Contingencies and Other Information	6 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2016
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
CONTINGENCIES AND OTHER INFORMATION	CONTINGENCIES AND OTHER INFORMATION Non-Income Tax The government in the Brazilian State of Parana (“Parana”) issued a tax assessment on October 26, 2007 with respect to local intrastate trade tax credits that result primarily from tobacco transferred between states within Brazil. The assessment for intrastate trade tax credits taken is $4,058 and the total assessment including penalties and interest at September 30, 2016 is $12,808. The Company believes it has properly complied with Brazilian law and will contest any assessment through the judicial process. Should the Company lose in the judicial process, the loss of the intrastate trade tax credits would have a material impact on the financial statements of the Company. The Company also has local intrastate trade tax credits in the Brazilian State of Santa Catarina and the State of Rio Grande do Sul. These jurisdictions permit the sale or transfer of excess credits to third parties, however approval must be obtained from the tax authorities. The Company has an agreement with the state governments regarding the amounts and timing of credits that can be sold. The tax credits have a carrying value of $3,157 at September 30, 2016, which is net of impairment charges based on management’s expectations about future realization. The intrastate trade tax credits will continue to be monitored for impairment in future periods based on market conditions and the Company’s ability to use or sell the tax credits. In 1969, the Brazilian government created a tax credit program that allowed companies to earn IPI tax credits (“IPI credits”) based on the value of their exports. The government began to phase out this program in 1979, which resulted in numerous lawsuits between taxpayers and the Brazilian government. The Company has a long legal history with respect to credits it earned while the IPI credit program was in effect. In 2001, the Company won a claim related to certain IPI credits it earned between 1983 and 1990. The Brazilian government appealed this decision and numerous rulings and appeals were rendered on behalf of both the government and the Company from 2001 through 2013. Because of this favorable ruling, the Company began to use these earned IPI credits to offset federal taxes in 2004 and 2005, until it received a Judicial Order to suspend the IPI offsetting in 2005. The value of the federal taxes offset in 2004 and 2005 was $24,142 and the Company established a reserve on these credits at the time of offsetting as they were not yet realizable due to the legal uncertainty that existed. Specifically, the Company extinguished other federal tax liabilities using IPI credits and recorded a liability in Pension, Postretirement and Other Long-Term Liabilities to reflect that the credits were not realizable at that time due to the prevalent legal uncertainty. On March 7, 2013, the Brazilian Supreme Court rendered a final decision in favor of the Company that recognized the validity of the IPI credits and secured the Company's right to benefit from the IPI credits earned from March 1983 to October 1990. This final decision expressly stated the Company has the right to the IPI credits. The Company estimated the total amount of the IPI credits to be approximately $94,316 at March 31, 2013. Since the March 2013 ruling definitively (without the government's ability to appeal) granted the Company the ownership of the IPI credits generated between 1983 and 1990 the Company believed the amount of IPI credits that were used to offset other 10. CONTINGENCIES AND OTHER INFORMATION (continued) federal taxes in 2004 and 2005 were realizable beyond a reasonable doubt. Accordingly, and at March 31, 2013, the Company recorded the $24,142 IPI credits it realized in the Statements of Consolidated Operations in Other Income. No further benefit has been recognized pending the outcome of the judicial procedure to ascertain the final amount as those amounts have not yet been realized. Other Mindo, S.r.l., the purchaser in 2004 of the Company's Italian subsidiary Dimon Italia, S.r.l., asserted claims against a subsidiary of the Company arising out of that sale transaction in an action filed before the Court of Rome on April 12, 2007. The claim involved a guaranty letter issued by a consolidated subsidiary of the Company in connection with the sale transaction, and sought the recovery of €7,400 plus interest and costs. On November 11, 2013, the court issued its judgment in favor of the Company’s subsidiary, rejecting the claims asserted by Mindo, S.r.l., and awarding the Company’s subsidiary legal costs of €48. On December 23, 2014, Mindo, S.r.l. appealed the judgment of the Court of Rome to the Court of Appeal of Rome. A hearing before the Court of Appeal of Rome was held on June 12, 2015, which was adjourned pending a further hearing set for February 2018. The outcome of, and timing of a decision on, the appeal are uncertain and therefore no amounts have been recorded. In addition to the above-mentioned matter, certain of the Company’s subsidiaries are involved in other litigation or legal matters incidental to their business activities, including tax matters. While the outcome of these matters cannot be predicted with certainty, the Company is vigorously defending them and does not currently expect that any of them will have a material adverse effect on its business or financial position. However, should one or more of these matters be resolved in a manner adverse to its current expectation, the effect on the Company’s results of operations for a particular fiscal reporting period could be material. In accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, the Company records all known asset retirement obligations (“ARO”) for which the liability can be reasonably estimated. Currently, it has identified an ARO associated with one of its facilities that requires it to restore the land to its initial condition upon vacating the facility. The Company has not recognized a liability under generally accepted accounting principles for this ARO because the fair value of restoring the land at this site cannot be reasonably estimated since the settlement date is unknown at this time. The settlement date is unknown because the land restoration is not required until title is returned to the government, and the Company has no current or future plans to return the title. The Company will recognize a liability in the period in which sufficient information is available to reasonably estimate its fair value.

CONTINGENCIES AND OTHER INFORMATION

Non-Income Tax

The government in the Brazilian State of Parana (“Parana”) issued a tax assessment on October 26, 2007 with respect to local intrastate trade tax credits that result primarily from tobacco transferred between states within Brazil. The assessment for intrastate trade tax credits taken is $4,058 and the total assessment including penalties and interest at September 30, 2016 is $12,808. The Company believes it has properly complied with Brazilian law and will contest any assessment through the judicial process. Should the Company lose in the judicial process, the loss of the intrastate trade tax credits would have a material impact on the financial statements of the Company. The Company also has local intrastate trade tax credits in the Brazilian State of Santa Catarina and the State of Rio Grande do Sul. These jurisdictions permit the sale or transfer of excess credits to third parties, however approval must be obtained from the tax authorities. The Company has an agreement with the state governments regarding the amounts and timing of credits that can be sold. The tax credits have a carrying value of $3,157 at September 30, 2016, which is net of impairment charges based on management’s expectations about future realization. The intrastate trade tax credits will continue to be monitored for impairment in future periods based on market conditions and the Company’s ability to use or sell the tax credits.

In 1969, the Brazilian government created a tax credit program that allowed companies to earn IPI tax credits (“IPI credits”) based on the value of their exports. The government began to phase out this program in 1979, which resulted in numerous lawsuits between taxpayers and the Brazilian government. The Company has a long legal history with respect to credits it earned while the IPI credit program was in effect. In 2001, the Company won a claim related to certain IPI credits it earned between 1983 and 1990. The Brazilian government appealed this decision and numerous rulings and appeals were rendered on behalf of both the government and the Company from 2001 through 2013. Because of this favorable ruling, the Company began to use these earned

IPI credits to offset federal taxes in 2004 and 2005, until it received a Judicial Order to suspend the IPI offsetting in 2005. The value of the federal taxes offset in 2004 and 2005 was $24,142 and the Company established a reserve on these credits at the time of offsetting as they were not yet realizable due to the legal uncertainty that existed. Specifically, the Company extinguished other federal tax liabilities using IPI credits and recorded a liability in Pension, Postretirement and Other Long-Term Liabilities to reflect that the credits were not realizable at that time due to the prevalent legal uncertainty. On March 7, 2013, the Brazilian Supreme Court rendered a final decision in favor of the Company that recognized the validity of the IPI credits and secured the Company's right to benefit from the IPI credits earned from March 1983 to October 1990. This final decision expressly stated the Company

has the right to the IPI credits. The Company estimated the total amount of the IPI credits to be approximately $94,316 at March

31, 2013. Since the March 2013 ruling definitively (without the government's ability to appeal) granted the Company the ownership of the IPI credits generated between 1983 and 1990 the Company believed the amount of IPI credits that were used to offset other

10. CONTINGENCIES AND OTHER INFORMATION (continued)

federal taxes in 2004 and 2005 were realizable beyond a reasonable doubt. Accordingly, and at March 31, 2013, the Company recorded the $24,142 IPI credits it realized in the Statements of Consolidated Operations in Other Income. No further benefit has been recognized pending the outcome of the judicial procedure to ascertain the final amount as those amounts have not yet been

realized.

Other

Mindo, S.r.l., the purchaser in 2004 of the Company's Italian subsidiary Dimon Italia, S.r.l., asserted claims against a subsidiary of the Company arising out of that sale transaction in an action filed before the Court of Rome on April 12, 2007. The claim involved a guaranty letter issued by a consolidated subsidiary of the Company in connection with the sale transaction, and sought the recovery of €7,400 plus interest and costs. On November 11, 2013, the court issued its judgment in favor of the Company’s subsidiary, rejecting the claims asserted by Mindo, S.r.l., and awarding the Company’s subsidiary legal costs of €48. On December 23, 2014, Mindo, S.r.l. appealed the judgment of the Court of Rome to the Court of Appeal of Rome. A hearing before the Court of Appeal of Rome was held on June 12, 2015, which was adjourned pending a further hearing set for February 2018. The outcome of, and timing of a decision on, the appeal are uncertain and therefore no amounts have been recorded.

In addition to the above-mentioned matter, certain of the Company’s subsidiaries are involved in other litigation or legal matters incidental to their business activities, including tax matters. While the outcome of these matters cannot be predicted with certainty, the Company is vigorously defending them and does not currently expect that any of them will have a material adverse effect on its business or financial position. However, should one or more of these matters be resolved in a manner adverse to its current expectation, the effect on the Company’s results of operations for a particular fiscal reporting period could be material.

In accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, the Company records all known asset retirement obligations (“ARO”) for which the liability can be reasonably estimated. Currently, it has identified an ARO associated with one of its facilities that requires it to restore the land to its initial condition upon vacating the facility. The Company has not recognized a liability under generally accepted accounting principles for this ARO because the fair value of restoring the land at this site cannot be reasonably estimated since the settlement date is unknown at this time. The settlement date is unknown because the land restoration is not required until title is returned to the government, and the Company has no current or future plans to return the title. The Company will recognize a liability in the period in which sufficient information is available to reasonably estimate its fair value.