA also indicated an intention to assess a fine of approximately $200 against AMVAC B. The Company has challenged the citation, for among other reasons, on the ground that the change in color has to do with the removal of a coloring component and that such removal poses no environmental or toxicity risk. In March 2011, IBAMA denied AMVAC B’s first appeal. The Company believes, however, that the agency is statutorily prevented from levying a fine of this magnitude for an infraction of this nature. Thus, the Company has filed another appeal on these grounds and expects to hear a response during 2014. At this stage, the Company believes that a loss of between $200 and $300 is probable and has set up a loss contingency in the amount of $200.

XML

Employee Deferred Compensation Plan and Employee Stock Purchase Plan

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Employee Deferred Compensation Plan and Employee Stock Purchase Plan

(5) Employee Deferred Compensation Plan and Employee Stock Purchase Plan

The Company maintains a deferred compensation plan (“the Plan”) for all eligible employees. The Plan calls for each eligible employee, at the employee’s election, to participate in an income deferral arrangement under Internal Revenue Code Section 401(k). The plan allows eligible employees to make contributions which cannot exceed 100% of compensation, or the annual dollar limit set by the Internal Revenue Code. The Company matches the first 5% of employee contributions. The Company’s contributions to the Plan amounted to $1,330, $982 and $870 in 2013, 2012 and 2011.

During 2001, the Company’s Board of Directors adopted the AVD Employee Stock Purchase Plan (the “Plan”). The Plan allows eligible employees to purchase shares of common stock through payroll deductions at a discounted price. An aggregate of approximately 1,000,000 shares of the Company’s Common Stock, par value $.10 per share (subject to adjustment for any stock dividend, stock split or other relevant changes in the Company’s capitalization) may be sold

pursuant to the Plan, which is intended to qualify under Section 423 of the Internal Revenue Code. The Plan allows for purchases in a series of offering periods, each six months in duration, with new offering periods (other than the initial offering period) commencing on January 1 and July 1 of each year. The initial offering period commenced on July 1, 2001. Pursuant to action taken by the Company’s Board of Directors in December 10, 2010, the expiration of the Plan was extended to December 31, 2013. The Plan was amended and restated on June 30, 2011 following shareholders’ ratification of the extended expiration date. In December 2013, the Board of Directors resolved to extend the expiration date of the Plan five years, that is, until December 31, 2018. Under the Plan, as amended as of June 30, 2011, 995,000 shares of the Company’s common stock were authorized. As of December 31, 2013, 901,220 shares remained authorized under the plan.

Shares of common stock purchased through the Plan in 2013, 2012 and 2011 were 27,923, 40,116 and 54,933, respectively.

XML

Royalties

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Royalties

(7) Royalties

The Company entered into a licensing agreement in December 2012 that requires a minimum annual royalty payable through 2022. In addition, the Company had other royalty agreements in place that extended through December 2013. Those agreements related to the acquisition of certain products as well as various licensing arrangements, none of which contained a minimum royalty provision. Certain royalty agreements contain confidentiality covenants. Royalty expenses were $116, $38 and $39 for 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively.

XML

Product Acquisitions - Additional Information (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Business Acquisition [Line Items]
Intangible assets acquired		$ 3,473	$ 316
Payment made toward Intangible Assets acquired during period		2,400
Acquisition cost associated with the product acquisition		7,447
Purchased product line			6,802
Fair value reduction	294	216	2,857
Product acquisition and licensing agreements obligation, Other Liability	3,886
Cost of Sales
Business Acquisition [Line Items]
Fair value reduction		0	495
Costs and Expenses
Business Acquisition [Line Items]
Fair value reduction	$ 294	$ 216	$ 2,362
Product Rights
Business Acquisition [Line Items]
Expected useful life	25 years
Customer Lists
Business Acquisition [Line Items]
Expected useful life	10 years
Trademarks
Business Acquisition [Line Items]
Expected useful life	25 years

XML

Schedule of Future Amortization Charges Related to Intangible Assets (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Finite Lived Intangible Assets And Liabilities Future Amortization Expense [Line Items]
2014	$ 6,352
2015	6,352
2016	6,352
2017	6,352
2018	6,352
Thereafter	75,247
Net Book Value	$ 107,007	$ 113,521

XML

Schedule of Intangible Assets Recognized in Connection with Product Acquisitions (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Business Acquisition [Line Items]
Beginning Balance	$ 113,521	$ 116,189	$ 115,249
Acquisitions during fiscal year		3,473	316
Impact of movement in exchange rates	(162)	(118)	(161)
Other adjustments related to deferred liabilities			6,802
Amortization expense	(6,352)	(6,023)	(6,017)
Ending Balance	$ 107,007	$ 113,521	$ 116,189

XML

Quarterly Data-Unaudited (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Schedule of Quarterly Data

Quarterly Data—2013	March 31		June 30		September 30		December 31
Net sales	$	121,537	$	86,761	$	97,201	$	75,522
Gross profit		53,781		42,066		43,159		32,341
Net income attributable to American Vanguard		16,915		8,386		8,870		278
Basic net income per share		0.60		0.29		0.32		0.01
Diluted net income per share		0.59		0.29		0.30		0.01
Quarterly Data—2012
Net sales	$	87,255	$	84,837	$	89,836	$	104,262
Gross profit		37,378		38,346		39,625		45,776
Net income		8,734		8,744		8,076		11,313
Basic net income per share		0.32		0.31		0.29		0.40
Diluted net income per share		0.31		0.30		0.28		0.39

XML

Summary of Different Loans in Place Constitute Short-Term and Long-Term Loan Balances Together (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2013		Dec. 31, 2012
Extinguishment of Debt [Line Items]
Long Term debt	$ 51,676		$ 36,196
Short-term	69		16,247
Total indebtedness	51,745		52,443
Term Loan
Extinguishment of Debt [Line Items]
Long Term debt			36,000
Short-term			10,000
Total indebtedness			46,000
Revolving line of credit
Extinguishment of Debt [Line Items]
Long Term debt	51,550
Total indebtedness	51,550	[1]
Notes payable
Extinguishment of Debt [Line Items]
Long Term debt	126		196
Short-term	69		6,247
Total indebtedness	$ 195		$ 6,443

[1] On June 17, 2013, AMVAC Chemical Corporation ("AMVAC"), our principal operating subsidiary, as borrower, and affiliates (including the Company), as guarantors and/or borrowers, entered into a Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement (the "New Credit Agreement") with a group of commercial lenders led by Bank of the West (AMVAC's primary bank) as agent, swing line lender and L/C issuer. The New Credit Agreement supersedes the Amended and Restated Credit Agreement ("First Amendment") dated as of January 10, 2011. The New Credit Agreement is a senior secured lending facility with a five year term and consists of a revolving line of credit of $200 million and an accordion feature for up to $100 million. The new facility includes both AMVAC CV and AMVAC BV (both Dutch subsidiaries) as borrowers. In connection with AMVAC's entering into the New Credit Agreement, all outstanding indebtedness under the First Amendment was rolled over into the New Credit Agreement, and term loans were converted into revolving debt. Under the New Credit Agreement, revolving loans bear interest at a variable rate based, at borrower's election with proper notice, on either (i) LIBOR plus the "Applicable Rate" which is based upon the Consolidated Funded Debt Ratio ("Eurocurrency Rate Loan") or (ii) the greater of (x) the Prime Rate, (y) the Federal Funds Rate plus 0.5%, and (z) the Daily One-Month LIBOR Rate plus 1.00%, plus, in the case of (x), (y) or (z) the Applicable Rate ("Alternate Base Rate Loan"). Interest payments for Eurocurrency Rate Loans are payable on the last day of each interest period (either one, two, three or six months, as selected by the borrower) and the maturity date, while interest payments for Alternate Base Rate Loans are payable on the last business day of each month and the maturity date. The senior secured revolving line of credit matures on June 17, 2018.

XML

Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)

(12) Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)

The following table lists the beginning balance, annual activity and ending balance of each component of accumulated other comprehensive income:

	Interest Rate Swap			FX Translation			Total
Balance, December 31, 2010	$	(17	)	$	(431	)	$	(448	)
Other comprehensive income/(loss) before reclassifications		(2,005	)		(933	)		(2,938	)
Amounts reclassified from AOCI		571			—			571
Tax effect		565			—			565
Balance, December 31, 2011		(886	)		(1,364	)		(2,250	)
Other comprehensive income/(loss) before reclassifications		(472	)		330			(142	)
Amounts reclassified from AOCI		721			—			721
Tax effect		(91	)		—			(91	)
Balance, December 31, 2012		(728	)		(1,034	)		(1,762	)
Other comprehensive income/(loss) before reclassifications		(75	)		326			251
Amounts reclassified from AOCI		712			—			712
Tax effect		(249	)		—			(249	)
Balance, December 31, 2013	$	(340	)	$	(708	)	$	(1,048	)

XML

Property, Plant and Equipment (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Summary of Property, Plant and Equipment

Property, plant and equipment at December 31, 2013 and 2012 consist of the following:

	2013			2012			Estimated useful lives
Land	$	2,458		$	2,458
Buildings and improvements		14,167			12,537			10 to 30 years
Machinery and equipment		94,184			89,089			3 to 15 years
Office furniture, fixtures and equipment		9,717			8,400			3 to 10 years
Automotive equipment		278			312			3 to 6 years
Construction in progress		10,615			3,363
		131,419			116,159
Less accumulated depreciation		(78,951	)		(70,458	)
	$	52,468		$	45,701

XML

Long Term Debt - Additional Information (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Line of Credit Facility [Line Items]
Fixed interest rate for interest rate swap contract	3.39%	3.39%	3.39%
Interest rate swap, start date	Mar. 30, 2011
Interest rate swap, termination date	Dec. 31, 2014
Total indebtedness	$ 51,745	$ 52,443
Maximum
Line of Credit Facility [Line Items]
Capacity to increase borrowings under credit agreement	148,450
Term Loan
Line of Credit Facility [Line Items]
Average line of credit facility outstanding	23,318	50,957
Weighted average interest rate	3.80%	3.70%
Secured Revolving Credit Facility
Line of Credit Facility [Line Items]
Average line of credit facility outstanding	$ 29,284	$ 0
Weighted average interest rate	3.10%	0.00%

XML

Derivative Liabilities Recognized in Current Installments of Other Liabilities in Consolidated Balance Sheets (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2013
Derivatives, Fair Value [Line Items]
Gross Amounts of Recognized Liabilities	$ (564)
Gross Amounts Offset in the Statement of Financial Position
Net Amounts of Liabilities Presented in the Statement of Financial Position	(564)
Financial Instruments
Cash Collateral Pledged
Net Amount	(564)
Bank of the West
Derivatives, Fair Value [Line Items]
Gross Amounts of Recognized Liabilities	(564)
Gross Amounts Offset in the Statement of Financial Position
Net Amounts of Liabilities Presented in the Statement of Financial Position	(564)
Financial Instruments
Cash Collateral Pledged
Net Amount	$ (564)

XML

Consolidated Statements of Stockholders' Equity (USD $) In Thousands, except Share data	Total	Common Stock	Additional Paid-in Capital	Retained Earnings	Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income/(loss)	Non- Controlling Interest	Treasury Stock
Beginning Balance at Dec. 31, 2010	$ 166,437	$ 2,974	$ 43,403	$ 123,661	$ (448)		$ (3,153)
Beginning Balance (in shares) at Dec. 31, 2010		29,735,928					2,260,996
Stocks issued under ESPP (in shares)		54,933
Stocks issued under ESPP	465	6	459
Cash dividends on common stock ($0.22 per share in 2013, $0.22 per share in 2012 and $0.08 per share in 2011)	(2,205)			(2,205)
Foreign currency translation adjustment, net	(933)				(933)
Stock based compensation	1,994		1,994
Changes in fair value of interest swap	(869)				(869)
Stock options exercised and grants of restricted stock units (in shares)		54,186
Stock options exercised and grants of restricted stock units	115	5	110
Net (loss) income	22,068			22,068
Ending Balance at Dec. 31, 2011	187,072	2,985	45,966	143,524	(2,250)		(3,153)
Ending Balance (in shares) at Dec. 31, 2011		29,845,047					2,260,996
Stocks issued under ESPP (in shares)		40,116
Stocks issued under ESPP	551	4	547
Cash dividends on common stock ($0.22 per share in 2013, $0.22 per share in 2012 and $0.08 per share in 2011)	(6,148)			(6,148)
Foreign currency translation adjustment, net	330				330
Stock based compensation	2,950		2,950
Changes in fair value of interest swap	158				158
Stock options exercised and grants of restricted stock units (in shares)		881,567					49,638
Stock options exercised and grants of restricted stock units	2,676	88	4,239				(1,651)
Excess tax benefits from share based payment arrangements	621		621
Non-controlling interest contribution	400					400
Net (loss) income	36,826			36,867		(41)
Ending Balance at Dec. 31, 2012	225,436	3,077	54,323	174,243	(1,762)	359	(4,804)
Ending Balance (in shares) at Dec. 31, 2012	30,766,730	30,766,730					2,310,634
Stocks issued under ESPP (in shares)		27,923
Stocks issued under ESPP	743	3	740
Cash dividends on common stock ($0.22 per share in 2013, $0.22 per share in 2012 and $0.08 per share in 2011)	(6,222)			(6,222)
Foreign currency translation adjustment, net	326				326
Stock based compensation	3,819		3,819
Changes in fair value of interest swap	388				388
Stock options exercised and grants of restricted stock units (in shares)		298,129
Stock options exercised and grants of restricted stock units	867	29	838
Excess tax benefits from share based payment arrangements	440		440
Shares repurchased (in shares)							70,000
Shares repurchased	(1,934)						(1,934)
Net (loss) income	33,932			34,449		(517)
Ending Balance at Dec. 31, 2013	$ 257,795	$ 3,109	$ 60,160	$ 202,470	$ (1,048)	$ (158)	$ (6,738)
Ending Balance (in shares) at Dec. 31, 2013	31,092,782	31,092,782					2,380,634

XML

Property, Plant and Equipment

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Property, Plant and Equipment

(1) Property, Plant and Equipment

Property, plant and equipment at December 31, 2013 and 2012 consist of the following:

	2013			2012			Estimated useful lives
Land	$	2,458		$	2,458
Buildings and improvements		14,167			12,537			10 to 30 years
Machinery and equipment		94,184			89,089			3 to 15 years
Office furniture, fixtures and equipment		9,717			8,400			3 to 10 years
Automotive equipment		278			312			3 to 6 years
Construction in progress		10,615			3,363
		131,419			116,159
Less accumulated depreciation		(78,951	)		(70,458	)
	$	52,468		$	45,701

XML

Litigation and Environmental - Additional Information (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	1 Months Ended	12 Months Ended				12 Months Ended		1 Months Ended					12 Months Ended				1 Months Ended	12 Months Ended	1 Months Ended	12 Months Ended			12 Months Ended
	Sep. 19, 2012 Claimant	Dec. 31, 2013	Mar. 31, 2011	Mar. 31, 2011 Minimum	Mar. 31, 2011 Maximum	Dec. 31, 2013 Louisiana Case	Dec. 31, 2013 Louisiana Superior Court Case	Jun. 01, 2011 Louisiana Federal Case	Nov. 30, 1999 Louisiana State Person Case	Nov. 30, 1999 Ecuador Louisiana State Person	Nov. 30, 1999 Costa Rica Louisiana State Person	Nov. 30, 1999 Guatemala Louisiana State Person	Dec. 31, 2013 Hendler Law Firm Plaintiff	Dec. 31, 2013 Hendler Law Firm Louisiana Case	Dec. 31, 2013 Hendler Law Firm Delaware Case	Dec. 31, 2013 Hendler Law Firm Delaware Superior Court Case	Aug. 21, 2012 Hendler Law Firm Delaware U.S. State District Court Case	Dec. 31, 2013 Hendler Law Firm Delaware U.S. State District Court Case	Oct. 31, 1997 Former Banana Workers Plaintiff Country	Dec. 31, 2013 Former Banana Workers Nicaraguan Case Plaintiff	Dec. 31, 2013 Former Banana Workers Nicaraguan Public Law Case	Dec. 31, 2013 Former Banana Workers Nicaraguan Special Law Case	Dec. 31, 2013 Former Banana Workers Nicaraguan Compensatory Damages	Dec. 31, 2013 Former Banana Workers Nicaraguan Punitive Damages	Dec. 31, 2013 Former Banana Workers Hendler Law Firm Delaware Person Case	Dec. 31, 2013 Former Banana Workers Hendler Law Firm Delaware U.S. State District Court Person
Loss Contingencies [Line Items]
Number of lawsuits																				100
Lawsuits Filed In Country								7												15
Number of dismissed complaints						6	3						22	7			6
Number of Lawsuits Filed															9	1		8
Number of labor cases pending																									2
Number of claimants																									2,700	235
Legal Proceedings Number Of Personal Injuries									314	167	102	45			2			6
Number of Claimants Involved in Case	14
Number of Claimants Not Involved in Case	8
Number of claimants																			10	3,592
Number Of Countries																			4
Number of Lawsuits Filed									3												85	2
Value of claims paid																							$ 1,000	$ 5,000
Potential value of fine against AMVAC		200
Amount set up for loss contingency			200
Probable contingency Loss				$ 200	$ 300

XML

Future Minimum Lease Payments Under Term Of Leases (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2013
Operating Leased Assets [Line Items]
2014	$ 850
2015	868
2016	433
2017	135
2018	135
Thereafter	1,170
Operating Leases, Future Minimum Payments Due, Total	$ 3,591

XML

Long-Term Debt (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Summary of Long Term Debt

Long-term debt of the Company at December 31, 2013 and 2012 is summarized as follows:

	2013			2012
Term loan		—			46,000
Revolving line of credit(a)		51,550			—
Notes payable		195			6,443
		51,745			52,443
Less current installments		(69	)		(16,247	)
	$	51,676		$	36,196

(a) On June 17, 2013, AMVAC Chemical Corporation (“AMVAC”), our principal operating subsidiary, as borrower, and affiliates (including the Company), as guarantors and/or borrowers, entered into a Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement (the “New Credit Agreement”) with a group of commercial lenders led by Bank of the West (AMVAC’s primary bank) as agent, swing line lender and L/C issuer. The New Credit Agreement supersedes the Amended and Restated Credit Agreement (“First Amendment”) dated as of January 10, 2011. The New Credit Agreement is a senior secured lending facility with a five year term and consists of a revolving line of credit of $200 million and an accordion feature for up to $100 million. The new facility includes both AMVAC CV and AMVAC BV (both Dutch subsidiaries) as borrowers. In connection with AMVAC’s entering into the New Credit Agreement, all outstanding indebtedness under the First Amendment was rolled over into the New Credit Agreement, and term loans were converted into revolving debt. Under the New Credit Agreement, revolving loans bear interest at a variable rate based, at borrower’s election with proper notice, on either (i) LIBOR plus the “Applicable Rate” which is based upon the Consolidated Funded Debt Ratio (“Eurocurrency Rate Loan”) or (ii) the greater of (x) the Prime Rate, (y) the Federal Funds Rate plus 0.5%, and (z) the Daily One-Month LIBOR Rate plus 1.00%, plus, in the case of (x), (y) or (z) the Applicable Rate (“Alternate Base Rate Loan”). Interest payments for Eurocurrency Rate Loans are payable on the last day of each interest period (either one, two, three or six months, as selected by the borrower) and the maturity date, while interest payments for Alternate Base Rate Loans are payable on the last business day of each month and the maturity date. The senior secured revolving line of credit matures on June 17, 2018.

Payments on Long-term Debt Details

Approximate principal payments on long-term debt at December 31, 2013 are as follows:

2014	$	69
2015		71
2016		55
2017		—
2018		51,550
	$	51,745

Amount of Outstanding Debt and Notional Amount on Interest Rate Swap Contract

The table below shows the amount of outstanding debt and the related notional amount on the interest rate swap contract at each of the balance sheet dates:

	Outstanding Variable Rate Debt		Notional Amount on Interest Rate Swap
At December 31, 2011	$	54,000	$	45,000
At December 31, 2012		46,000		44,250
At December 31, 2013		51,550		36,750

Summary of Short-Term and Long-Term Loan Balances in the Balance Sheet

The Company has various loans in place that together constitute the short-term and long-term loan balances shown in the balance sheet at December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012. These are summarized in the following table:

Indebtedness	December 31, 2013						December 31, 2012
$000’s	Long-term		Short-term		Total		Long-term		Short-term		Total
Term loan	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	36,000	$	10,000	$	46,000
Revolving line of credit		51,550		—		51,550		—		—		—
Notes payable		126		69		195		196		6,247		6,443
Total indebtedness	$	51,676	$	69	$	51,745	$	36,196	$	16,247	$	52,443

XML

Weighted Average Exercise Prices for Options Granted and Exercisable and Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Life for Options Outstanding (Detail) (USD $) In Thousands, except Share data, unless otherwise specified					12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011	Dec. 31, 2010	Dec. 31, 2013 Incentive Stock Option Plan	Dec. 31, 2012 Incentive Stock Option Plan
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Number of Shares, Outstanding					561,029	705,345
Number of Shares, Expected to Vest					560,972	699,537
Number of Shares, Exercisable					554,362	179,345
Weighted Average Exercise Price, Outstanding	$ 7.76	$ 7.70	$ 7.44	$ 7.65	$ 7.76	$ 7.70
Weighted Average Exercise Price, Expected to Vest					$ 7.76	$ 7.70
Weighted Average Exercisable, Exercise Price	$ 7.70	$ 7.95	$ 7.26	$ 7.77	$ 7.70	$ 7.95
Weighted Average Remaining Life, Outstanding					83 months	91 months
Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Life, Expected to Vest					83 months	91 months
Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Life, Exercisable					83 months	78 months
Intrinsic Value, Outstanding					$ 9,276	$ 16,481
Intrinsic Value, Expected to Vest					9,275	16,345
Intrinsic Value, Exercisable					$ 9,196	$ 4,147

XML

Description of Business, Basis of Consolidation and Significant Accounting Policies - Additional Information (Detail) In Thousands, except Share data, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended													12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013 USD ($) Derivative	Dec. 31, 2013 EUR (€)	Dec. 31, 2012 USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2011 USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2012 Unvested Common Stock USD ($) Employee	Dec. 31, 2012 Unvested Common Stock Modification USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2013 Stock Option USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2011 Stock Option USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2013 Restricted Stock USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2012 Restricted Stock USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2011 Restricted Stock USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2013 Performance Shares USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2013 Cash Flow Hedging Interest Rate Swap USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2013 Building Minimum	Dec. 31, 2013 Building Maximum	Dec. 31, 2013 Machinery and equipment Minimum	Dec. 31, 2013 Machinery and equipment Maximum	Dec. 31, 2013 Office furniture, fixtures and equipment Minimum	Dec. 31, 2013 Office furniture, fixtures and equipment Maximum	Dec. 31, 2013 Automotive equipment Minimum	Dec. 31, 2013 Automotive equipment Maximum	Dec. 31, 2013 Construction in progress Minimum	Dec. 31, 2013 Construction in progress Maximum
Basis Of Presentation And Summary Of Significant Accounting Policies [Line Items]
Advertising expense	$ 4,011		$ 2,680	$ 2,095
Property, Plant and Equipment Useful Life														10 years	30 years	3 years	15 years	3 years	10 years	3 years	6 years	3 years	15 years
Derivative euro exchange forward contract		4,500
Notional amount of interest rate swap													36,750
Number of Interest rate swap contract outstanding	1	1
Losses in other comprehensive income expected to be reclassified to earnings	(564)
Carrying value of equity investment	2,701
Quoted market value of equity investment	4,073
Reduction in share based compensation expense	247
Forfeited percentage of stock							0.80%		8.00%			28.60%
Nonvested unamortized stock-based compensation expense							21		5,550			564
Nonvested unamortized stock-based compensation expense, contractual term							6 months		1 year 10 months 24 days			2 years 4 months 24 days
Weighted average grant-date fair values of options in period								$ 6.62	$ 30.91	$ 21.51	$ 12.30
Retired number of employees					2
Total common stock, unvested					13,334
Common stock value per share					$ 7.50	$ 23.55
Additional share based compensation						$ 314

XML

Stock Options

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Stock Options

(11) Stock Options

Incentive Stock Option Plans (“ISOP”)

Under the terms of the Company’s ISOP, under which options to purchase 4,296,000 shares of common stock can be issued, all key employees are eligible to receive non-assignable and non-transferable options to purchase shares. The exercise price of any option may not be less than the fair market value of the shares on the date of grant; provided, however, that the exercise price of any option granted to an eligible employee owning more than 10% of the outstanding common stock may not be less than 110% of the fair market value of the shares underlying such option on the date of grant. No options granted may be exercisable more than ten years after the date of grant. The options granted generally vest evenly over a three to five year period, beginning on the date of the grant.

In 2011, the Company granted incentive stock options to purchase 20,000 shares of common stock to employees. Of those options, one third of the total option shares vest on each of the first, second, and third anniversaries of the date of grant. All options granted are non-assignable and non-transferable. In 2012 and 2013, no options were granted.

Nonstatutory Stock Options (“NSSO”)

The Company did not grant any non-statutory stock options during the three years ended December 31, 2013.

Option activity within each plan is as follows:

	Incentive Stock Option Plans			Non-Statutory Stock Options Plans		Weighted Average Price Per Share		Exercisable Weighted Average Price Per Share
Balance outstanding, December 31, 2010		1,487,331			—	$	7.65	$	7.77
Options granted, range from $11.32-$13.24		20,000			—		12.28
Options exercised, range from $8.10-$11.30		(48,000	)		—		8.63
Options expired		(70,817	)		—		12.38
Balance outstanding, December 31, 2011		1,388,514			—	$	7.44	$	7.26
Options exercised, range from $3.67-$14.99		(659,733	)		—		7.05
Options expired		(23,436	)		—		10.41
Balance outstanding, December 31, 2012		705,345			—	$	7.70	$	7.95
Options exercised, $7.50		(126,149	)		—		7.50
Options expired		(18,167	)		—		7.50
Balance outstanding, December 31, 2013		561,029			—	$	7.76	$	7.70

Information relating to stock options at December 31, 2013 summarized by exercise price is as follows:

	Outstanding Weighted Average						Exercisable Weighted Average
Exercise Price Per Share	Shares		Remaining Life (Months)		Exercise Price		Shares		Exercise Price
Incentive Stock Option Plan:
$7.50		534,350		83	$	7.50		534,350	$	7.50
$11.32-$14.75		26,679		80	$	12.90		20,012	$	13.10
		561,029			$	7.76		554,362	$	7.70

The weighted average exercise prices for options granted and exercisable and the weighted average remaining contractual life for options outstanding as of December 31, 2012 and 2013 was as follows:

	Number of Shares		Weighted Average Exercise Price		Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Life (Months)		Intrinsic Value (thousands)
As of December 31, 2012:
Incentive Stock Option Plans:
Outstanding		705,345	$	7.70		91	$	16,481
Expected to Vest		699,537	$	7.70		91	$	16,345
Exercisable		179,345	$	7.95		78	$	4,147
As of December 31, 2013:
Incentive Stock Option Plans:
Outstanding		561,029	$	7.76		83	$	9,276
Expected to Vest		560,972	$	7.76		83	$	9,275
Exercisable		554,362	$	7.70		83	$	9,196

The total intrinsic value of options exercised during 2013, 2012 and 2011 was $2,365, $15,910, and $4, respectively. Cash received from stock options exercised during 2013, 2012, and 2011 was $946, $2,996, and $414 respectively. Upon exercise in 2012, the Company also received 49,638 shares which were valued on the day of exercise at $1,651.

Restricted Stock Grants

During 2013, the Company issued a total of 162,336 shares of common and restricted stock to certain employees and non-executive board members. Vesting ranges from immediate to three years from the date of grant. The fair values of the grants range from $23.43 to $31.83 per share based on the publicly traded share prices. The total fair value of $5,018 will be recognized over the related service periods. During 2013, 11,999 shares of common stock granted to employees were forfeited.

During 2012, the Company issued a total of 248,536 shares of common and restricted stock to certain employees and non-executive board members. Vesting ranges from immediate to three years from the date of grant. The fair values of the grants range from $13.34 to $34.04 per share based on the publicly traded share prices. The total fair value of $5,346 will be recognized over the related service periods. During 2012, 1,367 shares of common stock granted to employees were forfeited.

During 2011, the Company issued a total of 35,640 shares of common and restricted stock to certain employees and non-executive board members. Vesting ranges from immediate to three years from the date of grant. The fair values of the grants range from $11.26 to $12.89 per share based on the publicly traded share prices. The total fair value of $411 will be recognized over the related service periods. During 2011, 5,556 shares of common stock granted to employees were forfeited.

A status summary of non-vested shares as of December 31, 2013, is presented below:

	Number of Shares			Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair Value
Nonvested shares at January 1, 2013		245,817		$	20.23
Granted		162,336		$	30.91
Vested		(19,452	)	$	18.38
Forfeited		(11,999	)	$	22.75
Nonvested shares at December 31, 2013		376,702		$	24.85

Performance Based Stock Grants

During 2013, the Company granted a total of 24,637 performance based shares that will cliff vest after three years of service. 80% of these performance based shares are based upon net income and net sales for the period commencing April 1, 2013 and ending December 31, 2015; the remaining 20% of performance based shares are based upon the Company’s stock price appreciation over the course of the period commencing June 6, 2013 and ending on December 31, 2015. Both parts of these awards vest in three years, but are subject to reduction to a minimum (or even zero) for meeting less than the targeted performance and to increase to a maximum of 200% for meeting in excess of the targeted performance.

The performance based shares related to net income and net sales have an average fair value of $30.13 per share. The fair value was determined by using the publicly traded share price as of the date of grant. The performance based shares related to the Company’s stock price have an average fair value of $15.31 per share. The fair value was determined by using the Monte Carlo valuation method. For awards with performance conditions, the Company recognizes share-based compensation cost on a straight-line basis for each performance criteria over the implied service period when the Company believes it is probable that the performance targets, as defined in the agreements, will be achieved.

During 2013, the Company recognized stock-based compensation expense related to performance based shares of $90. There were no performance based shares issued by the Company prior to those issued during the quarter ended June 30, 2013.

As of December 31, 2013, the Company had approximately $564 of unamortized stock-based compensation expenses related to unvested performance based shares. This amount will be recognized over the weighted-average period of 2.4 years. This projected expense will change if any performance based shares are granted or cancelled prior to the respective reporting periods or if there are any changes required to be made for estimated forfeitures.

A status summary of non-vested shares as of December 31, 2013, is presented below:

	Number of Shares		Weighted Average Grant- Date Fair Value
Nonvested shares at January 1, 2013		—	$	—
Granted		24,637	$	28.43
Vested		—	$	—
Forfeited		—	$	—
Nonvested shares at December 31, 2013		24,637	$	28.43