Basis of Presentation and Significant Accounting Policies (Policies)

6 Months Ended

May 31, 2012

Basis of Presentation and Significant Accounting Policies [Abstract]

Use of Estimates

Use of Estimates

The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared in conformity with GAAP and, therefore, include amounts based on informed estimates and judgments of management. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

Cash and Cash Equivalents and Restricted Cash

Cash and Cash Equivalents and Restricted Cash

The Company considers all highly liquid short-term investments purchased with an original maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents. The Company’s cash equivalents totaled $197.6 million at May 31, 2012 and $212.8 million at November 30, 2011. The majority of the Company’s cash and cash equivalents were invested in money market accounts and U.S. government securities.

Restricted cash of $63.2 million at May 31, 2012 and $64.5 million at November 30, 2011 consisted of cash deposited with various financial institutions that was required as collateral for the Company’s cash-collateralized letter of credit facilities (the “LOC Facilities”).

Loss Per Share

Loss Per Share

Basic and diluted loss per share were calculated as follows (in thousands, except per share amounts):

Comprehensive loss

Comprehensive Loss

Accounting Standards Codification Topic No. 715 - Compensation - Retirement Benefits

The accumulated balances of other comprehensive loss in the consolidated balance sheets as of May 31, 2012 and November 30, 2011 were comprised solely of adjustments recorded directly to accumulated other comprehensive loss in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification Topic No. 715, “Compensation – Retirement Benefits” (“ASC 715”). ASC 715 requires an employer to recognize the funded status of defined postretirement benefit plans as an asset or liability on the balance sheet and requires any unrecognized prior service costs and actuarial gains/losses to be recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss).

Stock-Based Compensation (ASC 718)

The Company measures and recognizes compensation expense associated with its grants of equity-based awards in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification Topic No. 718, “Compensation — Stock Compensation” (“ASC 718”). ASC 718 requires that public companies measure and recognize compensation expense at an amount equal to the fair value of share-based payments granted under compensation arrangements over the vesting period.

Accounting Standards Codification Topic No.280, Segment Reporting

As of May 31, 2012, the Company had identified five reporting segments, comprised of four homebuilding reporting segments and one financial services reporting segment, within its consolidated operations in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification Topic No. 280, “Segment Reporting.” As of May 31, 2012, the Company’s homebuilding reporting segments conducted ongoing operations in the following states:

West Coast: California

Southwest: Arizona and Nevada

Central: Colorado and Texas

Southeast: Florida, Maryland, North Carolina and Virginia

The Company’s homebuilding reporting segments are engaged in the acquisition and development of land primarily for residential purposes and offer a wide variety of homes that are designed to appeal to first-time, move-up and active adult homebuyers.

The Company’s homebuilding reporting segments were identified based primarily on similarities in economic and geographic characteristics, product types, regulatory environments, methods used to sell and construct homes and land acquisition characteristics. The Company evaluates segment performance primarily based on segment pretax results.

The Company’s financial services reporting segment provides title and insurance services to the Company’s homebuyers in the same markets as the Company’s homebuilding reporting segments. In addition, since the third quarter of 2011, this segment has earned revenues pursuant to the terms of a marketing services agreement with a preferred mortgage lender that offers mortgage banking services, including residential consumer mortgage loan originations, to the Company’s homebuyers who elect to use the lender. The Company’s homebuyers are under no obligation to use the Company’s preferred mortgage lender and may select any lender of their choice to obtain mortgage financing for the purchase of a home. The Company makes available to its homebuyers marketing materials and other information regarding its preferred mortgage lender’s financing options and mortgage loan products, and is compensated solely for the fair market value of these services. Prior to late June 2011, this segment provided mortgage banking services to the Company’s homebuyers indirectly through KBA Mortgage, LLC (“KBA Mortgage”), a former unconsolidated joint venture of a subsidiary of the Company and a subsidiary of Bank of America, N.A., with each partner having had a 50% interest in the joint venture.

The Company’s reporting segments follow the same accounting policies used for the Company’s consolidated financial statements. Operational results of each segment are not necessarily indicative of the results that would have occurred had the segment been an independent, stand-alone entity during the periods presented, nor are they indicative of the results to be expected in future periods.

Property, Plant and Equipment (ASC 360)

If indicators of potential impairment exist for a community or land parcel, the identified asset is evaluated for recoverability in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification Topic No. 360, “Property, Plant, and Equipment” (“ASC 360”).

Accounting Standards Codification Topic No. 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures

Accounting Standards Codification Topic No. 820, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures,” provides a framework for measuring the fair value of assets and liabilities under GAAP, and establishes a fair value hierarchy that requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. The fair value hierarchy can be summarized as follows:

Level 1	Fair value determined based on quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.
Level 2	Fair value determined using significant observable inputs, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities or quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active, inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability, or inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data, by correlation or other means.
Level 3	Fair value determined using significant unobservable inputs, such as pricing models, discounted cash flows, or similar techniques.

ASC 360, long-lived assets Policy

In accordance with the provisions of ASC 360, long-lived assets held and used with a carrying value of $43.9 million were written down to their fair value of $27.4 million during the six months ended May 31, 2012, resulting in inventory impairment charges of $16.5 million. Long-lived assets held and used with a carrying value of $56.7 million were written down to their fair value of $34.0 million during the year ended November 30, 2011, resulting in inventory impairment charges of $22.7 million.

Accounting Standards Codification Topic No.810,Consolidation (ASC 810)

The Company participates in joint ventures from time to time that conduct land acquisition, development and/or other homebuilding activities. Its investments in these joint ventures may create a variable interest in a variable interest entity (“VIE”), depending on the contractual terms of the arrangement. The Company analyzes its joint ventures in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification Topic No. 810, “Consolidation” (“ASC 810”), to determine whether they are VIEs and, if so, whether the Company is the primary beneficiary. All of the Company’s joint ventures at May 31, 2012 and November 30, 2011 were determined under the provisions of ASC 810 to be unconsolidated joint ventures and were accounted for under the equity method, either because they were not VIEs or, if they were VIEs, the Company was not the primary beneficiary of the VIEs.

In the ordinary course of its business, the Company enters into land option contracts and other similar contracts to procure rights to land parcels for the construction of homes. The use of such land option contracts and other similar contracts generally allows the Company to reduce the market risks associated with direct land ownership and development, and to reduce the Company’s capital and financial commitments, including interest and other carrying costs. Under such contracts, the Company typically pays a specified option deposit or earnest money deposit in consideration for the right to purchase land in the future, usually at a predetermined price. Under the requirements of ASC 810, certain of these contracts may create a variable interest for the Company, with the land seller being identified as a VIE.

In compliance with ASC 810, the Company analyzes its land option contracts and other similar contracts to determine whether the corresponding land sellers are VIEs and, if so, whether the Company is the primary beneficiary. Although the Company does not have legal title to the underlying land, ASC 810 requires the Company to consolidate a VIE if the Company is determined to be the primary beneficiary. In determining whether it is the primary beneficiary, the Company considers, among other things, whether it has the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance. Such activities would include, among other things, determining or limiting the scope or purpose of the VIE, selling or transferring property owned or controlled by the VIE, or arranging financing for the VIE. The Company also considers whether it has the obligation to absorb losses of the VIE or the right to receive benefits from the VIE. As a result of its analyses, the Company determined that as of May 31, 2012 and November 30, 2011 it was not the primary beneficiary of any VIEs from which it is purchasing land under land option contracts and other similar contracts.

Accounting Standards Codification Topic No. 470, Debt (ASC 470)

The Company also evaluates its land option contracts and other similar contracts for financing arrangements in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification Topic No. 470, “Debt” (“ASC 470”), and, as a result of its evaluations, increased inventories, with a corresponding increase to accrued expenses and other liabilities, in its consolidated balance sheets by $20.3 million at May 31, 2012 and $23.9 million at November 30, 2011.

Accounting Standards Codification Topic No. 460, Guarantees

Guarantees. In the normal course of its business, the Company issues certain representations, warranties and guarantees related to its home sales and land sales that may be affected by Accounting Standards Codification Topic No. 460, “Guarantees.” Based on historical evidence, the Company does not believe any potential liability with respect to these representations, warranties or guarantees would be material to its consolidated financial statements.

Accounting Standards Codification Topic No. 450, Contingencies

Southern California Project Development Case

On December 27, 2011, the jury in a case entitled Estancia Coastal, LLC v. KB HOME Coastal Inc. et al. returned a verdict against KB HOME Coastal Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary, and the Company for $9.8 million, excluding legal fees and interest. The case related to a land option contract and a construction agreement between KB HOME Coastal Inc. and the plaintiff. Based on pre-trial analysis, the verdict was not expected, and KB HOME Coastal Inc. and the Company jointly filed a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and a motion for a new trial, which were heard on May 18, 2012. On May 23, 2012, the trial court denied the motions and on June 4, 2012 entered a judgment in favor of the plaintiff in the amount of $9.2 million plus pre-judgment interest of approximately $.9 million. The judgment entered reflects an earlier payment by the Company to the plaintiff of a portion of the jury’s award and does not include legal fees and costs and post-judgment interest. KB HOME Coastal Inc. and the Company expect the trial court to award legal fees and costs to the plaintiff after a hearing in September 2012 in an amount less than $1.8 million. The Company had established an accrual for this matter based on its previous estimate of the probable loss. However, as a result of the trial court’s decision and probable attorney fees and costs award, the Company recorded a charge of $8.8 million in the second quarter of 2012 to increase the accrual for this matter to $11.7 million at May 31, 2012. The charge was included in selling, general and administrative expenses in the Company’s consolidated statement of operations. KB HOME Coastal Inc. and the Company have appealed the entry of judgment. While the ultimate outcome is uncertain, KB HOME Coastal Inc. and the Company believe they will be successful in resolving the matter for an amount less than the judgment.

Presentation of Comprehensive Income

In June 2011, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2011-05, “Presentation of Comprehensive Income” (“ASU 2011-05”), which allows an entity the option to present the total of comprehensive income, the components of net income, and the components of other comprehensive income either in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements. In both instances, an entity is required to present each component of net income along with total net income, each component of other comprehensive income along with a total for other comprehensive income, and a total amount for comprehensive income. ASU 2011-05 eliminates the option to present the components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in stockholders’ equity. The amendments in ASU 2011-05 do not change the items that must be reported in other comprehensive income or when an item of other comprehensive income must be reclassified to net income. However, in December 2011, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2011-12, “Deferral of the Effective Date for Amendments to the Presentation of Reclassifications of Items Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income in Accounting Standards Update No. 2011-05” (“ASU 2011-12”), which deferred the guidance on whether to require entities to present reclassification adjustments out of accumulated other comprehensive income by component in both the statement where net income is presented and the statement where other comprehensive income is presented for both interim and annual financial statements. ASU 2011-12 reinstated the requirements for the presentation of reclassifications that were in place prior to the issuance of ASU 2011-05 and did not change the effective date for ASU 2011-05. For public entities, the amendments in ASU 2011-05 and ASU 2011-12 are effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2011, and should be applied retrospectively. The adoption of this guidance concerns disclosure only and will not have an impact on the Company’s consolidated financial position or results of operations.

Income Taxes ("ASC 740")

In accordance with Accounting Standards Codification Topic No. 740, “Income Taxes” (“ASC 740”), the Company evaluates its deferred tax assets quarterly to determine if adjustments to the valuation allowance are required. ASC 740 requires that companies assess whether a valuation allowance should be established based on the consideration of all available evidence using a “more likely than not” standard with respect to whether deferred tax assets will be realized. The realization of deferred tax assets depends primarily on the Company’s ability to generate sustained profitability. During the three months ended May 31, 2012, the Company recorded a valuation allowance of $9.7 million against net deferred tax assets generated from the loss for the period. During the three months ended May 31, 2011, the Company recorded a similar valuation allowance of $25.7 million. For the six months ended May 31, 2012 and 2011, the Company recorded valuation allowances of $28.0 million and $70.8 million, respectively, against the net deferred tax assets generated from the losses for those periods. The Company’s net deferred tax assets totaled $1.1 million at both May 31, 2012 and November 30, 2011. The deferred tax asset valuation allowance increased to $875.8 million at May 31, 2012 from $847.8 million at November 30, 2011, reflecting the $28.0 million valuation allowance recorded during the six months ended May 31, 2012.