2. Significant Accounting Policies

Basis of Presentation

The unaudited condensed consolidated interim financial information of the Company has been prepared in accordance with Article 10 of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s, or the SEC, Regulation S-X. Accordingly, as permitted by Article 10 of the SEC’s Regulation S-X, it does not include all of the information required by generally accepted accounting principles in the U.S., or U.S. GAAP, for complete financial statements. The condensed consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2014 was derived from the audited financial statements at that date and does not include all the disclosures required by U.S. GAAP, as permitted by Article 10 of the SEC’s Regulation S-X. The Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements as of September 30, 2015, and for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2015 and 2014, include Herbalife and all of its direct and indirect subsidiaries. In the opinion of management, the accompanying financial information contains all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring adjustments, necessary to present fairly the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements as of September 30, 2015, and for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2015 and 2014. These unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014, or the 2014 10-K. Operating results for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2015, are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending December 31, 2015.

New Accounting Pronouncements

In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, issued Accounting Standards Update, or ASU, No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606). The new revenue recognition standard provides a five-step analysis of transactions to determine when and how revenue is recognized. The core principle is that a company should recognize revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-14, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Deferral of the Effective Date, which defers the effective date of ASU No. 2014-09 for all entities by one year to annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. This ASU shall be applied either retrospectively to each period presented or as a cumulative-effect adjustment as of the date of adoption.  Early adoption is permitted as of the original effective date of December 15, 2016. The Company is evaluating the potential impact of this adoption on its consolidated financial statements.

In June 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-12, Compensation—Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Accounting for Share-Based Payments When the Terms of an Award Provide That a Performance Target Could Be Achieved after the Requisite Service Period (a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force). This ASU clarifies that a performance target that affects vesting and that could be achieved after the requisite service period be treated as a performance condition. A reporting entity should apply existing guidance in Topic 718 as it relates to awards with performance conditions that affect vesting to account for such awards. As such, the performance target should not be reflected in estimating the grant-date fair value of the award. Compensation cost should be recognized in the period in which it becomes probable that the performance target will be achieved and should represent the compensation cost attributable to the period(s) for which the requisite service has already been rendered. This ASU is effective for annual periods, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2015. Early adoption is permitted. This ASU may be applied either (a) prospectively to all awards granted or modified after the effective date or (b) retrospectively to all awards with performance targets that are outstanding as of the beginning of the earliest annual period presented in the financial statements and to all new or modified awards thereafter. The adoption of this guidance will not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-15, Presentation of Financial Statements — Going Concern (Subtopic 205-40). The purpose of this ASU is to incorporate into U.S. GAAP management’s responsibility to evaluate whether there is substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the date that the financial statements are issued (or within one year after the date that the financial statements are available to be issued when applicable), and to provide related footnote disclosures. This update is effective for the annual period ending after December 15, 2016, and for annual periods and interim periods thereafter. Early application is permitted. The adoption of this guidance will not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In January 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-01, Income Statement—Extraordinary and Unusual Items (Subtopic 225-20): Simplifying Income Statement Presentation by Eliminating the Concept of Extraordinary Items. This ASU is part of the FASB’s initiative to reduce complexity in accounting standards. This ASU eliminates from U.S. GAAP the concept of extraordinary items, which were previously required to be segregated from the results of ordinary operations and shown separately in the income statement, net of tax, after income from continuing operations. Entities were also required to disclose applicable income taxes for the extraordinary item and either present or disclose earnings-per-share data applicable to the extraordinary item. Items which are considered both unusual and infrequent will now be presented separately within income from continuing operations in the income statement or disclosed in notes to the financial statements. This update is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2015. Companies may apply the ASU prospectively, or may also apply the amendments retrospectively to all prior periods presented in the financial statements. Early adoption is permitted provided that the guidance is applied from the beginning of the fiscal year of adoption. The adoption of this guidance will not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In February 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-02, Consolidation (Topic 810): Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis. This ASU changes the analysis that reporting entities must perform to determine if certain types of legal entities should be consolidated. Specifically, the ASU focuses on 1) the variable interest entity, or VIE, evaluation of limited partnerships and similar legal entities, 2) eliminating the presumption that general partners should consolidate a limited partnership, 3) the consolidation analysis of reporting entities that are involved with VIEs, and 4) scope exceptions from consolidation guidance for reporting entities with interests in legal entities that are required to comply with or operate in accordance with requirements that are similar to those in Rule 2a-7 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 for registered money market funds. This update is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2015. Early adoption is permitted, including adoption in an interim period. If the ASU is adopted in an interim period, any adjustments should be reflected as of the beginning of the fiscal year that includes that interim period. The ASU may be applied using a modified retrospective approach by recording a cumulative-effect adjustment as of the beginning of the fiscal year of adoption. A reporting entity also may apply the amendments retrospectively. The Company is evaluating the potential impact of this adoption on its consolidated financial statements.

In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-03, Interest—Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs. This ASU requires that debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability now be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of that debt liability, consistent with debt discounts. Under current U.S. GAAP, debt issuance costs are recognized as a deferred charge asset. The recognition and measurement guidance for debt issuance costs are not affected by the amendments in this ASU. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-15, Interest—Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Presentation and Subsequent Measurement of Debt Issuance Costs Associated with Line-of-Credit Arrangements.  This ASU clarifies the presentation and subsequent measurement of debt issuance costs associated with lines of credit.  These costs may be presented as an asset and amortized ratably over the term of the line of credit arrangement. These updates are effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2015. Early adoption is permitted for financial statements that have not been previously issued. A reporting entity should apply these amendments retrospectively, wherein the balance sheet of each individual period presented should be adjusted to reflect the period-specific effects of applying the ASU. The Company is evaluating the potential impact of these adoptions on its consolidated financial statements.

In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-05, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other— Internal-Use Software (Subtopic 350-40): Customer’s Accounting for Fees Paid in a Cloud Computing Arrangement. This ASU adds explicit guidance into U.S. GAAP regarding a customer’s accounting for fees paid in a cloud computing arrangement. The ASU provides guidance to customers about whether a cloud computing arrangement includes a software license. If a cloud computing arrangement includes a software license, then the customer should account for the software license element of the arrangement consistent with the acquisition of other software licenses. If a cloud computing arrangement does not include a software license, the customer should account for the arrangement as a service contract. This update is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2015. Early adoption is permitted. A reporting entity should apply the amendments either (1) prospectively to all arrangements entered into or materially modified after the effective date or (2) retrospectively. The Company is evaluating the potential impact of this adoption on its consolidated financial statements.

In May, 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-07, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Disclosures for Investment in Certain Entities That Calculate Net Asset Value per Share (or Its Equivalent). This ASU applies to reporting entities that elect to measure the fair value of an investment using the net asset value, or NAV, per share (or its equivalent) practical expedient. The ASU removes the requirement to categorize within the fair value hierarchy all investments for which fair value is measured using the NAV per share practical expedient. The amendments also remove the requirement to make certain disclosures for all investments that are eligible to be measured at fair value using the NAV per share practical expedient. Rather, those disclosures are limited to investments for which the entity has elected to measure the fair value using that practical expedient. The amendments in this ASU are effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2015, with early adoption permitted. Entities should apply the amendments in this update retrospectively to all periods presented. The Company is evaluating the potential impact of this adoption on its consolidated financial statements.

In July 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-11, Inventory (Topic 330): Simplifying the Measurement of Inventory.  This ASU does not apply to inventory that is measured using last-in, first-out (LIFO) or the retail inventory method.  The amendments apply to all other inventory, which includes inventory that is measured using first-in, first-out (FIFO) or average cost.  This ASU eliminates from U.S. GAAP the requirement to measure inventory at the lower of cost or market.  Market under the previous requirement could be replacement cost, net realizable value, or net realizable value less an approximately normal profit margin.  Entities within scope of this update will now be required to measure inventory at the lower of cost and net realizable value.  Net realizable value is the estimated selling prices in the ordinary course of business, less reasonably predictable costs of completion, disposal, and transportation.  Subsequent measurement is unchanged for inventory using LIFO or the retail inventory method.  The amendments in this update are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, with early adoption permitted, and should be applied prospectively.  The Company is evaluating the potential impact of this adoption on its consolidated financial statements.  

Venezuela

Herbalife Venezuela, the Company’s Venezuelan subsidiary, currently imports its products into Venezuela. Foreign exchange controls in that country limit Herbalife Venezuela’s ability to repatriate earnings and settle its intercompany obligations at any official rate. As a result, the Company’s Bolivar-denominated cash and cash equivalents have continued to accumulate, increasing the potential impact of any currency devaluation. The current operating environment in Venezuela also continues to be challenging for the Company’s Venezuela business, with high inflation, price controls, and the risk that the government will further devalue the Bolivar or impose other import or currency exchange restrictions.

At December 31, 2014, the Company used the SICAD II rate of 50 Bolivars per U.S. dollar to remeasure Herbalife Venezuela’s financial statements. In February 2015, the Venezuelan government announced the introduction of a modified three-tier exchange control system which consists of CENCOEX, SICAD, and a third new mechanism called the Marginal Currency System, or SIMADI, and the SICAD II exchange mechanism was terminated. On February 12, 2015, the SIMADI exchange mechanism opened at a rate of 170 Bolivars per U.S. dollar as published by the Venezuelan government. During the first quarter of 2015, the Company was awarded approximately $0.1 million U.S. dollars through the SIMADI exchange mechanism and the Company’s ability to successfully exchange Bolivars to U.S. dollars continues to remain limited.

At March 31, 2015, the Company used the SIMADI exchange rate to remeasure its Venezuelan subsidiary’s financial statements. The Company recognized $32.6 million in foreign exchange losses in selling, general & administrative expenses and $1.4 million of inventory write downs in cost of sales within its condensed consolidated statement of income for the three months ended March 31, 2015 related to the remeasurement of its Venezuelan subsidiary’s financial statements. The Company recognized $0.3 million in foreign exchange losses in selling, general & administrative expenses and $0.3 million of inventory write downs in cost of sales within its condensed consolidated statement of income for the three months ended June 30, 2015 related to the remeasurement of its Venezuelan subsidiary’s financial statements. The Company recognized $0.2 million of inventory write downs in cost of sales within its condensed consolidated statement of income for the three months ended September 30, 2015 related to the remeasurement of its Venezuelan subsidiary’s financial statements. The Company continues to use the SIMADI exchange rate for remeasurement which was 198 Bolivars per U.S. dollar at September 30, 2015. During the three months ended September 30, 2015, the Company entered into a transaction to effectively convert 350.5 million of its Bolivars to $0.5 million U.S. dollars. Due to the financing nature of the transaction, the Company recognized a loss of $1.3 million in interest expense within its condensed statement of income.  

Due to the evolving foreign exchange control environment in Venezuela, it is possible that the Company’s ability to access certain foreign exchange mechanisms, including the SIMADI rate, could change in future periods which may have an impact on the rate the Company uses to remeasure Herbalife Venezuela’s Bolivar-denominated assets and liabilities. If the Company continues using the SIMADI rate for remeasurement purposes in future periods, any future U.S. dollars obtained through the SICAD or other more favorable mechanisms could have a positive impact on the Company’s consolidated net earnings. In addition, devaluations of the SIMADI rate, adoption of less favorable official rates by the Venezuelan government, or U.S. dollars obtained through less favorable alternative legal exchange mechanisms, could have a negative impact on the Company’s future consolidated net earnings. The Company is closely monitoring the CENCOEX, SICAD, and SIMADI exchange mechanisms as they continue to evolve.

As a result of using the SICAD I rate for remeasurement at March 31, 2014, the Company recognized $86.1 million of foreign exchange losses in selling, general & administrative expenses within its condensed consolidated statement of income for the three months ended March 31, 2014.  The Company recognized $0.2 million and $17.1 million in foreign exchange losses relating to unfavorable changes in the SICAD I rate during the three months ended June 30, 2014 and September 30, 2014, respectively. As a result of using the SICAD II rate for remeasurement at September 30, 2014, the Company recognized $98.0 million in foreign exchange losses in selling, general & administrative expenses within its condensed consolidated statement of income for the three months ended September 30, 2014.  In addition, as a result of using the SICAD II rate for remeasurement, the Company recognized $7.6 million of inventory write downs in cost of sales and $7.0 million of long lived asset impairments in selling, general & administrative expenses within its condensed consolidated statement of income during the three months ended September 30, 2014.

As of September 30, 2015, Herbalife Venezuela’s net monetary assets and liabilities denominated in Bolivars was approximately $10.1 million, and included approximately $9.5 million in Bolivar denominated cash and cash equivalents. As noted above, these Bolivar denominated assets and liabilities were remeasured at the SIMADI rate as of September 30, 2015. These remeasured amounts, including cash and cash equivalents, being reported on the Company’s condensed consolidated balance sheet using the published SIMADI rate may not accurately represent the amount of U.S. dollars that the Company will ultimately realize. While the Company continues to monitor the exchange mechanisms and restrictions imposed by the Venezuelan government, and assess and monitor the current economic and political environment in Venezuela, there is no assurance that the Company will be able to exchange Bolivars into U.S. dollars on a timely basis or at all, and if it does, what impact, if any, such exchanges will have on the Company’s financial statements. Herbalife Venezuela’s net sales represented less than 1% and approximately 3% of the Company’s consolidated net sales for the nine months ended September 30, 2015 and 2014, respectively, and its total assets represented approximately 1% and 2% of the Company’s consolidated total assets as of September 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014, respectively. As of September 30, 2015, the majority of Herbalife Venezuela’s total assets consisted of Bolivar-denominated cash and cash equivalents.

See the Company’s financial statements and related notes in the 2014 10-K for further information on Herbalife Venezuela and Venezuela’s highly inflationary economy.

Investments in Bolivar-Denominated Bonds

The Company did not invest in any additional Bolivar-denominated bonds during the three months ended September 30, 2015. During the nine months ended September 30, 2015, the Company invested in additional Bolivar-denominated bonds with a purchase price of 25.7 million Bolivars, or approximately $0.1 million. During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2014, the Company invested in additional Bolivar-denominated bonds with a purchase price of 48.0 million and 113.4 million Bolivars, respectively, or approximately $4.2 million and $11.8 million, respectively. The Company classifies these bonds as long-term available-for-sale investments which are carried at fair value, inclusive of unrealized gains and losses, and net of discount accretion and premium amortization. The fair value of these bonds is determined using Level 2 inputs which include prices of similar assets traded in active markets in Venezuela and observable yield curves. Net unrealized gains and losses on these bonds are included in other comprehensive income (loss) and are net of applicable income taxes. As of September 30, 2015, the amortized cost of the Company’s Venezuelan bonds was $1.2 million and the bonds had a market value of $1.1 million. As of September 30, 2015, the Company’s Venezuelan bonds had contractual maturities due after five years. Expected disposal dates of the bonds may be less than the contractual maturity dates. During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2015 and 2014, the Company did not sell any of its Venezuelan bonds.

The Company evaluates securities for other-than-temporary impairment on a quarterly basis. The impairment evaluation considers numerous factors, and their relative significance varies depending on the situation. Factors considered include the length of time and extent to which the market value has been less than cost; the financial condition and near-term prospects of the issuer of the securities; when applicable, the foreign exchange rates that are available to the Company; and the intent and ability of the Company to retain the security in order to allow for an anticipated recovery in fair value. If, based upon the analysis, it is determined that the impairment is other-than-temporary, the security is written-down to fair value, and a loss is recognized in other expense, net in the Company’s condensed consolidated income statement. Other-than-temporary impairments related to available-for-sale securities for the three months ended September 30, 2014 was $9.8 million, which were primarily due to unfavorable foreign exchange rates related to investments in Bolivar-denominated bonds. There were no other-than-temporary impairments related to available-for-sale securities during the three months ended September 30, 2015.  Other-than-temporary impairments related to available-for-sale securities for the nine months ended September 30, 2015 and 2014 were $2.3 million and $13.0 million, respectively, which were primarily due to unfavorable foreign exchange rates related to investments in Bolivar-denominated bonds.