Commitments, Contingent Liabilities and Litigation	3 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2018
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments, Contingent Liabilities and Litigation	9. Commitments, Contingent Liabilities and Litigation Commitments Generic Sourcing Venture with CVS Health Corporation ("CVS Health") In July 2014, we established Red Oak Sourcing, LLC ("Red Oak Sourcing"), a U.S.-based generic pharmaceutical sourcing venture with CVS Health for an initial term of 10 years. Red Oak Sourcing negotiates generic pharmaceutical supply contracts on behalf of its participants. Due to the achievement of predetermined milestones, we are required to make quarterly payments of $45.6 million to CVS Health for the remainder of the initial term. New York Opioid Stewardship Act In April 2018, the State of New York passed a budget which included the Opioid Stewardship Act (the "OSA"). The OSA created an aggregate $100 million annual assessment on all manufacturers and distributors licensed to sell or distribute opioids in New York. Each licensed manufacturer and distributor is required to pay a portion of the assessment based on its ratable share, as determined by the state, of the total morphine milligram equivalents sold or distributed in New York during the applicable calendar year. The initial payment is due on January 1, 2019 for opioids sold or distributed during calendar year 2017. The Healthcare Distribution Alliance and other parties have filed lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the law and seeking an injunction against its enforcement. In October, we received notices from the New York Department of Health (the "Department") of our estimated payment amount for calendar year 2017. The Department noted that it is still validating reported data and the final amount owed could vary significantly from this estimated payment amount. We accrue for contingencies if it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount can be reasonably estimated. At September 30, 2018, we recorded an aggregate accrual of $34 million for calendar year 2017 and the first three quarters of calendar year 2018 based on the estimated payment amount. This is our best estimate of the OSA payments owed at September 30, 2018. Legal Proceedings We become involved from time to time in disputes, litigation and regulatory matters. We may be named from time to time in qui tam actions initiated by private third parties. In such actions, the private parties purport to act on behalf of federal or state governments, allege that false claims have been submitted for payment by the government and may receive an award if their claims are successful. After a private party has filed a qui tam action, the government must investigate the private party's claim and determine whether to intervene in and take control over the litigation. These actions may remain under seal while the government makes this determination. If the government declines to intervene, the private party may nonetheless continue to pursue the litigation on his or her own purporting to act on behalf of the government. From time to time, we become aware through employees, internal audits or other parties of possible compliance matters, such as complaints or concerns relating to accounting, internal accounting controls, financial reporting, auditing, or other ethical matters or relating to compliance with laws such as healthcare fraud and abuse, anti-corruption or anti-bribery laws. When we become aware of such possible compliance matters, we investigate internally and take appropriate corrective action. In addition, from time to time, we receive subpoenas or requests for information from various federal or state agencies relating to our business or to the business of a customer, supplier or other industry participants. Internal investigations, subpoenas or requests for information could lead to the assertion of claims or the commencement of legal proceedings against us or result in sanctions. From time to time, we may determine that products we manufacture or market do not meet our specifications, regulatory requirements, or published standards. When we or a regulatory agency identify a potential quality or regulatory issue, we investigate and take appropriate corrective action. Such actions can lead to product recalls, costs to repair or replace affected products, temporary interruptions in product sales, action by regulators and product liability claims and lawsuits, including class actions. Even absent an identified regulatory or quality issue or product recall, we can become subject to product liability claims and lawsuits. We accrue for contingencies related to disputes, litigation and regulatory matters if it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Because these matters are inherently unpredictable and unfavorable developments or resolutions can occur, assessing contingencies is highly subjective and requires judgments about future events. We regularly review contingencies to determine whether our accruals and related disclosures are adequate. The amount of ultimate loss may differ from these estimates. We recognize income from the favorable outcome of litigation when we receive the associated cash or assets. We recognize estimated loss contingencies for certain litigation and regulatory matters and income from favorable resolution of litigation in litigation (recoveries)/charges in our condensed consolidated statements of earnings. Opioid Lawsuits Pharmaceutical wholesale distributors, including us, have been named as defendants in over 1,000 lawsuits relating to the distribution of prescription opioid pain medications. These lawsuits have been filed in various federal, state, and other courts by a variety of plaintiffs, primarily counties, municipalities and other political subdivisions from 48 states. Plaintiffs also include state attorneys general, unions and other health and welfare funds, hospital systems and other healthcare providers. Of these lawsuits, 50 are purported class actions. The lawsuits seek equitable relief and monetary damages based on a variety of legal theories including various common law claims, such as negligence, public nuisance, unjust enrichment as well as violations of controlled substance laws and various other statutes. Many also name pharmaceutical manufacturers, retail pharmacy chains and other entities as defendants. The vast majority of these lawsuits were filed in U.S. federal court and have been transferred for consolidated pre-trial proceedings in a Multi-District Litigation proceeding in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. The court, among other things, ordered that three lawsuits be set for trial in 2019. In connection with these proceedings, distributors have engaged in preliminary discussions with various parties, including state attorneys general, regarding possible resolution structures. In addition, 39 state attorneys general have formed a multi-state task force to investigate the manufacturing, distribution, dispensing and prescribing practices of opioid medications. We have received requests related to this multi-state investigation, as well as civil investigative demands, subpoenas or requests for information from these and other state attorneys general offices. We are cooperating with the offices conducting these investigations. We are vigorously defending ourselves in all of these opioid matters. Given the uncertainty surrounding these lawsuits and investigations and their early stages, we are unable to predict their outcome or estimate a range of reasonably possible losses. Product Liability Lawsuits As of October 30, 2018, we are named as a defendant in 198 product liability lawsuits coordinated in Alameda County Superior Court in California involving claims by approximately 2,218 plaintiffs that allege personal injuries associated with the use of Cordis OptEase and TrapEase inferior vena cava (IVC) filter products. Another 19 similar lawsuits involving claims by approximately 20 plaintiffs are pending in other jurisdictions. These lawsuits seek a variety of remedies, including unspecified monetary damages. We are vigorously defending ourselves in these lawsuits. At September 30, 2018, we had a total of $268 million, net of estimated insurance recoveries of $10 million, accrued for losses and legal defense costs related to the Cordis IVC filter lawsuits which are presented on a gross basis in the condensed consolidated balance sheets. During the three-months ended September 30, 2018, we refined the methodology used to estimate probable losses and have developed a range of estimated losses. Because no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount within the range, we have accrued the minimum amount in the range. We estimate the high end of the range to be approximately $459 million, net of estimated insurance recoveries of $10 million.

9. Commitments, Contingent Liabilities and Litigation

Commitments

Generic Sourcing Venture with CVS Health Corporation ("CVS Health")

In July 2014, we established Red Oak Sourcing, LLC ("Red Oak Sourcing"), a U.S.-based generic pharmaceutical sourcing venture with CVS Health for an initial term of 10 years. Red Oak Sourcing negotiates generic pharmaceutical supply contracts on behalf of its participants. Due to the achievement of predetermined milestones, we are required to make quarterly payments of $45.6 million to CVS Health for the remainder of the initial term.

New York Opioid Stewardship Act

In April 2018, the State of New York passed a budget which included the Opioid Stewardship Act (the "OSA"). The OSA created an aggregate $100 million annual assessment on all manufacturers and distributors licensed to sell or distribute opioids in New York. Each licensed manufacturer and distributor is required to pay a portion of the assessment based on its ratable share, as determined by the state, of the total morphine milligram equivalents sold or distributed in New York during the applicable calendar year. The initial payment is due on January 1, 2019 for opioids sold or distributed during calendar year 2017. The Healthcare Distribution Alliance and other parties have filed lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the law and seeking an injunction against its enforcement.

In October, we received notices from the New York Department of Health (the "Department") of our estimated payment amount for calendar year 2017. The Department noted that it is still validating reported data and the final amount owed could vary significantly from this estimated payment amount.

We accrue for contingencies if it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount can be reasonably estimated. At September 30, 2018, we recorded an aggregate accrual of $34 million for calendar year 2017 and the first three quarters of calendar year 2018 based on the estimated payment amount. This is our best estimate of the OSA payments owed at September 30, 2018.

Legal Proceedings

We become involved from time to time in disputes, litigation and regulatory matters.

We may be named from time to time in qui tam actions initiated by private third parties. In such actions, the private parties purport to act on behalf of federal or state governments, allege that false claims have been submitted for payment by the government and may receive an award if their claims are successful. After a private party has filed a qui tam action, the government must investigate the private party's claim and determine whether to intervene in and take control over the litigation. These actions may remain under seal while the government makes this determination. If the government declines to intervene, the private party may nonetheless continue to pursue the litigation on his or her own purporting to act on behalf of the government.

From time to time, we become aware through employees, internal audits or other parties of possible compliance matters, such as complaints or concerns relating to accounting, internal accounting controls, financial reporting, auditing, or other ethical matters or relating to compliance with laws such as healthcare fraud and abuse, anti-corruption or anti-bribery laws. When we become aware of such possible compliance matters, we investigate internally and take appropriate corrective action. In addition, from time to time, we receive subpoenas or requests for information from various federal or state agencies relating to our business or to the business of a customer, supplier or other industry participants. Internal investigations, subpoenas or requests for information could lead to the assertion of claims or the commencement of legal proceedings against us or result in sanctions.

From time to time, we may determine that products we manufacture or market do not meet our specifications, regulatory requirements, or published standards. When we or a regulatory agency identify a potential quality or regulatory issue, we investigate and take appropriate corrective action. Such actions can lead to product recalls, costs to repair or replace affected products, temporary interruptions in product sales, action by regulators and product liability claims and lawsuits, including class actions. Even absent an identified regulatory or quality issue or product recall, we can become subject to product liability claims and lawsuits.

We accrue for contingencies related to disputes, litigation and regulatory matters if it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Because these matters are inherently unpredictable and unfavorable developments or resolutions can occur, assessing contingencies is highly subjective and requires judgments about future events. We regularly review contingencies to determine whether our accruals and related disclosures are adequate. The amount of ultimate loss may differ from these estimates.

We recognize income from the favorable outcome of litigation when we receive the associated cash or assets.

We recognize estimated loss contingencies for certain litigation and regulatory matters and income from favorable resolution of litigation in litigation (recoveries)/charges in our condensed consolidated statements of earnings.

Opioid Lawsuits

Pharmaceutical wholesale distributors, including us, have been named as defendants in over 1,000 lawsuits relating to the distribution of prescription opioid pain medications. These lawsuits have been filed in various federal, state, and other courts by a variety of plaintiffs, primarily counties, municipalities and other political subdivisions from 48 states. Plaintiffs also include state attorneys general, unions and other health and welfare funds, hospital systems and other healthcare providers. Of these lawsuits, 50 are purported class actions. The lawsuits seek equitable relief and monetary damages based on a variety of legal theories including various common law claims, such as negligence, public nuisance, unjust enrichment as well as violations of controlled substance laws and various other statutes. Many also name pharmaceutical manufacturers, retail pharmacy chains and other entities as defendants.

The vast majority of these lawsuits were filed in U.S. federal court and have been transferred for consolidated pre-trial proceedings in a Multi-District Litigation proceeding in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. The court, among other things, ordered that three lawsuits be set for trial in 2019. In connection with these proceedings, distributors have engaged in preliminary discussions with various parties, including state attorneys general, regarding possible resolution structures.

In addition, 39 state attorneys general have formed a multi-state task force to investigate the manufacturing, distribution, dispensing and prescribing practices of opioid medications. We have received requests related to this multi-state investigation, as well as civil investigative demands, subpoenas or requests for information from these and other state attorneys general offices. We are cooperating with the offices conducting these investigations.

We are vigorously defending ourselves in all of these opioid matters. Given the uncertainty surrounding these lawsuits and investigations and their early stages, we are unable to predict their outcome or estimate a range of reasonably possible losses.

Product Liability Lawsuits

As of October 30, 2018, we are named as a defendant in 198 product liability lawsuits coordinated in Alameda County Superior Court in California involving claims by approximately 2,218 plaintiffs that allege personal injuries associated with the use of Cordis OptEase and TrapEase inferior vena cava (IVC) filter products. Another 19 similar lawsuits involving claims by approximately 20 plaintiffs are pending in other jurisdictions. These lawsuits seek a variety of remedies, including unspecified monetary damages. We are vigorously defending ourselves in these lawsuits.

At September 30, 2018, we had a total of $268 million, net of estimated insurance recoveries of $10 million, accrued for losses and legal defense costs related to the Cordis IVC filter lawsuits which are presented on a gross basis in the condensed consolidated balance sheets. During the three-months ended September 30, 2018, we refined the methodology used to estimate probable losses and have developed a range of estimated losses. Because no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount within the range, we have accrued the minimum amount in the range. We estimate the high end of the range to be approximately $459 million, net of estimated insurance recoveries of $10 million.