Commitments and Contingencies

6 Months Ended

Nov. 30, 2019

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Commitments and Contingencies

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Various claims and lawsuits arising in the normal course of business are pending against the Company. The Company accrues a liability for such matters when it is probable that a liability exists and the amount of such liability can be reasonably estimated. When only a range can be estimated, the most probable amount in the range is accrued unless no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount, in which case the minimum amount in the range is accrued. Legal costs associated with litigation are expensed in the period in which they are incurred. The Company does not expect, in the case of those various claims and lawsuits arising in the normal course of business where a loss is considered probable or reasonably possible, that the reasonably possible losses from such claims and lawsuits (either individually or in the aggregate) would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position or results of operations.

In the current fiscal year, based on the status of negotiations, an alleged patent infringement claim settlement became probable and estimable. As such, an accrual of $1.5 was recognized in the Financial Statements in the first quarter of fiscal 2020. The settlement was subsequently concluded in the second quarter.

On June 21, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc. et. al., reversing prior precedent, in particular Quill Corp. v. North Dakota (1992), which held that states could not constitutionally require retailers to collect and remit sales or use taxes in respect to mail order or internet sales made to residents of a state in the absence of the retailer having a physical presence in the taxing state. As a result, the Company now has an obligation, at least on a go forward basis, based on each state's enforcement date, to collect and remit sales and use taxes, primarily in respect to sales made through its school book club channel, as well as certain sales made through its ecommerce internet sites, to residents in states that the Company had not previously remitted sales or use taxes based on having no physical presence in such states. In the majority opinion, several factors were discussed in support of the Court’s reasoning that the collection of sales and use taxes from out-of-state retailers did not constitute an undue burden on interstate commerce, including the fact

that South Dakota did not require retroactive application of its statute. However, the question of retroactive application, as well as certain other factors noted in the opinion, are subject to how the states, on a state-by-state basis, interpret and apply the Court’s decision in their implementation of their respective state laws or regulations addressing the collection of sales and use taxes from out-of-state retailers. As a result, the effect of the decision on the Company depends on the positions taken by the states, on a state-by-state basis, relating to the retroactive application of the obligation to collect such taxes, as well as other factors noted in the opinion.

The Company continues to monitor its compliance based on anticipated enforcement dates and an assumption as to each state's likely interpretation and application of the Court's decision. As the Company continues to monitor each state, the staggered enforcement dates, and the progress towards compliance, expenses will be incurred by the Company.

As of November 30, 2019, the Company’s school book club channel remits sales taxes in 44 states and the District of Columbia compared to 13 states in the prior fiscal year quarter ended November 30, 2018. Any on-going or future litigation with states relating to sales and use taxes could be impacted favorably or unfavorably by legislative action in future fiscal periods.