(10)	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Vessel and Other Commitments

The table below summarizes the company’s various vessel commitments to acquire and construct new vessels, by vessel type, as of June 30, 2017:

	Number				Invested		Remaining
	of		Total		Through		Balance
(In thousands, except vessel count)	Vessels		Cost		6/30/17		6/30/17
Vessels under construction (A):
Deepwater PSV		1	$	53,639		47,452		6,187
Total vessel commitments		1	$	53,639		47,452		6,187

(A)

Two remaining option vessels, a vessel rejected at the time of delivery and a fast supply boat are not included in the table above.

The company has $6.2 million in unfunded capital commitments associated with the one 5,400 deadweight ton (DWT) deepwater platform supply vessel (PSV) under construction at June 30, 2017. The total cost of the new-build vessel includes contract costs and other incidental costs.

During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2017, the company rejected the delivery of a PSV under construction and withheld the final contractual milestone payment of $4.5 million for failure of the vessel to meet certain significant contract specifications. Thereafter, the company delivered a formal notice of default to the shipyard demanding a cure of the deficiencies, following which the shipyard declared the company in default for refusing to accept delivery. Subsequently, the company submitted a demand to the shipyard seeking a refund of all amounts paid by the company to date, totaling approximately $43 million plus accrued contractual interest. In March 2017, the shipyard filed a notice of arbitration alleging breach of contract with respect to the company’s rejection of the PSV and anticipatory breach of contract based on the company’s anticipated rejection of a second PSV under construction. Through this arbitration, the shipyard is seeking an order requiring the company to take delivery of both vessels and to reimburse the shipyard for certain costs incurred by the shipyard. The company is evaluating its next steps in the arbitration. A date for arbitration has not yet been set. Approximately $48.7 million of accumulated costs

for the rejected vessel have been reclassified from construction in progress to other assets. The rejected vessel is not included in our vessel count and is not included in the table above. The shipyard has also informed the company that the second PSV under construction, and included in the table above, has been suspended and may not be tendered for delivery given the ongoing dispute. Accordingly, the expected delivery date is not known.

The company has experienced substantial delay with one fast supply boat under construction in Brazil that was originally scheduled to be delivered in September 2009. On April 5, 2011, pursuant to the vessel construction contract, the company sent the subject shipyard a letter initiating arbitration in order to resolve disputes of such matters as the shipyard’s failure to achieve payment milestones, its failure to follow the construction schedule, and its failure to timely deliver the vessel. The company has suspended construction on the vessel and both parties continue to pursue arbitration. The company has third party credit support in the form of insurance coverage for 90% of the progress payments made on this vessel, or all but approximately $2.4 million of the carrying value of the accumulated costs through June 30, 2015. During the fiscal 2016, the company recorded an impairment charge of $2.4 million (representing amounts not covered by insurance) and reclassified the remaining $5.6 million from construction in progress to other non-current assets. This vessel is not included in the preceding table of vessel commitments as of June 30, 2017.

The company generally requires shipyards to provide third party credit support in the event that vessels are not completed and delivered timely and in accordance with the terms of the shipbuilding contracts. That third party credit support typically guarantees the return of amounts paid by the company and generally takes the form of refundment guarantees or standby letters of credit issued by major financial institutions generally located in the country of the shipyard. While the company seeks to minimize its shipyard credit risk by requiring these instruments, the ultimate return of amounts paid by the company in the event of shipyard default is still subject to the creditworthiness of the shipyard and the provider of the credit support, as well as the company’s ability to successfully pursue legal action to compel payment of these instruments. When third party credit support that is acceptable to the company is not available or cost effective, the company endeavors to limit its credit risk by minimizing pre-delivery payments and through other contract terms with the shipyard.

Sonatide Joint Venture

The company has previously disclosed the significant financial and operational challenges that it confronts with respect to its substantial operations in Angola, as well as steps that the company has taken to address or mitigate those risks. Most of the company’s attention has been focused in three areas: reducing the net receivable balance due the company from Sonatide, its Angolan joint venture with Sonangol, for vessel services; reducing the foreign currency risk created by virtue of provisions of Angolan law that require that payment for a significant portion of the services provided by Sonatide be paid in Angolan kwanza; and optimizing opportunities, consistent with Angolan law, for services provided by the company to be paid for directly in U.S. dollars. These challenges, and the company’s efforts to respond, continue.

Amounts due from Sonatide (due from affiliate in the consolidated balance sheets) at June 30, 2017 and March 31, 2017 of approximately $253 million and $263 million, respectively, represent cash received by Sonatide from customers and due to the company, amounts due from customers that are expected to be remitted to the company through Sonatide and costs incurred by the company on behalf of Sonatide. Approximately $46 million of the balance at June 30, 2017 represents invoiced but unpaid vessel revenue related to services performed by the company through the Sonatide joint venture. Remaining amounts due to the company from Sonatide are, in part, supported by (i) approximately $84 million of cash (primarily denominated in Angolan kwanzas) held by Sonatide that is pending conversion into U.S. dollars and the subsequent expatriation of such funds and (ii) approximately $121 million of amounts due from the company to Sonatide, including $37.5 million in commissions payable by the company to Sonatide, with the balance related to costs incurred by Sonatide on behalf of the company.

For the quarter ended June 30, 2017, the company collected (primarily through Sonatide) approximately $15 million from its Angolan operations. Of the $15 million collected, approximately $13 million were U.S. dollars received by Sonatide on behalf of the company or U.S. dollars received directly by the company from customers. The balance of $2 million collected reflects Sonatide’s conversion of Angolan kwanza into U.S. dollars and the subsequent expatriation of the dollars and payment to the company. The company also reduced the net due from affiliate and due to affiliate balances by approximately $21 million during the quarter ended June 30, 2017 through netting transactions based on an agreement with the joint venture.

Amounts due to Sonatide (Due to affiliate in the consolidated balance sheets) at June 30, 2017 and March 31, 2017 of approximately $121 million and $133 million, respectively, represent amounts due to Sonatide for commissions payable and other costs paid by Sonatide on behalf of the company.

The company believes that the process for converting Angolan kwanzas continues to function, but the tight U.S. dollar liquidity situation continues in Angola. Sonatide continues to press the commercial banks with which it has relationships to increase the amount of U.S. dollars that are made available to Sonatide.

For the quarter ended June 30, 2017, the company’s Angolan operations generated vessel revenues of approximately $27 million, or 24%, of its consolidated vessel revenue, from an average of approximately 51 company-owned vessels that are marketed through the Sonatide joint venture (22 of which were stacked on average during the quarter ended June 30, 2017), and, for the quarter ended June 30, 2016, generated vessel revenues of approximately $39 million, or 24%, of consolidated vessel revenue, from an average of approximately 60 company-owned vessels (16 of which were stacked on average during the quarter ended June 30, 2016).

Sonatide owns seven vessels (four of which are currently stacked) and certain other assets, in addition to earning commission income from company-owned vessels marketed through the Sonatide joint venture (owned 49% by the company). As of June 30, 2017 and March 31, 2017, the carrying value of the company’s investment in the Sonatide joint venture, which is included in “Investments in, at equity, and advances to unconsolidated companies,” was approximately $49 million and $45 million, respectively.

Management continues to explore ways to profitably participate in the Angolan market while looking for opportunities to reduce the overall level of exposure to the increased risks that the company believes currently characterize the Angolan market. Included among mitigating measures taken by the company to address these risks is the redeployment of vessels from time to time to other markets. Redeployment of vessels to and from Angola during the quarter ended June 30, 2017 and year ended March 31, 2017 has resulted in a net one and 22 vessels transferred out of Angola, respectively.

Brazilian Customs

In April 2011, two Brazilian subsidiaries of Tidewater were notified by the Customs Office in Macae, Brazil that they were jointly and severally being assessed fines of 155 million Brazilian reais (approximately $46.9 million as of June 30, 2017). The assessment of these fines is for the alleged failure of these subsidiaries to obtain import licenses with respect to 17 company vessels that provided Brazilian offshore vessel services to Petrobras, the Brazilian national oil company, over a three-year period ended December 2009. After consultation with its Brazilian tax advisors, the company and its Brazilian subsidiaries believe that vessels that provide services under contract to the Brazilian offshore oil and gas industry are deemed, under applicable law and regulations, to be temporarily imported into Brazil, and thus exempt from the import license requirement. The Macae Customs Office has, without a change in the underlying applicable law or regulations, taken the position that the temporary importation exemption is only available to new, and not used, goods imported into Brazil and therefore it was improper for the company to deem its vessels as being temporarily imported. The fines have been assessed based on this new interpretation of Brazilian customs law taken by the Macae Customs Office.

After consultation with its Brazilian tax advisors, the company believes that the assessment is without legal justification and that the Macae Customs Office has misinterpreted applicable Brazilian law on duties and customs. The company is vigorously contesting these fines (which it has neither paid nor accrued). Based on the advice of its Brazilian counsel, the company believes that it has a high probability of success with respect to overturning the entire amount of the fines, either at the administrative appeal level or, if necessary, in Brazilian courts. In May 2016, a final administrative appeal allowed fines totaling 3 million Brazilian reais (approximately $0.9 million as of June 30, 2017). The company intends to appeal this 3 million Brazilian reais administrative award to the appropriate Brazilian court and deposited 6 million Brazilian reais (approximately $1.8 million as of June 30, 2017) with the court. The 6 million Brazilian reais deposit represents the amount of the award and the substantial interest that would be due if the company did not prevail in this court action. The court action is in its initial stages. Fines totaling 30 million Brazilian reais (approximately $9.1 million as of June 30, 2017) are still subject to additional administrative appeals board hearings, but the company believes that previous administrative appeals board decisions will be helpful in those upcoming hearings for the vast majority of amounts still claimed by the Macae Customs Office. The remaining fines totaling 122 million (approximately $36.9 million as of June 30, 2017) of the original 155 million Brazilian reais of fines are now formally resolved in favor of the company and are no longer at issue. The company believes that the ultimate resolution of this matter will not have a material effect on the company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Repairs to U.S. Flagged Vessels Operating Abroad

During fiscal 2015 the company became aware that it may have had compliance deficiencies in documenting and declaring upon re-entry to the U.S. certain foreign purchases for or repairs to U.S. flagged vessels while they were working outside of the U.S. When a U.S. flagged vessel operates abroad, certain foreign purchases for or repairs made to the U.S. flagged vessel while it is outside of the U.S. are subject to declaration with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) upon re-entry to the U.S. and are subject to 50% vessel repair duty. During our examination of our filings made in or prior to fiscal 2015 with CBP, we determined that it was necessary to file amended forms with CBP to supplement previous filings. We have amended several vessel repair entries with CBP and have paid additional vessel repair duties and interest associated with these amended forms. We continue to review and evaluate the return of other U.S. flagged vessels to the U.S. to determine whether it is necessary to adjust our responses in any of those instances. With respect to certain of our amended vessel repair entries, CBP has advised us that it is contemplating the assessment of civil penalties and interest for alleged violations of the vessel repair statute. In accordance with CBP regulations, we are protesting the assessment of civil penalties and interest and are requesting mitigation of those civil penalties. We anticipate that CBP will seek to impose additional vessel repair duty, civil penalties and interest pending its review of our other amended filings and we will continue to protest any such determinations in accordance with CBP’s guidelines. Therefore, the final amount of vessel repair duty and/or civil penalties and interest associated with amending various vessel repair entries is not known at this time.

Currency Devaluation and Fluctuation Risk

Due to the company’s global operations, the company is exposed to foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations and exchange rate risks on charter hire contracts denominated in foreign currencies. For some of our non-U.S. contracts, a portion of the revenue and local expenses are incurred in local currencies with the result that the company is at risk of changes in the exchange rates between the U.S. dollar and foreign currencies. We generally do not hedge against any foreign currency rate fluctuations associated with foreign currency contracts that arise in the normal course of business, which exposes us to the risk of exchange rate losses. To minimize the financial impact of these items, the company attempts to contract a significant majority of its services in U.S. dollars. In addition, the company attempts to minimize its financial impact of these risks, by matching the currency of the company’s operating costs with the currency of the revenue streams when considered appropriate. The company continually monitors the currency exchange risks associated with all contracts not denominated in U.S. dollars.

Legal Proceedings

Arbitral Award for the Taking of the Company’s Venezuelan Operations

On December 27, 2016, the annulment committee formed under the rules of the World Bank’s International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (“ICSID”) issued a decision on the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela’s (“Venezuela”) application to annul the award rendered by an ICSID tribunal on March 13, 2015. As previously reported, the award granted two subsidiaries of the Company (the “Claimants”) compensation for Venezuela’s expropriation of their investments in that country. The nature of the investments expropriated and the progress of the ICSID proceeding were previously reported by the company in prior filings. The annulment committee’s decision reduced the total compensation awarded to the Claimants to $36.4 million. That compensation is accruing interest at an annual rate of 4.5% compounded quarterly from May 8, 2009 to the date of payment of that amount ($16 million as of June 30, 2017). The annulment committee also left undisturbed the portion of the award that granted the Claimants $2.5 million in legal fees and other costs related to the arbitration. The reduction of $10 million in compensation from the earlier award of $46.4 million represents that portion of the tribunal’s award that the annulment committee determined had not been properly explained by the tribunal’s analysis. The final aggregate award is therefore $54.9 million as of June 30, 2017. The award for that amount is immediately enforceable and not subject to any further stay of enforcement. The annulment committee’s decision is not subject to any further ICSID review, appeal or other substantive proceeding, unless the company decides to pursue additional compensation through ICSID related to the portion of the award reduced by the annulment committee. The company has not made any decision whether to pursue any such additional relief.

The company is committed to taking appropriate steps to enforce and collect the award, which is enforceable in any of the 150 member states that are party to the ICSID Convention. As an initial step, the company was successful in having the award recognized and entered in March 2015 as a final judgment by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. In addition, the company was successful in having the award recognized and entered in November 2016 as a final judgment of the High Court of Justice of England and Wales. Even with the recognition of the award in the United States and United Kingdom courts, the company recognizes that collection of the award may present significant practical challenges. The company is accounting for this matter as a gain contingency, and will record any such gain in future periods if and when the contingency is resolved, in accordance with ASC 450 Contingencies.

Various legal proceedings and claims are outstanding which arose in the ordinary course of business. In the opinion of management, the amount of ultimate liability, if any, with respect to these actions, will not have a material adverse effect on the company's financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.