UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

 

 

Form 20-F

 

 

 

Commission file number 1-15240

 

JAMES HARDIE INDUSTRIES N.V.

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

 

N/A

(Translation of Registrant’s name into English)

 

The Netherlands

(Jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)

 

Atrium, 8^th floor

Strawinskylaan 3077

1077 ZX Amsterdam, The Netherlands

(Address of principal executive offices)

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

 

 

 

 

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act.

None.

 

Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act.

None.

 

Indicate the number of outstanding shares of each of the issuer’s classes of capital or common stock as of the close of the period covered by the annual report: 467,295,391 shares of common stock at March 31, 2007.

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.  Yes þ     No o

 

If this report is an annual or transition report, indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  Yes o     No þ

 

Note — Checking the box will not relieve any registrant required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 from their obligations under those Sections.

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.  Yes þ     No o

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

Large accelerated filer  þ     Accelerated filer  o     Non-accelerated filer  o

 

Indicate by check mark which financial statement item the registrant has elected to follow. Item 17 o  Item 18 þ

 

If this is an annual report, indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).  Yes oNo þ

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

 

Not Required.

 

Not Applicable.

 

In this annual report, unless the context otherwise indicates, James Hardie Industries N.V., a “naamloze vennootschap,” or a Dutch public limited liability company incorporated and existing under the laws of The Netherlands, is referred to as JHI NV. JHI NV together with its direct and indirect wholly owned subsidiaries as of the time relevant to the applicable reference, are collectively referred to as the James Hardie Group. JHI NV and its current direct and indirect wholly owned subsidiaries are collectively referred to as “we,” “us,” “our,” “JHI NV and its wholly owned subsidiaries” or the “Company.”

 

The term “fiscal year” refers to our fiscal year ended March 31 of such year; the term “dollars” or “$” refers to U.S. dollars; the term “A$” refers to Australian dollars; the term “NZ$” refers to New Zealand dollars; the term “PHP” refers to Philippine pesos; and the term “CLP” refers to Chilean pesos. The term “msf” or “thousand square feet” refers to thousands of square feet, where a square foot is defined as a standard square foot of 5/16” thickness and the term “mmsf” or “million square feet” refers to millions of square feet, where a square foot is defined as a standard square foot of 5/16” thickness.

 

As a company incorporated under the laws of The Netherlands, we have listed our securities for trading on the Australian Securities Exchange, or ASX, through the use of the Clearing House Electronic Subregister System, or CHESS, Units of Foreign Securities, or CUFS. CUFS are a form of depositary security that represents a beneficial ownership interest in the securities of a non-Australian corporation. Each of our CUFS represents the beneficial ownership of one share of common stock of JHI NV, the legal ownership of which is held by CHESS Depositary Nominees Pty Ltd. The CUFS are listed and traded on the ASX under the symbol “JHX.”

 

We have also listed our securities for trading on the New York Stock Exchange, or NYSE. We sponsor a program, whereby beneficial ownership of five CUFS is represented by one American Depositary Share, or ADS, which is issued by The Bank of New York. These ADSs trade on the NYSE in the form of American Depositary Receipts, or ADRs, under the symbol “JHX.” Unless the context indicates otherwise, when we refer to ADRs, we are referring to ADRs or ADSs and when we refer to our common stock we are referring to the shares of our common stock that are represented by CUFS.

 

Selected Financial Data

 

We have included in Item 18 of this annual report the audited consolidated financial statements of JHI NV, consisting of our consolidated balance sheets as of March 31, 2007 and March 31, 2006, our consolidated statements of changes in shareholders’ equity as of March 31, 2007, March 31, 2006 and March 31, 2005 and our consolidated statements of operations and cash flows for the years ended March 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, together with the related notes thereto. The consolidated financial statements included in this annual report have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, or “U.S. GAAP.”

 

The selected consolidated financial information summarized below has been derived in part from JHI NV’s financial statements. You should read the selected consolidated financial information in conjunction with JHI NV’s financial statements and related notes contained in Item 18 and with the information provided in the section of this report entitled “Operating and Financial Review and Prospects” contained in Item 5. Historic financial data is not necessarily indicative of our future results and you should not unduly rely on it.

 

 

 

 

 

Operating (loss) income also includes restructuring and other operating income/expenses as follows: (i) for fiscal year 2006, an $0.8 million loss related to the disposal of our Chilean fiber cement business; (ii) for fiscal year 2005, $6.0 million consisting of a settlement loss of $5.3 million related to an employee retirement plan and a $0.7 million loss on the sale of land in Sacramento, California; (iii) for fiscal year 2004, $2.1 million expense primarily related to an increase in cost provisions for our Australian and New Zealand business; and (iv) for fiscal year 2003, $1.0 million income related to the settlement of a terminated derivative contract.

 

 

 

 

 

Risk Factors

 

Our wholly owned Australian subsidiary, James Hardie 117 Pty Ltd, is required to make payments to a special purpose fund that provides compensation for Australian asbestos-related personal injury claims against certain former companies of the James Hardie Group. Such payments have reduced, and future payments will reduce, our funds available for capital expenditures on existing and new business opportunities, repayments of debt, payments of dividends or other distributions and may restrict our ability to access equity or debt capital markets. Such payments have also adversely affected, and will adversely affect, our financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows.

 

On November 21, 2006, JHI NV, the Asbestos Injuries Compensation Fund, or AICF, the Government of the State of New South Wales, Australia, which we refer to as the NSW Government, and our wholly owned Australian subsidiary, James Hardie 117 Pty Ltd, which we refer to as the Performing Subsidiary, have entered into a Final Funding Agreement (as amended), which we refer to as the Final Funding Agreement, to provide long-term funding to the AICF, a special purpose fund that provides compensation for Australian asbestos-related personal injury claims against certain former companies of the James Hardie Group, including ABN 60, Amaca Pty Ltd (which we refer to as Amaca) and Amaba Pty Ltd (which we refer to as Amaba), which we collectively refer to as the Former James Hardie Companies.

 

As a result of our obligation to make payments under the Final Funding Agreement, our funds available for capital expenditures (either with respect to our existing business or new business opportunities), repayments of debt principal, or distributions to our shareholders and for other corporate purposes have been, and will be, reduced by the funding paid to the AICF, and consequently, our financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows have been, and will be, reduced or materially adversely affected.

 

Our obligation to make these payments could also affect or restrict our ability to access equity or debt capital markets. For example, had we not prepaid in full the outstanding amount of our US$ non-collateralized notes prior to making the decision to record the asbestos provision, we would not have been in compliance with certain restrictive covenants pertaining to those notes. If our financial position deteriorates, we may not be able to access the capital markets to replace those notes on terms as advantageous as those that were applicable to those notes and as a result our financial position and liquidity will be materially adversely affected. See Item 4, “Information on the Company — Legal Proceedings” for additional information concerning the Final Funding Agreement.

 

Even though the Final Funding Agreement has been implemented, we may be subject to potential additional liabilities (including claims for compensation or property remediation outside the arrangements reflected in the Final Funding Agreement) because certain current and former companies of the James Hardie Group previously manufactured products that contained asbestos.

 

Up to 1987, two former subsidiaries of ABN 60, Amaca and Amaba, which are now owned and controlled by the AICF, manufactured products in Australia that contained asbestos. In addition, prior to 1937, ABN 60, which is also now owned and controlled by the AICF, manufactured products in Australia that contained asbestos. ABN 60 also held shares in companies that manufactured asbestos-containing products in Indonesia and Malaysia, and held minority shareholdings in companies that conducted asbestos-mining operations based in Canada and Southern

Africa. Former ABN 60 subsidiaries also exported asbestos-containing products to various countries around the world. The AICF is designed to provide compensation only for certain claims and to meet certain related expenses and liabilities, and the legislation introduced in New South Wales in connection with the Final Funding Agreement seeks to defer all other claims against the Former James Hardie Companies. The funds contributed to the AICF will not be available to meet any asbestos-related claims made outside Australia, or claims made arising from exposure to asbestos occurring outside Australia, or any claim for pure property loss or pure economic loss or remediation of property. In these circumstances, it is possible that persons with such excluded claims may seek to pursue those claims directly against us. Defending any such litigation could be costly and time consuming.

 

Prior to 1988, a New Zealand subsidiary in the James Hardie Group manufactured products in New Zealand that contained asbestos. In New Zealand, asbestos-related disease compensation claims are managed by the state-run Accident Compensation Corporation, or ACC. Our New Zealand subsidiary that manufactured products that contained asbestos contributed financially to the ACC fund as required by law via payment of an annual levy. All decisions relating to the amount and allocation of payments to claimants in New Zealand are made by the ACC in accordance with New Zealand law. The Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2001 (NZ) bars compensatory damages for claims that are covered by the legislation which may be made against the ACC fund. However, we may be subject to potential liability if any of these claims are found not to be covered by the legislation and are later brought against us.

 

Apart from the funding obligations arising out of the Final Funding Agreement, it is possible that we could become subject to suits for damages for personal injury or death in connection with the former manufacture or sale of asbestos products that have been or may be filed against the Former James Hardie Companies. Although the ability of any claimants to initiate or pursue such suits is restricted by the legislation enacted by the NSW Government under the terms of the Final Funding Agreement (see Item 4, “Information on the Company — Legal Proceedings”), we cannot predict with any certainty the outcome of any future claims or allegations that may be made, how the laws of various jurisdictions may be applied to the facts or how the laws may change in the future. If a court of competent jurisdiction relying on applicable law at the time were to find JHI NV, our New Zealand subsidiary or another James Hardie Group subsidiary liable for damages connected with existing or former subsidiaries or their past manufacture of asbestos-containing products, we may incur significant liabilities in connection with any damages that may be awarded in the legal proceedings, in addition to the costs associated with defending against such claims.

 

We have agreed to indemnify the buyer of our former Gypsum manufacturing facilities for certain asbestos-related claims.

 

When we sold our former United States gypsum wallboard manufacturing facilities in April 2002, we agreed to indemnify the buyer from certain future liabilities, including, for a period of 30 years, liabilities arising from asbestos-related claims related to injuries to persons or property arising from our former gypsum business. See Item 10, “Additional Information — Material Contracts.”

 

The Final Funding Agreement imposes certain non-monetary obligations which could materially adversely affect our financial position, results of operations, cash flows and outlook.

 

Under the Final Funding Agreement, we are also subject to certain non-monetary obligations that could prove to be onerous or to otherwise materially adversely affect our ability to undertake proposed transactions or to pay dividends. For example, the Final Funding Agreement contains certain restrictions that generally prohibit us from undertaking transactions that would materially adversely affect the relative priority of the AICF as a creditor, or that would materially impair our legal or financial capacity and that of the Performing Subsidiary, in each case such that we and the Performing Subsidiary would cease to be likely to be able to meet the funding obligations that would have arisen under the Final Funding Agreement had the relevant transaction not occurred. Those restrictions apply to dividends and other distributions, reorganizations of, or dealings in, share capital which create or vest rights in such capital in third parties, or non-arm’s length transactions. While the Final Funding Agreement contains certain exemptions from such restrictions (including, for example, exemptions for arm’s length dealings; transactions in the ordinary course of business; certain issuances of equity securities or bonds; and certain transactions provided

certain financial ratios are met and certain amounts of dividends), implementing such restrictions could materially adversely affect our financial position, results of operations, cash flows and outlook.

 

The Final Funding Agreement does not eliminate the risk of adverse action being taken against us.

 

There is a possibility that, despite certain covenants agreed to by the NSW Government in the Final Funding Agreement, adverse action could be directed against us by one or more of the NSW Government, the government of the Commonwealth of Australia, governments of the states or territories of Australia or any other governments, unions or union representative groups, or asbestos disease groups with respect to the asbestos liabilities of Amaba, Amaca and ABN 60. Any such adverse action could materially adversely affect our financial position, results of operations, cash flows and outlook.

 

We incurred substantial costs in connection with the events leading up to the negotiation and implementation of the Final Funding Agreement and may in the future continue to incur substantial costs or be subject to further legal proceedings.

 

In February 2004, the NSW Government established a Special Commission of Inquiry, which we refer to as the SCI, to investigate, among other matters, the circumstances in which the Medical Research and Compensation Foundation, which we refer to as the Foundation, was established. The SCI issued its report on September 21, 2004. The SCI found that there was a significant funding shortfall. In part, this was based on actuarial work commissioned by us. As of March 31, 2007, an updated actuarial study completed by KPMG Actuaries Pty Ltd, or KPMG Actuaries, estimated that the undiscounted value of the central estimate of the asbestos-related liabilities of Amaba and Amaca was approximately A$2.8 billion ($2.3 billion). See Note 12 to our consolidated financial statements in Item 18 for additional information. The SCI found that the net assets of the Foundation, Amaba, Amaca and the ABN 60 Foundation (a newly established company into which the shares in ABN 60 were transferred) were not sufficient to meet these prospective liabilities and were likely to be exhausted in the first half of 2007. The SCI’s findings are not binding and if the same issues were presented to a court, the court might come to different conclusions on one or more of the issues.

 

In fiscal years 2007, 2006 and 2005, we incurred $13.6 million, $17.4 million and $28.1 million, respectively, of expenses related to the events and negotiations leading to the signing of the Final Funding Agreement, including the SCI. We expect to continue to incur material costs associated with the Final Funding Agreement and other related matters, including costs related to: cooperating with an ongoing investigation and proceedings by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, or ASIC, into the circumstances surrounding and leading up to the establishment of the Foundation, the corporate reorganizations in 2001 and 2003 and associated matters; and associated legal and advisory costs.

 

If the Final Funding Agreement is terminated, the NSW Government may pass legislation that would seek to impose liability on us for asbestos claims.

 

If the Final Funding Agreement is terminated for any reason, the NSW Government has indicated that it may pass or attempt to pass legislation to impose liability on us for certain asbestos claims of the former James Hardie subsidiaries. The Australian Commonwealth Government and governments of other states and territories in Australia could also seek to introduce legislation seeking to have a similar effect. However, the Company has no detailed information as to the content of any such legislation. Any such legislation could materially adversely affect our financial position, results of operations, cash flows and outlook.

 

In addition, if the Final Funding Agreement is terminated without a suitable alternative having been reached, our share price and access to capital markets may be adversely affected due to uncertainties surrounding our potential exposure to the asbestos-related liabilities of the Former James Hardie Companies, and any related liability which may arise by legislation which may be introduced by one or more of the Australian Commonwealth Governments, the NSW Government and other state and territory governments.

Since our revenues are primarily derived from sales in U.S. dollars and payments pursuant to the Final Funding Agreement are made in Australian dollars, unfavorable fluctuations in the U.S. dollar (and other currencies from which we derive our sales) compared to the Australian dollar, will require us to pay more of our revenues to discharge our obligations under the Final Funding Agreement. In addition, since our results of operations are reported in U.S. dollars, unfavorable fluctuations in the U.S. dollar compared to the Australian dollar will require us to expense the difference in the reported period in order to increase the amount of our asbestos liability on our balance sheet.

 

Approximately 11% of our net sales in fiscal years 2007 and 2006 were derived from sales in Australia. Payments pursuant to the Final Funding Agreement are required to be made to the AICF in Australian dollars. In addition, annual payments to the AICF are calculated based on various estimates that are denominated in Australian dollars. To the extent that our future obligations exceed our Australian dollar cash flows, and we do not hedge this foreign exchange exposure, we will need to convert U.S. dollars or other foreign currency into Australian dollars in order to meet our obligations pursuant to the Final Funding Agreement. As a result, any unfavorable fluctuations in the U.S. dollar (the majority of our revenues is derived from sales in U.S. dollars) and other currencies from which we derive our sales compared to the Australian dollar will require us to convert more U.S. dollars and other currencies from which we derive our sales to pay the same amount of Australian denominated annual payments to the AICF.

 

In addition, since our results of operations are reported in U.S. dollars and the asbestos liability is based on estimated payments denominated in Australian dollars, unfavorable fluctuations in the U.S. dollar compared to the Australia dollar will significantly affect our reported results of operations since we will be required to expense any such fluctuations in the reported period in order to increase the reported value of the asbestos liability on our balance sheet. For example, due to the strengthening of the Australian dollar compared to the U.S. dollar, we recorded a $94.5 million expense during fiscal year 2007 related to the impact of foreign exchange rate movements.

 

At March 31, 2007, there were no material forward exchange contracts outstanding to mitigate this risk. Accordingly, due to the size of the asbestos liability recorded on our balance sheet, fluctuations in the exchange rate will cause unpredictable volatility in our reported results for the foreseeable future and any unfavorable fluctuation in U.S. dollar and the other currencies from which we derive our sales compared to the Australian dollar would have a significant negative impact on our business, earnings, results of operations and financial condition. See Item 11, “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.”

 

Regulatory action and continued scrutiny resulting from ongoing investigations may have an adverse effect on our business.

 

Statutory notices previously issued by ASIC indicate that ASIC is conducting an investigation into suspected contraventions of certain provisions of Australian corporations and crimes legislation concerning the affairs of ABN 60, Amaca, Amaba and the Company during the period July 1, 1994 to October 31, 2004.

 

On February 14, 2007, ASIC commenced civil proceedings in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, which we refer to as the Court, against the Company, ABN 60 and ten then-present or former officers and directors of the James Hardie Group. While the subject matter of the allegations varies between individual defendants, the allegations against the Company are confined to alleged contraventions of provisions of the Australian Corporations Act/Law relating to continuous disclosure, a director’s duty of care and diligence, and engaging in misleading or deceptive conduct in respect of a security.

 

In the proceedings, ASIC seeks:

 

 

 

ASIC stated in February 2007 that it would not pursue the claim for indemnity if the conditions precedent to the original Final Funding Agreement as announced on December 1, 2005, which we refer to as the Original Final Funding Agreement, were satisfied. The Company and the other parties to the agreement provided certification to ASIC in March 2007 that the conditions precedent to the Final Funding Agreement dated November 21, 2006 have been satisfied. ASIC is still considering its position and has not yet taken any step to withdraw the indemnity claim.

 

ASIC has indicated that its investigations continue and may result in further actions, both civil and criminal. However, it has not indicated the possible defendants to any such actions. Any such further actions could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations, cash flows and outlook. For further information, see Item 4, “Information on the Company — Legal Proceedings.”

 

Our board of directors and senior management continue to devote significant attention to seeking to implement the Final Funding Agreement and associated issues.

 

Our board of directors, senior management and others within our organization continue to devote a significant amount of time and resources to investigating the allegations raised in the report of the SCI, producing documents to and complying with requests from governmental and regulatory authorities and others, implementing the Final Funding Agreement, and making submissions relating to the NSW Government’s review of legal and administrative costs. ASIC’s investigation is ongoing and the Company is now a party to proceedings ASIC has commenced against the Company, ABN 60 and ten former officers or directors of the James Hardie Group. To the extent our board of directors and management are required to devote time and resources to dealing with such issues rather than solely focusing on conducting the business of the Company, this could adversely affect our results of operations.

 

Negative publicity may continue to adversely affect our business.

 

As a result of the events that were considered by the SCI, we have been the subject of negative publicity, both in Australia and elsewhere in the world which we believe has contributed to declines in the price of our publicly traded securities in recent years. While such negative publicity has been significantly less frequent following our entry into the Original Final Funding Agreement, the potential for such negative publicity to increase in the future cannot be eliminated. Any uncertainty created by future negative publicity or by the events underlying such negative publicity could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, staff morale and the market price of our publicly traded securities and create difficulties in attracting or retaining high caliber staff.

 

We may have insufficient Australian taxable income to utilize tax deductions.

 

We may not have sufficient Australian taxable income in future years to utilize the tax deductions resulting from payments made to the AICF. Further, if as a result of making such funding payments we incur tax losses, we may not be able to fully utilize such tax losses in future years of income. Any inability to utilize such deductions or losses could adversely affect our financial position or results of operations.

 

Potential escalation in proven claims made against, and associated costs of, the AICF could increase our annual funding payments required to be made under the Final Funding Agreement, which may cause us to have to increase our asbestos liability in the future.

 

The amount of our asbestos liability is based, in part, on actuarially determined, anticipated (estimated), future annual funding payments to be made to the AICF on an undiscounted and uninflated basis. Future annual payments to the AICF are based on updated actuarial assessments that are to be performed as of March 31 of each year to determine expected asbestos-related personal injury liabilities to be funded under the Final Funding Agreement for the financial year in which the payment is made and the next two financial years. Estimates of actuarial liabilities are based on many assumptions, which may not prove to be correct, and which are subject to considerable uncertainty, since the ultimate number and cost of claims are subject to the outcome of events that have not yet

occurred, including social, legal and medical developments as well as future economic conditions. For instance, it is possible that the categories of payable claims could be extended to include claims that are not presently compensable or legally recognized. Further, estimating the future extent and pattern of asbestos-related diseases that will arise from past exposure to asbestos and the proportion of those claims that will be successful is inherently difficult and therefore could materially differ from actual results. If future proven claims are more numerous or the liabilities arising from them are larger than that currently estimated by KPMG Actuaries, it is possible that pursuant to the terms of the Final Funding Agreement, we will be required to pay higher annual funding payments to the AICF than currently anticipated and on which our asbestos liability is based. If this occurs, we may be required to increase our asbestos liability which would be reflected as a charge in our consolidated statements of operations at that date. Any such changes to actuarial estimates which require us to increase our asbestos liability could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

 

We have experienced product bans and boycotts and have been subject to other measures taken in response to the events investigated by the SCI and could continue to experience product bans and boycotts in the future.

 

Following the release of the SCI report, the Australian Council of Trade Unions, which we refer to as the ACTU, UnionsNSW (formerly known as the Labour Council of New South Wales), and a representative of the asbestos claimants, which we collectively refer to as the Representatives, and others indicated that they would encourage or continue to encourage consumers and union members in Australia and elsewhere to ban or boycott the Company’s products, to demonstrate or otherwise create negative publicity toward the Company in order to influence the Company’s approach to the discussions with the NSW Government or to encourage governmental action if the discussions are unsuccessful. As previously disclosed, our financial position, results of operations and cash flows were affected by such bans and boycotts.

 

Pursuant to the Final Funding Agreement, the Representatives agreed to use their best endeavors to achieve forthwith the lifting of all bans or boycotts on any products manufactured, produced or sold by the Company, and the Company and the Representatives signed a deed of release in December 2005 under which the Company agreed to release the Representatives and the members of the ACTU and UnionsNSW from civil liability arising in relation to bans or boycotts instituted as a result of the events described above. Such releases did not extend to any new bans or boycotts, if applicable, implemented after the date of the signing of the Final Funding Agreement, or to any bans or boycotts which persisted beyond January 1, 2006. All bans and boycotts have now been lifted. However, if the Final Funding Agreement is terminated, new bans or boycotts could be implemented against the Company’s products. Any such measures, and the influences resulting from them, could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

 

The complexity and long-term nature of the Final Funding Agreement and related legislation and agreements may result in litigation as to their interpretation or one or more of the parties to the agreements may seek to renegotiate their terms.

 

Certain legislation, the Final Funding Agreement and related agreements which govern the implementation and performance of the Final Funding Agreement are complex and have been negotiated over the course of extended negotiation periods between various parties. There is a risk that, over the term of the Final Funding Agreement, some or all parties may become involved in disputes as to the interpretation of such legislation, the Final Funding Agreement or related agreements. We cannot guarantee that no party will commence litigation seeking remedies with respect to such a dispute, nor can we guarantee that a court will not order other remedies which may adversely affect the Company.

 

Due to the long-term nature of the Final Funding Agreement, unforeseen events may result in one or more of the parties to the Final Funding Agreement (including the Company) wishing to renegotiate the terms and conditions of the Final Funding Agreement or any of the related agreements. Any amendments to the Final Funding Agreement or related agreements in the future would require the consent of the Company, the NSW Government and the AICF, and therefore may not be achieved.

We may be liable for costs, penalties, fees or expenses incurred by current or former directors, officers or employees of the James Hardie Group to the extent that those costs are covered by indemnity arrangements granted by the James Hardie Group to those persons.

 

We may be liable for costs, penalties, fees or expenses incurred by current or former directors, officers or employees of the James Hardie Group to the extent that those costs are covered by indemnity arrangements granted by the James Hardie Group to those persons. To date, with respect to the application of our indemnity obligations to proceedings of the SCI and other regulatory bodies, we have paid legal fees and costs incurred on behalf of certain current or past employees, officers or directors who have been involved in such proceedings. In addition, our indemnification obligations would generally cover costs incurred by a director or officer in responding to an ASIC investigation or any other investigation conducted by a governmental agency or a liquidator. We or a relevant subsidiary may be reimbursed under directors’ and officers’ insurance policies taken out by us or a relevant subsidiary. However, there is no guarantee that such insurance will cover the nature of such claims or will completely insure any claims that are covered. If such costs are not insured or substantially exceed the amount of the insurance that we maintain, our business, financial condition, results of operations and liquidity could be adversely affected.

 

Our subsidiary, RCI Pty Ltd, has been required to post a substantial cash deposit and may incur substantial expenses in order to pursue an appeal of an assessment by the Australian Taxation Office, which we refer to as the ATO, and, if it is unsuccessful in its appeal, our financial position, liquidity, and cash flow will be materially and adversely affected.

 

In March 2006, RCI Pty Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company, which we refer to as RCI, received an amended assessment from the ATO. The amended assessment is based on the ATO’s calculation of RCI’s net capital gains arising as a result of an internal corporate restructuring carried out in 1998. The amended assessment originally was for A$412.0 million ($332.4 million). However, after two subsequent remissions of general interest charges by the ATO, the total assessment was changed to A$368.0 million ($296.9 million), which includes: A$172.0 million ($138.8 million) as the primary tax after allowable credits; A$43.0 million ($34.7 million) in penalties (representing 25% of the primary tax); and A$153.0 million ($123.4 million) in general interest charges, or GIC.

 

RCI is appealing the amended assessment. On July 5, 2006, pursuant to an agreement negotiated with the ATO and in accordance with the ATO Receivable Policy, the Company made a payment of A$189.0 million ($152.5 million) being 50% of the amended assessment, and guaranteed the remaining unpaid 50% of the amended assessment, pending the outcome of the appeal of the amended assessment. The Company also agreed to pay general interest charges accruing on the unpaid balance of the amended assessment in arrears on a quarterly basis.

 

At the end of May 2007, the ATO disallowed our objection to RCI’s notice of amended assessment for RCI for the year ended March 31, 1999. We will continue to pursue all avenues of appeal to contest the ATO’s position in this matter. RCI may incur substantial legal and other expenses in pursuing this appeal.

 

As of March 31, 2007, we had not recorded any liability for the remainder of the amended assessment and have accounted for the payments made to the ATO on July 5, 2006 and October 16, 2006 as a deposit, see the line item “Deposit with Australian Taxation Office” in our consolidated balance sheets in Item 18. In addition, it is our intention to treat any payments to be made at a later date as a deposit. Even if RCI is successful in appealing the amended assessment and the amount paid to the ATO is ultimately refunded to RCI, the requirement to initially pay 50% of the amended assessment and ongoing payments of accruing general interest charges pending the outcome of the appeal could materially and adversely affect our financial position and liquidity, as the cash required to make these payments is not available during the appeals process for ordinary corporate purposes. If RCI is unsuccessful in appealing the amended assessment, RCI will be required to pay the remaining 50% of the unpaid amended assessment, reverse the “Deposit with Australian Taxation Office” amount and recognize an expense amount for the total amended assessment and general interest charge payments. In which case, our financial position, liquidity and cash flow will be materially and adversely affected. See Item 4, “Information on the Company — Legal Proceedings” and Note 14 to the notes to our consolidated financial statements included in Item 18 for more information.

Exposure to additional income tax liabilities could materially adversely affect our financial position, results of operations, cash flows, and liquidity.

 

Due to our size and the nature of our business, we are subject to ongoing reviews by taxing jurisdictions on various tax matters, including challenges to various positions we assert on our income tax returns. We accrue for tax contingencies based upon our best estimate of the taxes ultimately expected to be paid, which we update over time as more information becomes available. Such amounts are included in taxes payable or other non-current liabilities, as appropriate. We record additional tax expense in the period in which we determine that the recorded tax liability is less than the ultimate assessment we expect.

 

Relevant tax authorities from various jurisdictions in which we operate are in the process of auditing our respective jurisdictional income tax returns for various ranges of years. In particular, the ATO is auditing our Australian income tax return for the year ended March 31, 2002. The ATO has indicated that further investigation is required and is working with us and our advisors to conclude its inquiries.

 

Of the audits currently being conducted, none have progressed sufficiently to predict their ultimate outcome. We accrue income tax liabilities for these audits based upon our knowledge of all relevant facts and circumstances, taking into account existing tax laws, our experience with previous audits and settlements, the status of current tax examinations and how the tax authorities view certain issues.

 

The amounts ultimately paid upon resolution of these examinations could be materially different from the amounts included in taxes payable or other non-current liabilities and result in additional tax expense which could materially adversely affect our financial position, results of operations, cash flows, and liquidity.

 

Under the U.S.-Netherlands income tax treaty and Dutch tax law, we derive tax benefits from the group finance operations of our Netherlands-based finance subsidiary, and changes in either the treaty or laws applicable to the finance subsidiary, including the recent changes to the tax treaty, could increase our effective tax rate and, as a result, reduce our future profits and cash flows.

 

On December 28, 2004, the United States and The Netherlands amended the U.S.-Netherlands Income Tax Treaty (prior to amendment, the “Original U.S.-NL Treaty;” post amendment, the “New U.S.-NL Treaty”). We believe that, based on the transitional rules set forth in the New U.S.-NL Treaty, the Original U.S.-NL Treaty applied to us and to our Dutch and U.S. subsidiaries until January 31, 2006. We believe that, under the Original U.S.-NL Treaty, a 5% U.S. withholding tax applied to dividends, and no U.S. withholding tax applied to interest or royalties that our U.S. subsidiaries paid to JHI NV or our Dutch finance subsidiary. The Original U.S.-NL Treaty had various conditions of eligibility for reduced U.S. withholding tax rates (and other treaty benefits), all of which we satisfied. If, however, we do not qualify for the benefits under the New U.S.-NL Treaty, such dividend, interest and royalty payments would be subject to a 30% U.S. withholding tax.

 

Companies eligible for benefits under the New U.S.-NL Treaty qualify for a zero percent U.S. withholding tax rate on dividends. However, the New U.S.-NL Treaty has a number of new, more restrictive eligibility requirements for reduced U.S. withholding tax rates and other treaty benefits. We have changed our organizational and operational structure as of January 1, 2006 to satisfy the requirements of the New U.S.-NL Treaty and believe we are eligible for benefits under the New U.S.-NL Treaty commencing on February 1, 2006. We have requested a formal determination from the U.S. tax authorities regarding whether our recent organizational and operational changes meet the requirements of the New U.S.-NL Treaty provisions. We met with the Internal Revenue Service, which we refer to as the IRS, on April 19, 2007 to initiate an audit process that will result in a determination of whether we continue to be eligible for benefits under the New U.S.-NL Treaty. We cannot assure you that we will receive a favorable determination from the IRS. As a result, we cannot guarantee that we will continue to receive the treaty benefits. If, during this tax audit the IRS determines that these changes do not meet the new requirements, we may not qualify for treaty benefits, and our effective income tax rate could significantly increase beginning in the fiscal year that such determination is made, and we could be liable for taxes owed from the effective date of the amended treaty provisions.

 

We have previously concentrated our finance and treasury activities in our Dutch finance subsidiary located in The Netherlands. In addition to providing financing to our various subsidiaries, the finance subsidiary owns and

develops intellectual property that it licenses to our operating subsidiaries. Under the Netherlands International Group Finance Company rules, we have obtained a ruling from the Dutch Revenue authority that allows the finance subsidiary to set aside, in a Financial Risk Reserve, or FRR, a portion of its taxable profits from financing and from licensing its intellectual property. The amounts set aside in the FRR are free of current Dutch income tax. Consequently, the finance subsidiary will generally incur a tax rate of approximately 13% to 15% on its qualifying financing and licensing income and a 25.5% statutory rate on all other income (25.5% is the Dutch statutory rate for calendar year 2007 and subsequent years), including any amounts involuntarily released from the FRR to cover any risks (including currency, bad debt and foreign branch losses) for which the FRR was established. The tax rate on qualifying income may be reduced to as low as approximately 5% to 7% depending on the extent to which amounts from the FRR pay for capital expenditures of our operating companies and result in a tax exempt release from the FRR. However, the effective tax rate may also be higher than 13% to 15% if (1) the risks for which the FRR was formed materialize or (2) if there are insufficient opportunities to obtain tax exempt releases from the FRR. The Dutch revenue ruling became effective on July 1, 2001 and, when issued, was to apply for 10 years so long as we satisfy the requirements of the International Group Finance Company provisions under Dutch tax law. As discussed below, the Dutch revenue ruling is set to expire on December 31, 2010.

 

The European Commission, the Commission, the executive arm of the European Union, or EU, also reviewed the tax regimes of its member countries to identify tax concessions that the Commission considered to be a form of “prohibited state aid” and, therefore, contrary to the provisions of the European Community Treaty. In February 2003, the Commission concluded that the existence of special tax concessions in certain countries, including the Netherlands International Group Finance Company regime, cannot be reconciled with EU rules regarding state aid. Accordingly, the European Commission banned certain concessionary tax regimes, including the Netherlands International Group Finance Company regime, but allowed companies then operating under that regime, including our Dutch finance subsidiary, to continue to operate under the regime until December 31, 2010.

 

Substantial and increasing competition in the building products industry could adversely affect our business.

 

Competition in the building products industry is based largely on price and, to a lesser extent, quality, performance and service. Our fiber cement products compete with products manufactured from natural and engineered wood, vinyl, stucco, masonry, gypsum and other materials as well as fiber cement products offered by other manufacturers. Some of our competitors may have greater product diversity and greater financial and other resources than we do and, among other factors, may be less affected by reductions in margins resulting from price competition.

 

Some of our competitors have lowered prices of their products to compete for sales. In addition, we expect our competitors to continue to expand their manufacturing capacities, to improve the design and performance of their products and to introduce new products with competitive price and performance characteristics. Increased competition by existing or future competitors could adversely impact fiber cement prices and could require us to increase our investment in product development, productivity improvements and customer service and support to compete in our markets.

 

Fiber cement product prices in the United States, Australia and New Zealand have fluctuated for a number of years due to the entry into the market of new producers and competition from alternative products, among other reasons, and these prices could continue to fluctuate in the future. Because of the maturity of the Australian and New Zealand markets, we believe that prices in those markets may decline and that sales volumes may not increase significantly or may decline in the future.

 

Historically, in addition to the manufacturing costs associated with our products, the overall costs of our products have been affected by changes in our product mix, the addition of proprietary products to our product mix and the operating efficiencies of our manufacturing facilities. For instance, unanticipated technical problems could impair our efforts to commission new equipment aimed at improving operating efficiencies. Additionally, the current state of the U.S. housing industry increases the possibility of further price pressures. Increased competition into any of the markets in which we compete, would likely cause pricing pressures in those markets. Any of these factors could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

If damages resulting from product defects exceed our insurance coverage, paying these damages could result in a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

 

The actual or alleged existence of defects in any of our products could subject us to significant product liability claims. Although we do not have replacement insurance coverage for damages to, or defects in, our products, we do have product liability insurance coverage for consequential damages that may arise from the use of our products. Although we believe this coverage is adequate and currently intend to maintain this coverage in the future, we cannot assure you that this coverage will be sufficient to cover all future product liability claims or that this coverage will be available at reasonable rates in the future. The successful assertion of one or more claims against us that exceed our insurance coverage could require us to incur significant expenses to pay these damages. These additional expenses could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

 

If one or more of our fiber cement products fail to perform as expected or contain a design defect, such failure or defect, and any resulting negative publicity, could result in lower sales and may subject us to claims from purchasers or users of our fiber cement products.

 

Because our fiber cement products have been used only since the early-1980s, we cannot assure you that these products will perform in accordance with our expectations over an extended period of time or that there are no serious design defects in such products. If our fiber cement technology fails to perform as expected or a product is discovered to have design defects, such failure or defects, and any resulting negative publicity, could result in lower sales of our products and may subject us to claims from purchasers or users of defective products, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

 

Warranty claims resulting from unforeseen defects in our products and exceeding our warranty reserves could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

 

We have offered, and continue to offer, various warranties on our products, including a 50-year limited warranty on certain of our fiber cement siding products in the United States. Although we maintain reserves for warranty-related claims and legal proceedings that we believe are adequate, we cannot assure you that warranty expense levels or the results of any warranty-related legal proceedings will not exceed our reserves. If our warranty reserves are significantly exceeded, the costs associated with such warranties could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

 

We may incur significant costs in the future in complying with applicable environmental and health and safety laws and regulations. A failure to comply with or a change in these laws and regulations could subject us to significant liabilities, including, but not limited to, damages and penalties.

 

In all the jurisdictions in which we operate, we are subject to environmental, health and safety laws and regulations governing, among other matters, our operations, including the air and water quality of our plants, and the use, handling, disposal and remediation of hazardous substances currently or formerly used by us or any of our affiliates. Under these laws and regulations, we may be held jointly and severally responsible for the remediation of any hazardous substance contamination at our or our predecessors’ past or present facilities and at third-party waste disposal sites. We may also be held liable for any claims arising out of human exposure to hazardous substances or other environmental damage and our failure to comply with air, water, waste, and other environmental regulations. We will continue to be liable for any environmental problems that occurred while we owned or operated any of the three gypsum facilities that we sold in April 2002. See Item 10, “Additional Information — Material Contracts.”

 

In addition, many of our products contain crystalline silica, which can be released in a respirable form in connection with manufacturing practices and handling or use. The inhalation of respirable crystalline silica at certain exposure levels is known or suspected to be associated with silicosis, potentially causing lung cancer and other adverse human health effects. We may face future costs of engineering and compliance to meet new standards relating to crystalline silica if standards are made more stringent. In addition, there is a risk that claims for silica-related health effects could be made against us. We cannot assure you that we will have adequate resources, including adequate insurance coverage, to satisfy any future silica-related health effect claims. In addition, our sales could decrease if silica-related health effect claims are made against us and as a result potential users of our products

decide not to use our products. Any such claims may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition. See also Risk Factor above captioned “If damages resulting from product defects exceed our insurance coverage, paying these damages could result in a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.”

 

The costs of complying with environmental and health and safety laws relating to our operations or the liabilities arising from past or future releases of, or exposure to, hazardous substances or product liability matters, or our failure to comply with air, water, waste, and other existing environmental regulations may result in us making future expenditures that could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations or financial condition. In addition, we cannot make any assurances that the laws currently in place will not change. Also, if applicable laws or judicial interpretations related to successor liability or “piercing the corporate veil” were to change, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. See Item 4, “Information on the Company — Legal Proceedings.”

 

Our business is dependent on the residential and commercial construction markets and we expect a slow down in housing construction in the markets we serve, including the U.S., Australia and New Zealand, over the short to medium term.

 

Demand for our products depends in large part on residential construction markets and, to a lesser extent, on commercial construction markets. The level of activity in residential construction markets depends on new housing starts and residential remodeling projects, which are a function of many factors not within our control, including general economic conditions, finance availability, mortgage and other interest rates, inflation, unemployment, demographic trends, gross domestic product growth and consumer confidence in each of the countries and regions in which we operate. Residential construction in the U.S. weakened significantly during calendar year 2006, coming off a more than 30 year high in 2005. The National Association of Home Builders, or NAHB, and other market analysts expect the new construction single-family residential segment to slow further in calendar year 2007. In Australia and New Zealand, we do not expect an improvement to the weak residential housing and renovations markets in the short-term. Any slow down in the markets we serve could result in decreased demand for our products and cause us to experience decreased sales and operating income. In addition, the level of activity in construction markets also depends on our ability to grow primary demand for fiber cement and convert sales of alternative materials to sales of fiber cement. Historically, in periods of economic decline, both new housing starts and residential remodeling also decline. The level of activity in the commercial construction market depends largely on vacancy rates and general economic conditions. Because residential and commercial construction markets are sensitive to cyclical changes in the economy, downturns in the economy or a lack of substantial improvement in the economy of any of our geographic markets could negatively affect operating results. Because of these and other factors, our results of operations may be subject to substantial fluctuations and the results for any prior period may not be indicative of results for any future period.

 

Because demand for our products in our major markets is seasonal, our quarterly results of operations may vary throughout the year.

 

In the United States, a large proportion of our fiber cement products are sold in the Southeastern, South Central and Pacific Northwest regions of the country. Demand for building products in these regions is seasonal because construction activity diminishes during the winter season. In addition, the September 2005 hurricanes that caused considerable damage along the Gulf Coast in the United States had some impact on carrier availability and transportation costs through the initial phases of the hurricane relief efforts. In Australia, New Zealand and the Philippines, demand for building products is also seasonal because, in Australia and New Zealand, construction activity diminishes during the summer period of December to February, and in the Philippines, construction activity diminishes during the wet season from June to September and the last half of December due to the slowdown in business activity over the holiday period. Because of these and other factors, our quarterly results of operations may vary throughout the year and the results for any quarterly period may not be indicative of results for any future period.

We may experience adverse fluctuations in the supply and cost of raw materials necessary to our business. A significant reduction or cessation of shipments from an important supplier could adversely affect our business if we are unable to secure alternative supplies within a short time or on reasonable terms.

 

Our fiber cement business periodically experiences fluctuations in the supply and costs of raw materials, and some of our supply markets are concentrated. For example, during both fiscal years 2007 and 2006 in the United States, natural gas costs increased significantly, and to a lesser extent, we also experienced increases in costs associated with electric power and some of our major material components including cement. Cellulose fiber, silica, cement and water are the principal raw materials used in the production of fiber cement. Cellulose fiber and cement have been subject to significant price fluctuations in the past. Price fluctuations or material delays may occur in the future due to lack of raw materials or suppliers. The loss or deterioration of our relationship with a major supplier, an increase in demand by third parties for a particular supplier’s products or materials or delays in obtaining materials could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

 

If our research and development efforts fail to generate new, innovative products or processes, our overall profit margins may decrease and demand for our products may fall, which would have an adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. In addition we may incur substantial expenses related to unsuccessful research and development efforts.

 

We invest significantly in research and development because we believe that such efforts are key to sustaining and growing our existing market leadership position in fiber cement. Because profit margins for fiber cement products and building products generally erode the longer a product has been on the market, innovation is particularly important. We rely on our research and development efforts to generate new products and processes to increase demand and to protect profit margins. If our research and development efforts fail to generate new, innovative products or processes, our overall profit margins may decrease and demand for our products may fall, which would have an adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. In addition, we may incur substantial expenses related to unsuccessful research and development efforts.

 

Demand for our products is subject to changes in consumer preference.

 

The continued development of builder and consumer preference for our fiber cement products over competitive products is critical to sustaining and expanding demand for our products. Therefore, the failure to maintain and increase builder and consumer acceptance of our fiber cement products could have a material adverse effect on our growth strategy as well as our business, results of operations and financial condition.

 

We rely on only a few distributors to distribute our fiber cement products and the loss of any distributor could adversely affect our business.

 

Our top three distributors in the United States represented approximately 60% of our total USA Fiber Cement gross sales in fiscal year 2007. Our top three distributors in Australia and our top three distributors in New Zealand accounted for approximately 31% and 69% of our total gross sales of fiber cement in Australia and New Zealand, respectively, in fiscal year 2007. We generally do not have long-term contracts with our large distributors. Accordingly, if we were to lose one or more of these distributors because our competitors were able to offer distributors more favorable pricing terms or for any other reasons, we may not be able to replace distributors in a timely manner or on reasonable terms. The loss of one or more distributors could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

 

Changes in, or failure to comply with, the laws, regulations, policies or conditions of any jurisdiction in which we conduct our business could result in, among other consequences, the loss of our assets in such jurisdiction, the elimination of certain rights that are critical to the operation of our business in such jurisdiction, a decrease in revenues or the imposition of additional taxes or other costs.

 

Because we own assets, manufacture and sell our products internationally, our activities are subject to political, economic, legal and other uncertainties, including:

 

 

 

Although we seek to take applicable laws, regulations and conditions into account in structuring our business on a global basis, changes in, or our failure to comply with, the laws, regulations, policies or conditions of any jurisdiction in which we conduct our business could result in, among other consequences, the loss of our assets in such jurisdiction, the elimination of certain rights that are critical to the operation of our business in such jurisdiction, a decrease in revenues or the imposition of additional taxes. Therefore, any change in laws, regulations, policies or conditions of a jurisdiction could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

 

Because some of our intellectual property and other proprietary information may be publicly available, we are subject to the risk that competitors could copy our products or processes.

 

Our success depends, in part, on the proprietary nature of our technology, including non-patentable intellectual property such as our process technology. To the extent that a competitor is able to reproduce or otherwise capitalize on our technology, it may be difficult, expensive or impossible for us to obtain adequate legal or equitable relief. Also, the laws of some foreign countries may not protect our intellectual property to the same extent as do the laws of the United States. In addition to patent protection of intellectual property rights, we consider elements of our product designs and processes to be proprietary and confidential. To safeguard our confidential information, we rely on employee, consultant and vendor non-disclosure agreements and contractual provisions and a system of internal safeguards to protect our proprietary information. However, any of our registered or unregistered intellectual property rights may be challenged or exploited by others in the industry, which could harm our results of operations and competitive position.

 

Natural disasters could have an adverse effect on our overall business, results of operations and cash flows.

 

Our plants and other facilities are located in places that could be affected by natural disasters, such as hurricanes, typhoons, cyclones, earthquakes, floods, tornados and other natural disasters. Natural disasters that directly impact our plants or other facilities could adversely affect our manufacturing or other operations and, thereby, harm our overall business, results of operations and cash flows.

 

We rely on a continuous power supply and availability of utilities to conduct our operations, and any shortages or interruptions could disrupt our operations and increase our expenses.

 

In the manufacture of our products, we rely on a continuous and uninterrupted supply of electric power, water and natural gas as well as the availability of water, waste and emissions discharge facilities. Any future shortages or discharge curtailments could significantly disrupt our operations and increase our expenses. We currently do not have backup generators to maintain power and do not have alternate sources of power in the event of a blackout. In addition, our current insurance does not provide coverage for any damages that we or our customers may suffer as a result of any interruption in our power supply. If blackouts interrupt our power supply, we would be temporarily unable to continue operations at the affected facilities. Any future interruption in our ability to continue operations at our facilities could damage our reputation, harm our ability to retain existing customers or obtain new customers and could result in lost revenue, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Because we have significant operations outside of the United States and report our earnings in U.S. dollars, unfavorable fluctuations in currency values and exchange rates could have a significant negative impact on our earnings.

 

Because our reporting currency is the U.S. dollar, our non-U.S. operations face the additional risk of fluctuating currency values and exchange rates. Such operations may also face hard currency shortages and controls on currency exchange. Approximately 17% of our net sales in fiscal years 2007 and 2006 were derived from sales outside the United States. Consequently, changes in the value of foreign currencies (principally Australian dollars, New Zealand dollars, Philippine pesos, Euros, U.K. pounds and Canadian dollars) could significantly affect our business, results of operations and financial condition. We generally attempt to mitigate foreign exchange risk by entering into contracts that require payment in local currency, hedging transactional risk, where appropriate, and having non-U.S. operations borrow in local currencies, particularly that of the Philippines. Although, we may enter into such financial instruments from time to time to manage our market risks, we did not have any material interest rate swaps or forward exchange contracts outstanding as of March 31, 2007. There can be no assurance that we will be successful in these mitigation strategies, or that fluctuations in foreign currencies and other foreign exchange risks will not have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. See also Risk Factor above captioned “Since our revenues are primarily derived from sales in U.S. dollars and payments pursuant to the Final Funding Agreement are made in Australian dollars, unfavorable fluctuations in the U.S. dollar (and other currencies from which we derive our sales) compared to the Australian dollar, will require us to pay more of our revenues to discharge our obligations under the Final Funding Agreement. In addition, since our results of operations are reported in U.S. dollars, unfavorable fluctuations in the U.S. dollar compared to the Australian dollar will require us to expense the difference in the reported period in order to increase the amount of our asbestos liability on our balance sheet.”

 

Information technology systems integration issues could disrupt our internal operations, which could have significant adverse effects on our profitability.

 

In fiscal year 2006, we commenced our implementation of a new enterprise resource planning, or ERP, software system. Our ongoing systems integration work could cause portions of our information technology infrastructure to experience interruptions, delays or cessations of service and produce system errors. We may not be successful in timely implementing these new systems, and transitioning data and other aspects of the process could be expensive, time consuming and disruptive. Any disruptions that may occur in the implementation of this new system could adversely affect our ability to accurately and timely report the financial results of our operations and otherwise efficiently operate our business, which could have a significant adverse effect on our profitability.

 

Our Articles of Association and Dutch law contain provisions that could delay or prevent a change of control that may otherwise be beneficial to you.

 

Our Articles of Association contain several provisions that could have the effect of delaying or preventing a change of control of our ownership. Our Articles of Association generally prohibit the holding of shares of our common stock if, because of an acquisition of a relevant interest (including interests held in the form of shares of our common stock, CUFS or ADRs) in such shares, the number of shares in which a person holds relevant interests increases from 20% or below to over 20% or from a starting point that is above 20% and below 90%. However, this prohibition is subject to exceptions, including acquisitions that result from acceptance under a takeover bid as described in our Articles of Association. Although these provisions in our Articles of Association may help to ensure that no person acquires voting control of us without making an offer to all shareholders, these provisions may also have the effect of delaying or preventing a change of control that may otherwise be beneficial to you. See Item 10, “Additional Information — Key Provisions of our Articles of Association — Limitations on Right to Hold Common Stock.”

Because we are incorporated under Dutch laws, you may not be able to effectively seek legal recourse against us or our management and you may have difficulty enforcing any U.S. judgments or rulings in a foreign jurisdiction.

 

We are incorporated under the laws of The Netherlands. In addition, many of our directors and executive officers are residents of jurisdictions outside the United States and a substantial portion of our assets are located outside the United States. As a result, it may be difficult to effect service of process within the United States upon such persons, or to enforce outside the United States judgments obtained against such persons in U.S. courts, or to enforce in U.S. courts any judgments obtained against such persons in courts located in jurisdictions outside the United States, including actions predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the U.S. securities laws. In addition, it may be difficult for you to enforce, in original actions brought in courts located in jurisdictions outside the United States, rights predicated upon the U.S. securities laws.

 

The rights of shareholders and the responsibilities of directors under the laws of The Netherlands may not be as clearly established as under statutes or judicial precedent in existence in certain U.S. jurisdictions, and such rights under the laws of The Netherlands may differ substantially from what those rights would be under the laws of various jurisdictions in the United States. Therefore, our shareholders may have more difficulty in challenging the actions by our directors than they would otherwise as shareholders of a corporation incorporated in the United States.

 

The issuance of shares of common stock or the grant of options to acquire shares of common stock could dilute the value of your shares and adversely affect the price of our common stock.

 

The authority to issue shares and to grant rights (e.g. options) to subscribe for shares, up to the amount of authorized share capital has been delegated to our Supervisory Board. Accordingly, our Supervisory Board could decide to issue shares or grant rights to subscribe for shares, such as options, up to the amount of our authorized share capital, without shareholder approval, which could dilute the value of your shares and adversely affect the price of our common stock.

 

In addition, if we issue a large number of our equity securities, the trading price of our equity securities could decrease. We may pursue acquisitions of businesses and may issue equity securities in connection with these acquisitions, although we do not currently have specific acquisitions planned. We may also issue equity securities to satisfy other liabilities of the Company. We cannot predict the effect, if any, that future sales or issuances of our equity securities or the availability of such securities for future sale will have on our securities market price from time to time.

 

If we experience labor disputes or interruptions, as we have from time to time in the past, our operations may be disrupted and our business, financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected.

 

As of May 31, 2007, approximately 30%, or 180, of our employees in Australia¹ and approximately 56%, or 96, of our employees in New Zealand were represented by labor unions. Our unionized employees are covered by a range of federal and state-based agreements in Australia and other agreements in New Zealand. Two Australian labor agreements applying to our NSW operation expired in June 2006, one of which was subsequently renewed for two years (until June 2008) and the other is still in negotiation. In addition, we renegotiated one labor agreement for our Queensland (Meeandah) plant last year, which now expires in October 2008. Our New Zealand labor agreement expires in September 2007. We cannot assure you that any of these agreements will be renewed on reasonable terms, or at all. During the past three years, we experienced occasional strikes and work interruptions lasting up to 5 days in Australia. In each case the strike action was confined to a small group of employees and had minimal impact on the operation. If we were to experience a prolonged labor dispute at any of our facilities, any strikes or work interruptions associated with such dispute could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

 

¹ Under Australian law, we cannot keep records of union members. The number quoted is the number of people who work in our factories that have union participation and therefore may be represented by a union.

Our effective income tax rate could increase and adversely affect our operating results.

 

We operate in multiple jurisdictions and pay tax on our income according to the tax laws of these jurisdictions. Various factors, some of which are beyond our control, determine our effective tax rate, including changes in or interpretations of tax laws in any given jurisdiction, our ability to use net operating losses and tax credit carry forwards and other tax attributes, changes in geographical allocation of income and expense, and our judgment about the realizability of deferred tax assets.

 

If we are classified as a “controlled foreign corporation” or a “passive foreign investment company,” our shareholders could be subject to increased tax liability as a consequence of their investment in our securities.

 

Our U.S. citizen and resident shareholders could incur adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences if, for federal income tax purposes, we are classified as a “controlled foreign corporation” or a “passive foreign investment company.” For information regarding these consequences, see Item 10, “Additional Information — Taxation — United States Taxation.” In addition, shareholders could be adversely affected by changes in the current tax laws, regulations and interpretations thereof in the United States and The Netherlands, including changes that could have retroactive effect.

 

We may acquire or divest businesses from time to time, and this may adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition and may significantly change the nature of the company in which you have invested.

 

In the past, we have divested business segments. In the future, we may acquire other businesses or sell some or all of our assets or business segments. Any significant acquisition or sale may adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition and could change the overall profile of our business. As a result, the value of our shares may decrease in response to any such acquisition or sale and, upon any such acquisition or sale, our shares may represent an investment in a company with significantly different assets and prospects from the Company when you made your initial investment in us.

 

Forward-Looking Statements

 

This annual report contains forward-looking statements. We may from time to time make forward-looking statements in our periodic reports filed with or furnished to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, on Forms 20-F and 6-K, in our annual reports to shareholders, in offering circulars and prospectuses, in media releases and other written materials and in oral statements made by our officers, directors or employees to analysts, institutional investors, representatives of the media and others. Examples of forward-looking statements include:

 

 

Words such as “believe,” “anticipate,” “plan,” “expect,” “intend,” “target,” “estimate,” “project,” “predict,” “forecast,” “guideline,” “should,” “aim” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements but are not the exclusive means of identifying such statements.

 

Forward-looking statements involve inherent risks and uncertainties. We caution that a number of important factors could cause actual results to differ materially from the plans, objectives, expectations, estimates and intentions expressed in such forward-looking statements. These factors include, but are not limited to, the risk factors discussed under “Key Information — Risk Factors” beginning on page 6, and: all matters relating to or arising out of the prior manufacture of products that contained asbestos by current and former James Hardie subsidiaries; required contributions to the AICF and the effect of foreign exchange rates on the amount recorded in our financial statements as an asbestos liability; compliance with and changes in tax laws and treatments; competition and product pricing in the markets in which we operate; the consequences of product failures or defects; exposure to environmental, asbestos or other legal proceedings; general economic and market conditions; the supply and cost of raw materials; the success of our research and development efforts; our reliance on a small number of product distributors; compliance with and changes in environmental and health and safety laws; compliance with and changes in environmental and health and safety laws; risks of conducting business internationally; compliance with and changes in laws and regulations; foreign exchange risks; the successful implementation of new software systems; and the effect of natural disasters. We caution that the foregoing list of factors is not exclusive and that other risks and uncertainties may cause actual results to differ materially from those in forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made.

 

History and Development of the Company

 

Our legal name was changed to James Hardie Industries N.V. from RCI Netherlands Holdings B.V. in July 2001 when our legal form was converted from a “besloten vennootschap met beperkte aansprakelijkheid” (a “B.V.”), or private limited liability company, to a “naamloze vennootschap” (a “N.V.”), or a public limited liability company whose stock, unlike a private limited liability company, may be transferred without executing a notarial deed if such company is listed on a recognized stock exchange. We operate under Dutch law. Our corporate seat is located in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. The address of our registered office in The Netherlands is Atrium, 8^th floor, Strawinskylaan 3077, 1077 ZX Amsterdam. The telephone number there is +31 20 301 2980. Our Company Secretary is Mr. Benjamin Butterfield who is based in The Netherlands.

 

Corporate Restructuring

 

On July 2, 1998, James Hardie Industries Limited, or JHIL, now called ABN 60, which was then a public company organized under the laws of Australia and listed on the Australian Securities Exchange, or ASX, announced a plan of reorganization and capital restructuring, which we refer to as the 1998 Reorganization.

 

James Hardie N.V., or JHNV, was incorporated in August 1998 as an intermediary holding company, with all of its common stock owned by indirect subsidiaries of ABN 60. On October 16, 1998, the shareholders of ABN 60 approved the 1998 Reorganization. We began our restructuring in November 1998, primarily to address the structural imbalance and resulting operational, financial and commercial issues associated with the increasing significance and growth opportunities of our U.S. operations and the location of corporate management and our shareholder base in Australia. At that time, we successfully completed:

 

 

 

In February 2001, ABN 60, formerly known as James Hardie Industries Limited, or JHIL, established the Foundation by gifting A$3.0 million ($1.7 million) in cash and transferring ownership of Amaca and Amaba to the Foundation.

 

On July 24, 2001, ABN 60 announced a further plan of reorganization and capital restructuring, which we refer to as the 2001 Reorganization. On October 19, 2001, we completed our 2001 Reorganization. This restructuring was done to provide us with a more efficient financial structure in light of potential global expansion, to allow us to use our stock for acquisitions if necessary and to increase overall returns to our shareholders. The 2001 Reorganization consisted of the following:

 

 

As a result of the share exchange, ABN 60 shareholders ceased to hold any direct interest in ABN 60 and instead became the holders of interests in JHI NV common shares, receiving substantially their same proportional ownership interests in the Company as they had in ABN 60 before exchanging their shares.

 

In addition, as a result of the exchange, ABN 60 and JHNV became direct subsidiaries of JHI NV.

The 2001 Reorganization is generally depicted in the following simplified diagrams:

 

Before

 

 

After

 

 

Following the 2001 Reorganization, JHI NV controlled the same assets and liabilities as ABN 60 controlled immediately prior to the 2001 Reorganization.

 

During fiscal year 2003:

 

 

During fiscal year 2006, we completed a further restructuring which we believe will maximize our ability to continue paying dividends and continue realizing benefits available under the Dutch Financial Risk Reserve regime. See Item 3, “Key Information — Risk Factors.”

The 2006 reorganization consisted of the following: The subsidiary that owns our United States operations issued a second series of shares to a new subsidiary of JHIF BV. Our United States operations are now partly owned by JHI NV and the new subsidiary of JHIF BV. We expect that dividends paid to the new subsidiary of JHIF BV will be used to fund our ongoing obligations pursuant to the Final Funding Agreement (as amended), which we refer to as the Final Funding Agreement, to the Asbestos Injuries Compensation Fund, or AICF, through James Hardie 117 Pty Ltd, which we refer to as the Performing Subsidiary, while dividends paid to JHI NV will be available for other corporate purposes.

 

The following is a simplified diagram of our current corporate structure:

 

Current

 

 

Consolidation of the AICF

 

In February 2007, the Final Funding Agreement was approved by our shareholders to provide long-term funding to the AICF, a special purpose fund that provides compensation for Australian-related personal injury claims against certain former companies of the James Hardie Group, including ABN 60, Amaca and Amaba. After the Final Funding Agreement was approved, shares in Amaca and Amaba were transferred from the Foundation to the AICF. In addition, shares in ABN 60 were transferred from the ABN 60 Foundation to the AICF.

 

Although we have no legal ownership in the AICF, we have contractual and pecuniary interests in the AICF as a result of funding arrangements outlined in the Final Funding Agreement. The Final Funding Agreement results in the Performing Subsidiary having a contractual liability to pay the initial funding and ongoing annual payments to the AICF, subject to the terms and conditions of the Final Funding Agreement, including application of the cash flow cap. These payments to the AICF will result in us having a pecuniary interest in the AICF. The interest is considered variable because the potential impact on us will vary based upon the annual actuarial assessments obtained by us with respect to asbestos-related claims.

Due to our variable interest in the AICF we consolidate the AICF in accordance with the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Interpretation No. 46R, “Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities.” See Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements in Item 18.

 

Recent Developments

 

Board and Management Changes

 

On April 1, 2007, Mr. Donald DeFosset was appointed Chairman of our Joint and Supervisory Boards.

 

On June 29, 2007, Ms. Cathy Wallace resigned from her position as Vice President — Global Human Resources and from the Company.

 

Effective July 1, 2007, Ms. Catherine Walter was appointed as a non-executive director of our Joint and Supervisory Boards.

 

General Overview of Our Business

 

Based on net sales, we believe we are the largest manufacturer of fiber cement products and systems for internal and external building construction applications in the United States, Australia, New Zealand, and the Philippines. Fiber cement is currently one of the fastest growing segments of the U.S. residential exteriors industry. Based on our knowledge, experience and third-party data regarding our industry, we estimate that total U.S. industry shipments of fiber cement siding, trim, soffit and fascia were between 1.8 to 1.9 billion square feet during fiscal year 2007, a decrease of approximately 5% from fiscal year 2006. Based on our knowledge, experience and third-party data, we estimate that we have 35% to 45% of the U.S. Interior Cement Board Market. We market our fiber cement products and systems under various Hardie brand names and other brand names such as Cemplank^® siding (we also formerly marketed siding under the brand name Sentry^® siding). We believe that, in certain applications, our fiber cement products and systems provide a combination of distinctive performance, design and cost advantages when compared to other fiber cement products and alternative products and systems that use solid wood, engineered wood, vinyl, brick, stucco or gypsum wallboard.

 

The sale of fiber cement products in the United States accounted for 82%, 82% and 78% of our total net sales from continuing operations in fiscal years 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.

 

Our fiber cement products are used in a number of markets, including new residential construction (single and multi-family housing), manufactured housing (mobile and pre-fabricated homes), repair and remodeling and a variety of commercial and industrial applications (stores, warehouses, offices, hotels, motels, schools, libraries, museums, dormitories, hospitals, detention facilities, religious buildings and gymnasiums). We manufacture numerous types of fiber cement products with a variety of patterned profiles and surface finishes for a range of applications, including external siding and soffit lining, internal linings, facades, fencing, pipes and floor and tile underlayments.

 

In contrast to some other building materials, fiber cement provides durability attributes, such as strong resistance to moisture, fire, impact and termites, requires relatively little maintenance and can be used as a substrate to create a wide variety of architectural effects with textured and colored finishes. Based on our knowledge, experience and third-party data regarding our industry, we estimate that, in fiscal year 2007, we sold approximately 12%² of the estimated total 11.5 billion square foot² U.S. exterior siding market (all types of siding; excludes fascia, trim and soffit).

 

 

² Actual siding usage reports from NAHB for calendar year 2006 will not be available until August and November 2007.

The breakdown of our net sales by operating segment for each of our last three fiscal years is as follows:

 

 

Industry Overview

 

U.S. Housing Industry, Fiber Cement Industry and Pipe Industry

 

In the United States, fiber cement is principally used in the residential building industry. Such usage fluctuates based on the level of new home construction and the repair and remodeling of existing homes. The level of activity is generally a function of interest rates and the availability of finance to homeowners to purchase a new home or make improvements to their existing homes, inflation, unemployment levels, demographic trends, gross domestic product growth and consumer confidence. Demand for building products is also affected by residential housing starts and existing home sales, the age and size of the housing stock and overall home improvement expenditures. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, annual domestic housing starts decreased from approximately 2.07 million in calendar year 2005 to approximately 1.80 million in calendar year 2006 and residential remodeling expenditures increased from approximately $215.0 billion in calendar year 2005 to approximately $228.2 billion in calendar year 2006.

 

Based on our knowledge, experience and third-party data regarding our industry, we estimate that total U.S. industry shipments of fiber cement siding, trim, soffit and fascia were between 1.8 and 1.9 billion square feet during fiscal year 2007, down approximately 5% from fiscal year 2006. The future growth of fiber cement products will depend on overall demand for building products and on the rate of penetration of fiber cement products against competing materials such as wood, engineered wood (hardboard and oriented strand board), vinyl, masonry and stucco. See Item 3, “Key Information — Risk Factors.”

 

In the United States, the largest application for fiber cement products is in the external siding industry. Fiber cement is one of the fastest growing segments of the siding industry. Siding is a component of every building and it usually occupies more square footage than any other building component, such as windows and doors. Selection of siding material is based on installed cost, durability, aesthetic appeal, strength, weather resistance, maintenance requirements and cost, insulating properties and other features. Different regions of the United States show a decided preference among siding materials according to economic conditions, weather, materials availability and local taste. The principal siding materials are vinyl, masonry, stucco, fiber cement, solid wood, and engineered wood. Vinyl has the largest share of the siding market. In recent years, fiber cement has been gaining market share against vinyl and wood, and this is believed to be due to a number of reasons, including aesthetics, durability concerns and lower maintenance requirements compared to wood.

 

In the U.S. civil construction market, large diameter pipes are used for major public infrastructure projects such as storm water, sewer, water distribution and other non-pressurized drainage applications. According to the most recent Freedonia Report on Large Diameter Pipes, in 2005 there was demand for approximately 191 million linear feet of large diameter pipes in the United States. Of this amount, approximately 46% was used for storm sewer applications, approximately 19% was used in drainage and irrigation applications, approximately 14% for water distribution and approximately 21% for a variety of other applications. According to the report, demand for large diameter pipes in the United States is expected to grow at a rate of approximately 2.3% annually.

 

International Fiber Cement Industry

 

In Australia and New Zealand, fiber cement building products are used in both the residential and commercial building industries with applications in external siding, internal walls, ceilings, floors, soffits and fences. The residential building industry represents the principal market for fiber cement products. We believe the level of

activity in this industry is generally a function of interest rates, inflation, unemployment levels, demographic trends, gross domestic product growth and consumer confidence. Demand for fiber cement building products is also affected by the level of new housing starts and renovation activity. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, or ABS, total dwelling commencements in Australia declined from 167,993 in calendar year 2003 to 151,682 in calendar year 2006. Renovation activity, as measured in local currency expenditures by the ABS has increased from calendar year 2003 to calendar year 2006 for a total increase over this period of approximately 13%. According to Statistics New Zealand, new dwellings authorized in New Zealand declined from approximately 29,914 in calendar year 2003 to 25,952 in calendar year 2006. Residential renovation activity in New Zealand has increased from calendar year 2003 to calendar year 2006 for a total increase over this period of approximately 32%. The Housing Industry Association of Australia and InfoMetrics New Zealand believe new housing construction and renovation activity are expected to soften over the short to medium term in Australia and New Zealand, respectively.

 

Fiber cement products have, across a range of product applications, gained broader acceptance in Australia and New Zealand than in the United States, primarily due to earlier introduction in Australia and New Zealand. Former subsidiaries of ABN 60 developed fiber cement in Australia as a replacement for asbestos cement in the early 1980s. Asbestos sheet production ceased in the early 1980s and asbestos pipe production ceased in early 1987. Competition has intensified over the past decade in Australia. In addition to competition from solid wood, engineered wood, wallboard, masonry and brick, two Australian competitors have established fiber cement manufacturing facilities in Australia and fiber cement imports are also available. Competition continues to intensify in New Zealand as fiber cement imports have become more cost competitive with the strengthening New Zealand dollar, resulting in increasingly competitive market pricing. See Item 3, “Key Information — Risk Factors.”

 

Management believes that fiber cement has good long-term growth potential in some Asian markets because of the benefits of framed construction over traditional masonry construction. In addition, we believe the opportunity to replace wood-based products, such as plywood, with more durable fiber cement will be attractive to consumers in these markets.

 

Products

 

We manufacture fiber cement products in the United States, Australia, New Zealand and the Philippines. In July 2005, we sold our Chilean fiber cement business. In fiscal year 2004, we commenced our European fiber cement business by distributing our fiber cement products in the U.K. and France. Our total product offering is aimed at the building and construction markets, including new residential construction, manufactured housing, repair and remodeling and a variety of commercial and industrial building applications.

 

We offer a wide range of fiber cement products for both exterior and interior applications, some of which have not yet been introduced into the United States. In the United States and elsewhere, our products are typically sold as planks or flat sheets with a variety of patterned profiles and finishes. Planks are used for external siding while flat sheets are used for internal and external wall linings and floor and tile underlayments. At our Plant City, Florida facility, we manufacture fiber reinforced concrete pipes for use as large diameter storm water and non-pressurized drainage applications. Outside the United States, we also manufacture fiber cement products for use in other applications such as building facades, lattice, trim, fencing, decorative columns, flooring, soffit lining and ceiling applications. We also manufacture fiber cement pipes in Australia.

 

We have developed a proprietary technology platform that enables us to produce thicker yet lighter-weight fiber cement products that are generally lighter and easier to handle than traditional building products. The first application of this technology has been our Hardietrim^tm plank. Hardietrim plank is a fiber cement trim product that is used on the exterior of residential and commercial construction to replace traditional wood and engineered wood trim. Hardietrim plank was launched in fiscal year 1999, with the introduction of Hardietrim HLD^® plank, from our Cleburne, Texas plant and demand has been strong since that time. A new production process for manufacturing Hardietrim plank was completed at the Cleburne plant and production commenced in fiscal year 2002. Additional trim capacity was added in the Peru plant in fiscal years 2004 and 2005.

 

We believe that our products provide certain performance, design and cost advantages. The principal fiber cement attribute in exterior applications is durability, particularly when compared to competing wood and wood-based products, while offering comparable aesthetics. Our fiber cement products exhibit superior resistance to the

damaging effects of moisture, fire, impact and termites compared to wood and wood-based products, which has enabled us to gain a competitive advantage over competing products. Vinyl siding products generally have better durability characteristics than wood-based products, but typically cannot duplicate the superior aesthetics of fiber cement and lack the characteristics necessary for effectively accepting paint applications.

 

Our fiber cement products provide strength and the ability to imprint simulated patterns that closely resemble patterns and profiles of traditional materials such as wood and stucco. The surface properties provide a superior paint-holding finish to wood and engineered wood products such that the periods between necessary maintenance and repainting are longer. Compared to masonry construction, fiber cement is lightweight, physically flexible and can be cut using readily available tools. This makes fiber cement suitable for lightweight construction across a range of architectural styles. Fiber cement is well suited to both timber and steel-framed construction.

 

In our interior product range, our ceramic tile underlayment products provide superior handling and installation characteristics compared to fiberglass mesh cement boards. Compared to wood and wood-based products, our products provide the same general advantages that apply to external applications. In addition, our fiber cement products exhibit less movement in response to exposure to moisture than many alternative competing products, providing a more consistent and durable substrate on which to install tiles. In internal lining applications where exposure to moisture and impact damage are significant concerns, our products provide superior moisture resistance and impact resistance than traditional gypsum wet area wallboard and other competing products.

 

Our USA Hardie Pipe business manufactures fiber-reinforced concrete pipes at a custom-built facility in Plant City, Florida. The pipes are used for below-ground stormwater drainage in civil and commercial construction projects and in the development of residential subdivisions. Our strategy in our USA Hardie Pipe business is to establish Hardie^tm pipe as the preferred solution for stormwater applications that use pipes with diameters ranging from 12” to 36”. We believe that Hardie^tm pipe offers this market significant installation and performance benefits because our product features span those offered by traditional concrete pipes and newer flexible pipes. We provide the initial crush strength of rigid pipes, combined with the lighter-weight, longer-lengths and ease of installation of flexible pipes. We also manufacture fiber cement pipes in Australia.

 

We seek to emphasize the performance attributes of our products and continue to develop new products that, due to the materials used and the process technology employed in their manufacture, may be difficult for competitors to emulate. While no assurances can be given, we believe that the proprietary nature of these products, our ability to competitively source raw materials for these products and the economies of scale that are derived from their manufacture should assist our efforts to maintain our leadership and low cost competitive position. See “Research and Development.” Also see Item 3, “Key Information — Risk Factors.”

 

During fiscal year 2002, we introduced James Hardie^® building products with ColorPlus^® technology, a new finished product available in specific lap siding, panels, shingles, trim, and soffit products. Since then, we have added pre-finished trim accessories, several new colors and more board profiles. With ColorPlus^® pre-finished products, customers are saved the trouble or expense of finding tradesmen to finish their siding. We added a further enhancement to ColorPlus^® products by fitting a laminate to all ColorPlus^® pre-painted siding so it can be delivered and installed in the best possible condition.

 

During fiscal year 2003, we expanded our new ColorPlus^® line of pre-finished exterior products with the addition of several new colors, and successfully launched a new all-weather low density trim product utilizing our new proprietary XLD^® trim low density fiber cement technology. In that same year, we also launched our new improved proprietary grid quarter-inch backer product EZGrid^® underlayment.

 

During fiscal year 2004, we introduced pre-finished trim accessories to further expand our ColorPlus^® collection line.

 

During fiscal years 2005 and 2006, after considerable market research, we re-launched the ColorPlus^® collection of products with additional colors, board profiles, and pallet sizes. In addition, we expanded our manufacturing capacity and capabilities to meet increasing demand for our siding, trim and soffit products with ColorPlus^® Technology.

During fiscal year 2006, we added Moldblock^tm Protection to our EZGrid^® underlay and Hardiebacker^tm sheets. Additionally, in the past five years, we launched many new textures, styles and coatings in fiber cement siding products in the United States to capitalize on demand for a variety of styles among homebuilders and homeowners. In Australia and New Zealand, new products released over the past five years include EziGrid^® tile underlay, Eclipsa^tm eaves lining, Linea^tm cladding, ExoTec^® facade panel, Axon^® cladding, Matrix^tm cladding, and Scyon^® Wet Area Flooring (in Australia only) and Monotek^® facade panel and ShingleSide panel (in New Zealand only).

 

In the Philippines, new products released over the past five years include Hardisenepa^tm fascia board, Hardiplank^® siding and Hardifloor^tm Boards. More generally, during the past five years, we have introduced many new textures, styles and coatings to our fiber cement siding products in North America to capitalize on homeowners’ and homebuilders’ demands for a variety of cladding styles. At the same time, research and development has enabled us to find the optimum balance between low maintenance and appearance.

 

Seasonality

 

Our earnings are seasonal and typically follow activity levels in the building and construction industry. In the United States, the calendar quarters ending in December and March generally reflect reduced levels of building activity depending on weather conditions. In Australia and New Zealand, the calendar quarter ending in March is usually affected by a slowdown due to summer holidays. In the Philippines, construction activity diminishes during the wet season from June through September and during the last half of December due to the slowdown in business activity over the holiday period. Also, general industry patterns can be affected by weather, economic conditions, industrial disputes and other factors. See Item 3, “Key Information — Risk Factors.”

 

Raw Materials

 

All of the raw materials required in the manufacture of our fiber cement products are available from a number of sources and we have not experienced any shortages that have materially affected our operations. The principal raw materials used in the manufacture of fiber cement are cellulose fiber (wood-based pulp), silica (sand), portland cement and water.

 

Cellulose Fiber.  Reliable access to specialized, consistent quality, low cost pulp is critical to the production of fiber cement building materials. Cellulose fiber is sourced from New Zealand, the United States, Canada, and South America (Chile) and is processed to our specifications. It is further processed using our proprietary technology to provide the reinforcing material in the cement matrix of fiber cement. We have developed a high level of internal expertise in the production and use of wood-based pulps. This expertise is shared with pulp producers, which have access to appropriate raw wood stocks, in order to formulate superior reinforcing pulps. The resulting pulp formulas are typically proprietary and are the subject of confidentiality agreements between the pulp producers and us. Moreover, we have obtained patents in the United States and in certain other countries abroad covering certain unique aspects of our pulping formulas and processes that we believe cannot adequately be protected through confidentiality agreements. However, we cannot assure you that our intellectual property and other proprietary information will be protected in all cases. See Item 3, “Key Information — Risk Factors.” Although we have entered into contracts to hedge pulp prices in the past, we currently have none in effect. However, we continue to evaluate options on agreements with suppliers for the purchase of pulp that could fix our pulp prices over the longer-term.

 

Silica.  High purity silica is sourced locally by the various production plants. In the majority of locations, we use silica sand as a silica source. In certain other locations, however, we process quartz rock and beneficiate silica sand to ensure the quality and consistency of this key raw material.

 

Cement.  Cement is acquired in bulk from local suppliers and is supplied on a just-in-time basis to our manufacturing facilities. The silos at each fiber cement plant hold between one and three days of our cement requirements. During fiscal years 2007 and 2006 we experienced cost increases related to increases in the price of cement. We continue to evaluate options on agreements with suppliers for the purchase of cement that could fix our cement prices over longer periods of time.

Water.  We use local water supplies and seek to process all wastewater to comply with environmental requirements.

 

Sales, Marketing and Distribution

 

The principal markets for our fiber cement products are the United States, Australia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Canada, the United Kingdom and France. In addition, we sell fiber cement products in South Korea, China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, East Timor, India, Singapore, Indonesia, Malta, Guam, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, Turkey, the Middle East (Israel, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Qatar), Ireland, Spain, Switzerland, Belgium, The Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Germany, Papua New Guinea and the Pacific Islands (including, for example, Fiji, New Caledonia, and Western and American Samoa). Our brand name, customer education in comparative product advantages, differentiated product range and customer service, including technical advice and assistance, provide the basis for our marketing strategy. We offer our customers support through a specialized fiber cement sales force and customer service infrastructure in the United States, Australia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Europe and Canada. The customer service infrastructure includes inbound customer service support coordinated nationally in each country, and is complemented by outbound telemarketing capability. Within each regional market, we provide sales and marketing support to building products dealers and lumber yards and also provide support directly to the customers of these distribution channels, principally homebuilders and building contractors.

 

In the United States, we sell fiber cement products for new residential construction predominantly to distributors, which then sell these products to dealers or lumber yards. This two-step distribution process is supplemented with direct sales to dealers as a means of accelerating product penetration and sales. Our top three U.S. distributors accounted for approximately 60% of our total USA Fiber Cement gross sales in fiscal year 2007. Repair and remodel products in the United States are typically sold through the large home center retailers and specialist distributors. In Australia and New Zealand, both new construction and repair and remodel products are generally sold directly to distributor/hardware stores and lumber yards rather than through the two-step distribution process, which is generally used in the United States. In the Philippines, a network of thousands of small to medium size dealer outlets sells our fiber cement products to consumers, builders and real estate developers. Physical distribution of product in each country is primarily by road or sea transport, except for in the United States where transportation is primarily by road and a small use of rail.

 

We maintain dedicated regional sales management teams in our major sales territories. As of May 31, 2007, the sales teams (including telemarketing staff) consisted of approximately 300 people in the United States and Canada, 59 people in Australia, 20 people in New Zealand, 29 people in the Philippines, and 22 people in Europe. We also employ one person based in Taiwan who functions as a regional export salesperson, and who covers markets such as South Korea, Hong Kong, Macau, China and the Middle East (Israel, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Qatar). Our national sales managers and national account managers, together with the regional sales managers and sales representatives, maintain relationships with national and other major accounts. Our sales force includes skilled trades people who provide on-site technical advice and assistance. In some cases, sales forces manage specific product categories. For example, in the United States, there are separate sales forces for siding products, interior products, and pipes. The interior products sales force provides in-store merchandising support for home center retailers.

 

We also use trade and consumer advertising and public relations campaigns to generate demand for our products. These campaigns usually explain the differentiating attributes of our fiber cement products and the suitability of our fiber cement products and systems for specific applications.

 

Despite the fact that distributors are generally our direct customers, we also aim to increase primary demand for our products by marketing our products directly to homeowners, architects and builders. We encourage them to specify and install James Hardie^® products because of the quality and craftsmanship of our products. This “pull through” strategy, in turn, assists us in expanding sales for our distribution network as distributors benefit from the increasing demand for our products.

 

Geographic expansion of our fiber cement business has occurred in markets where framed construction is prevalent for residential applications or where there are opportunities to change building practices from masonry to framed construction. Expansion is also possible where there are direct substitution opportunities irrespective of the

methods of construction. Our entry into the Philippines is an example of the ability to substitute fiber cement for an alternative product (in this case plywood). With the exception of our current major markets, as well as Japan and certain rural areas in Asia, Scandinavia, and Eastern Europe, most markets in the world principally utilize masonry construction for external walls in residential construction. Accordingly, further geographic expansion depends on our ability to provide alternative construction solutions and for those solutions to be accepted by the markets.

 

Because fiber cement products were relatively new to the Philippines, the launch of our fiber cement products in the Philippines in fiscal year 1999 was accompanied by strategies to address the particular needs of local customers and the building trade. For example, we established a carpenter training and accreditation program whereby Filipino carpenters who are unfamiliar with our products are taught installation techniques. We have also put greater emphasis on building our relationships with new home developers and builders in order to educate the market on the benefits of our products in this particular sector.

 

Fiber cement products manufactured in Australia, New Zealand and the Philippines are exported to a number of markets in Asia, the Pacific, and the Middle East (Israel, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Qatar) by sea transport. A regional sales management team based in the Philippines is responsible for coordinating export sales into Asia and the Middle East (Israel, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Qatar). A regional sales coordinator based in New Zealand is responsible for export sales to the Pacific and Papua New Guinea.

 

Research and Development

 

We pioneered the successful development of cellulose reinforced fiber cement and, since the 1980s, have progressively introduced products resulting from our proprietary product formulation and process technology. We have capitalized on our strong market positions to maintain leadership in product research and development and process technology enhancements. Our product differentiation strategy, and our quest to maintain our position as one of the low cost manufacturers of fiber cement, is supported by our significant investment in research and development activities. In fiscal year 2007, we spent $30.0 million or approximately 1.9% of total net sales, in research and development activities. This amount included $4.1 million of amounts classified as selling, general and administrative expenses for U.S. GAAP purposes. In fiscal year 2006, we spent $32.1 million, or approximately 2.2% of total net sales, in research and development activities. This amount included $3.4 million of amounts classified as selling, general and administrative expenses for U.S. GAAP purposes. In fiscal year 2005, we spent $27.1 million, or approximately 2.2% of total net sales, in research and development activities. This amount included $5.5 million of amounts classified as selling, general and administrative expenses for U.S. GAAP purposes.

 

Dependence on Trade Secrets and Research and Development

 

Our current patent portfolio is based mainly on fiber cement compositions, associated manufacturing processes and the resulting products. Our non-patent technical intellectual property consists primarily of our operating and manufacturing know-how, which is maintained as trade secret information. We have increased our abilities to effectively create, manage and utilize our intellectual property and have implemented a strategy that increasingly uses patenting, licensing, trade secret protection and joint development to protect and increase our market share. However, we cannot assure you that our intellectual property and other proprietary information will be protected in all cases. In addition, if our research and development efforts fail to generate new, innovative products or processes, our overall profit margins may decrease and demand for our products may fall. We do not materially rely on intellectual property licensed from any outside third parties. See Item 3, “Key Information — Risk Factors.”

 

Governmental Regulation

 

Environmental Regulation

 

Our operations and properties are subject to extensive federal, state and local and foreign environmental protection and health and safety laws, regulations and ordinances. These environmental laws, among other matters, govern activities and operations that may have adverse environmental effects, such as discharges to air, soil and

water, and establish standards for the handling of hazardous and toxic substances and the handling and disposal of solid and hazardous wastes. In the United States, these environmental laws include, but are not limited to:

 

 

as well as analogous state statutes and local regulations. Other countries also have statutory schemes relating to the protection of the environment.

 

Some environmental laws provide that a current or previous owner or operator of real property may be liable for the costs of removal or remediation of environmental contamination on, under, or in that property or other impacted properties. In addition, persons who arrange, or are deemed to have arranged, for the disposal or treatment of hazardous substances may also be liable for the costs of removal or remediation of environmental contamination at the disposal or treatment site, regardless of whether the affected site is owned or operated by such person. Environmental laws often impose liability whether or not the owner, operator or arranger knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of such environmental contamination. Also, third parties may make claims against owners or operators of properties for personal injuries, property damage and/or for clean-up associated with releases of hazardous or toxic substances pursuant to applicable environmental laws and common law tort theories, including strict liability.

 

Environmental compliance costs in the future will depend, in part, on continued oversight of operations, expansion of operations and manufacturing activities, regulatory developments and future requirements that cannot presently be predicted. See Item 3, “Key Information — Risk Factors.” Also see “Legal Proceedings” below.

Organizational Structure

 

JHI NV is incorporated in The Netherlands, with its corporate seat in Amsterdam.

 

The table below sets forth our significant subsidiaries, all of which are 100% owned by JHI NV, either directly or indirectly, as of May 31, 2007.

 

 

Capital Expenditures and Divestitures

 

Capital Expenditures

 

The following table sets forth our capital expenditures, calculated on an accrual basis, for each year in the three-year period ended March 31, 2007.

 

 

 

 

The significant capital expenditure projects over the past three fiscal years in our USA Fiber Cement business include:

 

 

 

In addition, in fiscal year 2006 we commenced our implementation of a new ERP software system. As of March 31, 2007, we have incurred $10.3 million related to this project.

 

In fiscal year 2006, we spent $3.5 million to upgrade our fiber cement manufacturing plant at Rosehill in Sydney. The purpose of the upgrade was to improve production line efficiencies in order to increase productivity and cost savings.

 

We currently expect to spend up to approximately $60 million for capital expenditures in fiscal year 2008. Amounts expended will include facility upgrades and capital to implement new fiber cement technologies. The expected amount of spending in fiscal year 2008 includes additional capital expenditures expected to be made on projects that were in progress during fiscal year 2007, including the completion of the new finishing capability on a new product line.

 

In addition, the expected capital expenditure amount for fiscal year 2008 above includes the implementation of the new ERP software system discussed above.

 

Competitive pressures and market developments could require further increases in capital expenditures. Our financing for these capital expenditures is expected to come from our cash from our future operations and from external debt to the extent that cash from operations does not cover our capital expenditures. However, if we are unable to extend our credit facilities, or are unable to renew our credit facilities on terms that are substantially similar to the ones we presently have, we may experience liquidity issues and may have to reduce our levels of planned capital expenditures to conserve cash for future cash flow requirements. See Item 3, “Key Information — Risk Factors.”

 

Divestitures

 

Disposal of Chile Business

 

In June 2005, the Company approved a plan to dispose of its Chile Fiber Cement business to Compañía Industrial El Volcan S.A., which we refer to as Volcan. The sale closed on July 8, 2005. The Company received net proceeds of $3.9 million and recorded a loss on disposal of $0.8 million. This loss on disposal was included in other operating expense in the Company’s consolidated statements of operations for the year ended March 31, 2006.

As part of the terms of the sale of the Chile Fiber Cement business to Volcan, the Company entered into a two-year take or pay purchase contract for fiber cement product manufactured by Volcan. The first year of the contract amounted to a purchase commitment of approximately $2.8 million and the second year amounted to a purchase commitment of approximately $2.1 million. See Note 15 to our consolidated financial statements included in Item 18 for additional information about the results of the disposal of our Chile Fiber Cement business.

 

Property, Plant and Equipment

 

We estimate that our ten manufacturing plants are among the largest and lowest cost fiber cement manufacturing plants in the United States. We believe that the location of our ten plants in California, Texas, Florida, Illinois, Washington, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Nevada and Virginia positions us near high growth markets in the United States while minimizing our transportation costs for product distribution and raw material sourcing.

 

Our manufacturing plants use significant amounts of water which, after internal recycling and reuse, are eventually discharged to publicly owned treatment works (with the exception of our Blandon, Pennsylvania and Summerville, South Carolina facilities, which maintain a closed loop system). The discharge of process water is monitored by us, as well as by regulators. In addition, we are subject to regulations that govern the air quality and emissions from our plants. In the past, from time to time, we have received notices of discharges in excess of our water and air permit limits. In each case, we have addressed the concerns raised in those notices, including the payment of any minor fines.

 

Plants and Process

 

We manufacture fiber cement products in the United States, Australia, New Zealand and the Philippines. The location of each of our fiber cement plants and the annual design capacity for such plants are set forth below:

 

 

 

While the same basic process is used to manufacture fiber cement products at each facility, plants are designed to produce the appropriate mix of products to meet each market’s specific, projected needs. Many of our manufacturing facilities have been either newly constructed or substantially modernized and upgraded in the past five years. The facilities were constructed so production can be efficiently adjusted in response to increased consumer demand by increasing production capacity utilization, enhancing the economies of scale or adding additional lines to existing facilities, or making corresponding reductions in production capacity in response to weaker demand. Except for the Waxahachie, Texas plant, we own all of our fiber cement sites and plants located in the United States. The lease for the Waxahachie, Texas site and plant expires on March 31, 2020, at which time we have an option to purchase the plant. Pursuant to the lease, we make quarterly base rental payments of $850,000. In 1998, we entered into lease agreements with a former subsidiary, now owned by AICF, for all of our fiber cement sites located in Australia. In March 2004, Multiplex acquired the land and buildings related to the three fiber cement manufacturing facilities from the former subsidiary. Prior to that acquisition, we renegotiated the three leases with Multiplex. Upon completion of the acquisition and subsequent transfer of title to Multiplex, Multiplex assumed the responsibility of landlord under each of the amended leases. In addition, in March 2004, we entered into a lease agreement with Multiplex for our fiber cement site located in New Zealand. On June 30, 2005, an unrelated third party, the Location Group Limited, acquired the land and buildings related to the fiber cement manufacturing facilities in New Zealand from Multiplex and we now make lease payments related to this site to the Penrose Land Limited, a company within the Location Group Limited, as landlord under the lease. We own our pipe plant in the United States. In addition, we own 40% of the land on which our Philippines fiber cement plant is located, and 100% of the Philippines plant itself.

 

For fiscal year 2007, average capacity utilization for our fiber cement plants by country was approximately as follows:

 

 

 

The capital cost per unit of production for new plants has significantly declined since we opened our first U.S. plant in Fontana, California in 1989. This improvement is largely attributable to our utilization of proprietary technology. Management believes that our capital cost per unit of capacity is substantially lower than that of many of our competitors’ plants. In addition, we can now build and commission new manufacturing plants significantly faster than when we built our first production line in the United States. Management believes that the speed and cost at which we can construct new plants relative to our competitors enable us to respond rapidly to emerging regional demand for fiber cement products and to gain the advantage accorded to the first local producer in a market.

 

Mines

 

We lease silica quartz mine sites in Tacoma, Washington; Reno, Nevada; and Victorville, California. Our five year lease for our quartz mine in Tacoma, Washington expired on February 28, 2006, at which time we exercised our option to renew the lease for an additional four years. The lease for our silica quartz mine site in Reno, Nevada expires in March 2011 (with options to renew or purchase). The lease for our silica quartz mine site in Victorville, California expires in July 2015.

 

We pay production royalties to the owners based on silica tonnage removed from the mine. Because other cost effective sources of sand are not available at these locations, we operate these silica quartz mines and process the rock to obtain silica for our fiber cement products.

 

Legal Proceedings

 

Our operations, like those of other companies engaged in similar businesses, are subject to a number of federal, state and local laws and regulations on air and water quality, waste handling and disposal. Our policy is to accrue for environmental costs when it is determined that it is probable that an obligation exists and the amount can be reasonably estimated. In the opinion of management, based on information presently known, except as set forth below, the ultimate liability for such matters should not have a material adverse effect on either the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

 

The Company is involved from time to time in various legal proceedings and administrative actions incidental or related to the normal conduct of business. Although it is impossible to predict the outcome of any pending legal proceeding, our management believes that such proceedings and actions should not, except as described below, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on either our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. See also Item 3, “Key Information — Risk Factors.”

 

Commitment to Provide Funding on a Long-Term Basis in Respect of Asbestos-Related Liabilities of Former Subsidiaries

 

On November 21, 2006, the Company signed the Final Funding Agreement, with the NSW Government, to provide long-term funding to the AICF, that will provide compensation for Australian asbestos-related personal injury claims against the Former James Hardie Companies. While the Final Funding Agreement is consistent in all material respects with the terms of the Original Final Funding Agreement entered into on December 1, 2005 among the Company, the NSW Government and the Performing Subsidiary, the Final Funding Agreement set forth certain changes to the original proposed arrangements as approved by the Company’s Managing and Supervisory Boards of Directors and by its shareholders on February 7, 2007.

 

In summary, the Final Funding Agreement provides for the following key steps to occur if the remaining conditions precedent to that agreement were to be satisfied or waived in writing by the parties:

 

 

 

On November 9, 2006, the Company announced that it, the AICF and others had received private binding rulings relating to the expected tax consequences arising to the AICF and others in connection with the Final Funding Agreement. In the Final Funding Agreement, all parties to the Final Funding Agreement agreed to these rulings resulting in the tax conditions precedent set out in that agreement.

 

In the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2007, all conditions precedent including the following were satisfied:

 

 

In addition to entering into the Final Funding Agreement, one or more of the Company, the Performing Subsidiary, the AICF and the NSW Government have entered into a number of Related Agreements, including a

trust deed (for a trust known as the AICF, referred to as the Trust Deed), for the establishment of the AICF; a deed of guarantee under which JHI NV provides the guarantee described above; intercreditor deeds to achieve the subordination arrangements described above; and deeds of release in connection with the releases from civil liability described below.

 

The Performing Subsidiary also signed an Interim Funding Deed with Amaca to provide funding to Amaca of up to A$24.1 million in the event that Amaca’s finances were otherwise exhausted before the Final Funding Agreement was implemented in full. The commercial terms of such funding were settled and the Performing Subsidiary entered into interim funding documentation dated November 16, 2006. An interim funding payment of A$9.0 million ($7.1 million) was made to Amaca in December 2006. That sum was subsequently repaid by Amaca out of part of the proceeds of the initial funding on February 12, 2007, and the Interim Funding Deed arrangements have subsequently been terminated.

 

Actuarial Study; Claims Estimate

 

The AICF commissioned an updated actuarial study of potential asbestos-related liabilities as of March 31, 2007. Based on the results of these studies, it is estimated that the discounted value of the central estimate for claims against the Former James Hardie Companies was approximately A$1.4 billion ($1.1 billion). The undiscounted value of the central estimate of the asbestos-related liabilities of Amaca and Amaba as determined by KPMG Actuaries was approximately A$2.8 billion ($2.3 billion). Actual liabilities of those companies for such claims could vary, perhaps materially, from the central estimate described above. This central estimate is calculated in accordance with Australian Actuarial Standards, which differ from accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. The asbestos liability includes projected future cash flows as undiscounted and uninflated on the basis that it is inappropriate to discount or inflate future cash flows when the timing and amount of such cash flows is not fixed or readily determible.

 

The tables below are designed to show the various components of the net Final Funding Agreement liability at March 31, 2007.

 

The asbestos liability has been revised to reflect the most recent actuarial estimate prepared by KPMG Actuaries as of March 31, 2007 and to adjust for payments made to claimants during the year then ended.

Adjustments to the net Final Funding Agreement liability are shown in the table below:

 

 

In estimating the potential financial exposure, KPMG Actuaries made assumptions related to the total number of claims which were reasonably estimated to be asserted through 2071, the typical cost of settlement (which is sensitive to, among other factors, the industry in which a plaintiff claims exposure, the alleged disease type and the jurisdiction in which the action is brought), the legal costs incurred in the litigation of such claims, the rate of receipt of claims, the settlement strategy in dealing with outstanding claims and the timing of settlements.

 

Further, KPMG Actuaries relied on the data and information provided by the AICF and Amaca Claims Services, Amaca Pty Ltd (under NSW External Administration), which we refer to as ACS, and assumed that it is accurate and complete in all material respects. The actuaries have not verified the information independently nor established the accuracy or completeness of the data and information provided or used for the preparation of the report.

 

Due to inherent uncertainties in the legal and medical environment, the number and timing of future claim notifications and settlements, the recoverability of claims against insurance contracts, and estimates of future trends in average claim awards, as well as the extent to which the above named entities will contribute to the overall settlements, the actual amount of liability could differ materially from that which is currently projected.

 

A sensitivity analysis has been performed to determine how the actuarial estimates would change if certain assumptions (i.e., the rate of inflation and superimposed inflation, the average costs of claims and legal fees, and the projected numbers of claims) were different from the assumptions used to determine the central estimates. This analysis shows that the discounted central estimates could be in a range of A$0.9 billion ($0.7 billion) to A$2.0 billion ($1.6 billion) (undiscounted estimates of A$1.6 billion ($1.3 billion) to A$5.1 billion ($4.1 billion) as of March 31, 2007. It should be noted that the actual cost of the liabilities could be outside of that range depending on the results of actual experience relative to the assumptions made.

 

The potential range of costs as estimated by KPMG Actuaries is affected by a number of variables such as nil settlement rates (where no settlement is payable by the Former James Hardie Companies because the claim settlement is borne by other asbestos defendants (other than the Former James Hardie Companies) which are held liable), peak year of claims, past history of claims numbers, average settlement rates, past history of Australian asbestos-related medical injuries, current number of claims, average defense and plaintiff legal costs, base wage inflation and superimposed inflation. The potential range of losses disclosed includes both asserted and unasserted

claims. While no assurances can be provided, the Company believes that AICF is likely to be able to partially recover losses from various insurance carriers. As of March 31, 2007, KPMG Actuaries’ undiscounted central estimate of asbestos-related liabilities was A$2.8 billion ($2.3 billion). This undiscounted central estimate is net of expected insurance recoveries of A$488.1 million ($393.8 million) after making a general credit risk allowance for bad debt insurance carriers and an allowance for A$91.6 million ($73.9 million) of “by claim” or subrogation recoveries from other third parties.

 

Claims Data

 

The following table, provided by KPMG Actuaries, shows the number of claims pending as of March 31, 2007 and 2006:

 

 

 

 

For the years ended March 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, the following tables, provided by KPMG Actuaries, show the claims filed, the number of claims dismissed, settled or otherwise resolved for each period, and the average settlement amount per claim:

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following table, provided by KPMG Actuaries, shows the activity related to the numbers of open claims, new claims, and closed claims during each of the past five years and the average settlement per settled claim and case closed:

 

 

 

 

The Company did not have any responsibility or involvement in the management of claims against ABN 60 between the time ABN 60 left the James Hardie Group in March 2003 and February 2007 when the Final Funding Agreement was approved. Since February 2001, when Amaca and Amaba were separated from the James Hardie Group, neither the Company nor any of its current subsidiaries had any responsibility or involvement in the management of claims against those entities. Prior to February 2001, the principal entity potentially involved in relation to such claims was ABN 60, which was not a member of the James Hardie Group between March 2003 and February 2007. However, the Final Funding Agreement and associated New South Wales legislation provides that the AICF will have both the responsibility for, and management of claims against, the Former James Hardie Companies, and that the Company will have the right to appoint a majority of the directors of the AICF, unless a special default or insolvency event arises.

 

On October 26, 2004, the Company, the Foundation, and KPMG Actuaries entered into an agreement under which the Company would be entitled to obtain a copy of the actuarial report prepared by KPMG Actuaries in relation to the claims liabilities of the Foundation and Amaba and Amaca, and would be entitled to publicly release the final version of such reports. Under the terms of the Final Funding Agreement, the Company has obtained similar rights of access to actuarial information produced for the AICF by the actuary to be appointed by the AICF, which we refer to as the Approved Actuary. The Company’s future disclosures with respect to claims statistics is subject to it obtaining such information from the Approved Actuary. The Company has had no general right (and has not obtained any right under the Final Funding Agreement) to audit or otherwise require independent verification of such information or the methodologies to be adopted by the Approved Actuary. As such, the Company will need to rely on the accuracy and completeness of the information and analysis of the Approved Actuary when making future disclosures with respect to claims statistics.

 

For more information concerning our commitment to provide funding on a long-term basis in respect of asbestos-related liabilities of former subsidiaries, see Item 3, “Key Information — Risk Factors.”

 

SCI and Other Related Expenses

 

In February 2004, the NSW Government established the SCI to investigate, among other matters, the circumstances in which the Medical Research and Compensation Foundation was established in early 2001. Shortly after release of the SCI report on September 21, 2004, we commenced negotiations with the NSW Government, the ACTU, UnionsNSW and a representative of asbestos claimants in relation to its offer to the SCI on

July 14, 2004 to provide funds voluntarily for proven Australia-based asbestos-related injury and death claims against certain former James Hardie Group companies. On December 21, 2004, we entered into a Heads of Agreement with the above parties to establish and fund the AICF to provide funding for these claims on a long-term basis. On December 1, 2005, the Company, the Performing Subsidiary and the NSW Government signed the Original Final Funding Agreement. An amended version of the Original Final Funding Agreement was executed on November 21, 2006 and approved by our shareholders on February 7, 2007.

 

The Company has incurred substantial costs associated with the Special Commission of Inquiry, or SCI, and may incur material costs in the future related to the SCI or subsequent legal proceedings.

 

The following are the components of SCI and other related expenses:

 

 

Internal investigation costs reflect costs incurred by the Company in connection with an internal investigation conducted by independent legal advisors to investigate allegations raised during the SCI and the preparation and filing of the Company’s annual financial statements in the United States.

 

Australian Securities and Investments Commission Proceedings and Investigation

 

On February 14, 2007, ASIC commenced civil proceedings in the Court against the Company, ABN 60 and ten then-present or former officers and directors of the James Hardie Group. While the subject matter of the allegations varies between individual defendants, the allegations against the Company are confined to alleged contraventions of provisions of the Australian Corporations Act/Law relating to continuous disclosure, a director’s duty of care and diligence, and engaging in misleading or deceptive conduct in respect of a security.

 

In the proceedings, ASIC seeks:

 

 

ASIC stated in February 2007 that it would not pursue the claim for indemnity if the conditions precedent to the Original Final Funding Agreement as announced on December 1, 2005 were satisfied. The Company and the other parties to the agreement provided certification to ASIC in March 2007 that the conditions precedent to the

Final Funding Agreement dated November 21, 2006 have been satisfied. ASIC is considering its position and has not yet taken any step to withdraw the indemnity claim.

 

ASIC has indicated that its investigations continue and may result in further actions, both civil and criminal. However, it has not indicated the possible defendants to any such actions.

 

On February 20, 2007, the Company announced that the three serving directors named in the ASIC proceedings had resigned from the Board.

 

The Company has entered into deeds of indemnity with certain of its directors and officers as is common practice for publicly listed companies. The Company’s articles of association also contain an indemnity for directors and officers and the Company has granted indemnities to certain of its former related corporate bodies which may require the Company to indemnify those entities against indemnities they have granted their directors and officers. To date, claims for payments of expenses incurred have been received from certain former directors and officers in relation to the ASIC investigation, and in relation to the examination of these persons by ASIC delegates, the amount of which is not significant. Now that proceedings have been brought against former directors and officers of the James Hardie Group, the Company is likely to incur further liabilities under these indemnities. Initially, the Company has obligations, or has offered, to advance funds in respect of defense costs and depending on the outcome of the proceedings, may be or become responsible for these and other amounts.

 

There remains considerable uncertainty surrounding the likely outcome of the ASIC proceedings in the longer term and there is a possibility that the related costs to the Company could be material. However, at this stage, it is not possible to determine the amount of any such liability. Therefore, the Company believes that both the probable and estimable requirements under SFAS No. 5, “Accounting for Contingencies,” for recording a liability have not been met.

 

For more information concerning the SCI and other related expenses, see Item 3, “Key Information — Risk Factors.”

 

Tax Contingencies

 

Due to the size of the Company and the nature of its business, the Company is subject to ongoing reviews by taxing jurisdictions on various tax matters, including challenges to various positions the Company asserts on its income tax returns. The Company accrues for tax contingencies based upon its best estimate of the taxes ultimately expected to be paid, which it updates over time as more information becomes available. Such amounts are included in taxes payable or other non-current liabilities, as appropriate. If the Company ultimately determines that payment of these amounts is unnecessary, the Company reverses the liability and recognizes a tax benefit during the period in which the Company determines that the liability is no longer necessary. The Company records additional tax expense in the period in which it determines that the recorded tax liability is less than the ultimate assessment it expects.

 

In fiscal years 2007, 2006 and 2005 the Company recorded income tax benefit of $10.4 million, $20.7 million and $2.5 million, respectively, as a result of the finalization of certain tax audits, whereby certain matters were settled, the expiration of the statute related to certain tax positions, and adjustments to income tax balances based on the filing of amended income tax returns, which gave rise to the benefit recorded by the Company.

 

Relevant tax authorities from various jurisdictions in which the Company operates are in the process of auditing the Company’s respective jurisdictional income tax returns for various ranges of years. In particular, the ATO is auditing the Company’s Australian income tax return for the year ended March 31, 2002. The ATO has indicated that further investigation is required and is working with the Company and the Company’s advisors to conclude its inquiries.

 

Of the audits currently being conducted, none have progressed sufficiently to predict their ultimate outcome. The Company accrues income tax liabilities for these audits based upon knowledge of all relevant facts and circumstances, taking into account existing tax laws, its experience with previous audits and settlements, the status of current tax examinations and how the tax authorities view certain issues.

Amended Australian Taxation Office Assessment

 

In March 2006, RCI Pty Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company, which we refer to as RCI, received an amended assessment from the ATO in respect of RCI’s income tax return for the year ended March 31, 1999. The amended assessment relates to the amount of net capital gains arising as a result of an internal corporate restructure carried out in 1998 and has been issued pursuant to the discretion granted to the Commissioner of Taxation under Part IVA of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936. The original amended assessment issued to RCI was for a total of A$412.0 million. However, after two subsequent remissions of general interest charges by the ATO, the total was revised to A$368.0 million, and comprised the following at March 31, 2007:

 

 

 

 

On June 23, 2006, following negotiation with the ATO regarding payment options for the amended assessment, the Company was advised by the ATO that, in accordance with the ATO Receivable Policy, it was able to make a payment of 50% of the total amended assessment then due of A$378.0 million ($305.0 million), being A$189.0 million ($152.5 million), and provide a guarantee from JHI NV in favor of the ATO for the remaining unpaid 50% of the amended assessment, pending outcome of the appeal of the amended assessment. Payment of 50% of the amended assessment became due and was paid on July 5, 2006. The Company also agreed to pay general interest charge payments, or GIC, accruing on the unpaid balance of the amended assessment in arrears on a quarterly basis. The first payment of accrued GIC was paid on October 16, 2006 in respect to the quarter ended September 30, 2006.

 

On November 10, 2006, the ATO granted a further remission of GIC reducing total GIC on the amended assessment from A$163.0 million to A$153.0 million and thereby reducing the total amount due under the amended assessment from A$378.0 million to A$368.0 million. The reduction in the total amount due under the amended assessment resulted in a reduction in the 50% payment required under the agreement with the ATO from A$189.0 million to A$184.0 million. This gave rise to an amount of A$5.0 million being available for offset against future GIC accruing on the unpaid balance of the amended assessment. Accordingly, no GIC was required to be paid in respect of the quarter ended December 31, 2006 and a reduced amount of GIC of A$1.2 million was paid in respect of the quarter ended March 31, 2007.

 

RCI is appealing the amended assessment. The ATO has confirmed that RCI has a reasonably arguable position that the amount of net capital gains arising as a result of the corporate restructure carried out in 1998 has been reported correctly in the fiscal year 1999 tax return and that Part IVA does not apply. As a result, the ATO reduced the amount of penalty from an automatic 50% of primary tax that would otherwise apply in these circumstances, to 25% of primary tax. In Australia, a reasonably arguable position means that the tax position is about as likely to be correct as it is not correct. The Company and RCI received legal and tax advice at the time of the transaction, during the ATO inquiries and following receipt of the amended assessment. The Company believes that the tax position reported in RCI’s tax return for the 1999 fiscal year will be upheld on appeal. Therefore, the Company believes that the probable requirements under SFAS No. 5, “Accounting for Contingencies,” for recording a liability have not been met and therefore it has not recorded any liability at March 31, 2007 for the remainder of the amended assessment.

 

At the end of May 2007, the ATO disallowed our objection to RCI’s notice of amended assessment for RCI for the year ended March 31, 1999. We will continue to pursue all avenues of appeal to contest the ATO’s position in this matter.

The Company expects that amounts paid on July 5, 2006 and any later time, would be recovered by RCI (with interest) at the time RCI is successful in its appeal against the amended assessment. As a result, the Company has treated the payments on July 5, 2006 and October 16, 2006 as a deposit, and it is the Company’s intention to treat any payments to be made at a later date as a deposit.

 

For further information on the amended ATO assessment, see Item 3, “Key Information — Risk Factors.”

 

None.

 

The following discussion of our financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and the related notes thereto, included under Item 18.

 

Overview

 

We intend this discussion to provide information that will assist in understanding our March 31, 2007 consolidated financial statements, the changes in significant items in those consolidated financial statements from year to year, and the primary reasons for those changes. This discussion includes information about our critical accounting policies and how these policies affect our consolidated financial statements, and information about the consolidated financial results of each business segment to provide a better understanding of how each segment and its results affect our financial condition and results of operations as a whole.

 

Our pre-tax results for fiscal year 2007 were substantially and adversely affected by asbestos adjustments of $405.5 million. The asbestos provision was originally recorded in fiscal year 2006 for $715.6 million for estimated future asbestos-related compensation payments. We also incurred significant costs associated with the Special Commission of Inquiry, or SCI, and other related matters during fiscal years 2007, 2006 and 2005. Information regarding our asbestos-related matters and the SCI and other related matters can be found in this discussion, Item 3, “Key Information — Risk Factors,” Item 4, “Information on the Company — Legal Proceedings” and Note 12 to our consolidated financial statements in Item 18.

 

The Company and the Building Product Markets

 

Based on net sales, we believe we are the largest manufacturer of fiber cement products and systems for internal and external building construction applications in the United States, Australia, New Zealand, and the Philippines. Our current primary geographic markets include the United States, Australia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Europe and Canada. Through significant research and development expenditure, we develop key product and production process technologies that we patent or hold as trade secrets. We believe that these technologies give us a competitive advantage.

 

We manufacture numerous types of fiber cement products with a variety of patterned profiles and surface finishes for a range of applications including external siding and soffit lining, trim, fencing, internal linings, facades, floor and tile underlayments, flooring, drainage pipes and decorative columns. Our products are used in various market segments, including new residential construction, manufactured housing, repair and remodel and a variety of commercial and industrial construction applications. We believe that in certain construction applications, our fiber cement products and systems provide a combination of distinctive performance, design and cost advantages over competing building products and systems.

 

Our products are primarily sold in the residential housing markets. Residential construction levels fluctuate based on new home construction activity and the repair and renovation of existing homes. These levels of activity are affected by many factors, including home mortgage interest rates, the availability of finance to homeowners to purchase a new home or make improvements to their existing homes, inflation rates, unemployment levels, existing home sales, the average age and the size of housing inventory, consumer home repair and renovation spending, gross domestic product growth and consumer confidence levels. A number of these factors were generally unfavorable during fiscal year 2007, resulting in weaker residential construction activity.

Fiscal Year 2007 Key Results

 

As of March 31, 2007, we implemented the Final Funding Agreement (as amended), which we refer to as the Final Funding Agreement, to provide compensation for Australian asbestos-related personal injury claims against certain former companies of the James Hardie Group.

 

Total net sales increased 4% to $1,542.9 million in fiscal year 2007. However, the asbestos adjustments resulted in an operating loss of $86.6 million compared to an operating loss of $434.9 million in fiscal year 2006. We reported income from continuing operations of $150.8 million in fiscal year 2007.

 

Our largest market is North America, where fiber cement is one of the fastest growing segments of the external siding market. During fiscal year 2007, USA Fiber Cement net sales contributed approximately 82% of total net sales, and its operating income was the primary contributor to total Company operating income (before the asbestos adjustments). Net sales for our USA Fiber Cement business increased due to a higher average net sales price. Operating income for our USA Fiber Cement business increased from fiscal year 2006 primarily due to increased net sales and lower freight costs, which were partially offset by higher selling, general and administrative expenses.

 

Asia Pacific net sales contributed approximately 16% of total net sales, and its operating income was the second largest contributor of total Company operating income (before the asbestos adjustments) in 2007. Net sales increased in fiscal year 2007 in our Australia, New Zealand and Philippines businesses. The increase in net sales in our Australia and New Zealand business, which was due to increased volume, was partially offset by a reduction in average net sales price. Sales in our Philippines business increased due to higher sales volume, partially offset by a reduction in average net sales price.

 

Our emerging businesses of Europe Fiber Cement and USA Hardie Pipe continued to make good progress. Our USA Hardie Pipe business recorded a small profit in fiscal year 2007. Sales in our Europe Fiber Cement business continued to grow steadily, albeit from a low base.

 

For further information regarding our business and operations, see Item 4, “Information on the Company.”

 

Critical Accounting Policies

 

The accounting policies affecting our financial condition and results of operations are more fully described in Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements included in Item 18. Certain of our accounting policies require the application of judgment by management in selecting appropriate assumptions for calculating financial estimates, which inherently contain some degree of uncertainty. Management bases its estimates on historical experience and other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the reported carrying value of assets and liabilities and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses that may not be readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions and conditions. We consider the following policies to be the most critical in understanding the judgments that are involved in preparing our consolidated financial statements and the uncertainties that could impact our results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

 

Accounting for Contingencies

 

We account for loss contingencies in accordance with SFAS No. 5, “Accounting for Contingencies,” under which we accrue amounts for losses arising from contingent obligations when the obligations are probable and the amounts are reasonably estimable. As facts concerning contingencies become known, we reassess our situation and make appropriate adjustments to the consolidated financial statements. For additional information regarding asbestos-related matters and the ATO assessment, see Item 3, “Key Information — Risk Factors,” Item 4, “Information on the Company — Legal Proceedings” and Notes 12 and 14 to our consolidated financial statements in Item 18.

 

Accounting for the Asbestos Funding Agreement

 

Prior to March 31, 2007, our consolidated financial statements included an asbestos provision relating to our anticipated future payments to the AICF based on the terms of the Original Final Funding Agreement.

In February 2007, the Final Funding Agreement was approved to provide long-term funding to the AICF, a special purpose fund that provides compensation for Australian asbestos-related personal injury claims against the Former James Hardie Companies.

 

The amount of the asbestos liability reflects the terms of the Final Funding Agreement, which has been calculated by reference to (but is not exclusively based upon) the most recent actuarial estimate of projected future cash flows prepared by KPMG Actuaries. The asbestos liability includes these cash flows as undiscounted and uninflated on the basis that it is inappropriate to discount or inflate future cash flows when the timing and amounts of such cash flows is not fixed or readily determinable.

 

The asbestos liability also includes an allowance for the future operating costs of the AICF.

 

In estimating the potential financial exposure, KPMG Actuaries have made a number of assumptions. These include an estimate of the total number of claims by disease type which are reasonably estimated to be asserted through 2071, the typical average cost of a claim settlement (which is sensitive to, among other factors, the industry in which the plaintiff claims exposure, the alleged disease type and the jurisdiction in which the action is being brought), the legal costs incurred in the litigation of such claims, the proportion of claims for which liability is repudiated, the rate of receipt of claims, the settlement strategy in dealing with outstanding claims, the timing of settlements of future claims and the long-term rate of inflation of claim awards and legal costs.

 

Further, KPMG Actuaries have relied on the data and information provided by the AICF and Amaca Claim Services, Amaca Pty Ltd (under NSW External Administration), which we refer to as ACS, and have assumed that it is accurate and complete in all material respects. The actuaries have neither verified the information independently nor established the accuracy or completeness of the data and information provided or used for the preparation of the report.

 

Due to inherent uncertainties in the legal and medical environment, the number and timing of future claim notifications and settlements, the recoverability of claims against insurance contracts, and estimates of future trends in average claim awards, as well as the extent to which the above-named entities will contribute to the overall settlements, the actual amount of liability could differ materially from that which is currently projected and could result in significant debits or credits to the consolidated balance sheet and statement of operations.

 

An updated actuarial assessment will be performed as of March 31 each year. Any changes in the estimate will be reflected as a charge or credit to the consolidated statements of operations for the year then ended. Material adverse changes to the actuarial estimate would have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

 

For additional information regarding our asbestos liability, see Item 3, “Key Information — Risk Factors,” Item 4, “Information on the Company — Legal Proceedings,” and Note 12 to our consolidated financial statements in Item 18.

 

Sales

 

We record estimated reductions to sales for customer rebates and discounts including volume, promotional, cash and other rebates and discounts. Rebates and discounts are recorded based on management’s best estimate when products are sold. The estimates are based on historical experience for similar programs and products. Management reviews these rebates and discounts on an ongoing basis and the related accruals are adjusted, if necessary, as additional information becomes available.

 

Accounts Receivable

 

We evaluate the collectibility of accounts receivable on an ongoing basis based on historical bad debts, customer credit-worthiness, current economic trends and changes in our customer payment activity. An allowance for doubtful accounts is provided for known and estimated bad debts. Although credit losses have historically been within our expectations, we cannot guarantee that we will continue to experience the same credit loss rates that we have in the past. Because our accounts receivable are concentrated in a relatively small number of customers, a significant change in the liquidity or financial position of any of these customers could impact their ability to make

payments and result in the need for additional allowances which would decrease our net sales. For additional information regarding our customer concentration, see Item 3, “Key Information — Risk Factors.”

 

Inventory

 

Inventories are recorded at the lower of cost or market. In order to determine market, management regularly reviews inventory quantities on hand and evaluates significant items to determine whether they are excess, slow-moving or obsolete. The estimated value of excess, slow-moving and obsolete inventory is recorded as a reduction to inventory and an expense in cost of sales in the period it is identified. This estimate requires management to make judgments about the future demand for inventory, and is therefore at risk to change from period to period. If our estimate for the future demand for inventory is greater than actual demand and we fail to reduce manufacturing output accordingly, we could be required to record additional inventory reserves, which would have a negative impact on our gross profit.

 

Accrued Warranty Reserve

 

We offer various warranties on our products, including a 50-year limited warranty on certain of our fiber cement siding products in the United States. Because our fiber cement products have only been used in North America since the early 1990s, there is a risk that these products will not perform in accordance with our expectations over an extended period of time. A typical warranty program requires that we replace defective products within a specified time period from the date of sale. We record an estimate for future warranty-related costs based on an analysis of actual historical warranty costs as they relate to sales. Based on this analysis and other factors, we adjust the amount of our warranty provisions as necessary. Although our warranty costs have historically been within calculated estimates, if our experience is significantly different from our estimates, it could result in the need for additional reserves. For additional information regarding warranties, see Item 3, “Key Information — Risk Factors.”

 

Accounting for Income Tax

 

We account for income taxes according to SFAS No. 109, “Accounting for Income Taxes,” under which we compute our deferred tax assets and liabilities, which arise from differences in the timing of recognition of revenue and expense for tax and financial statement purposes. We must assess whether, and to what extent, we can recover our deferred tax assets. If full or partial recovery is unlikely, we must increase our income tax expense by recording a valuation allowance against the portion of deferred tax assets that we cannot recover. We believe that we will recover all of the deferred tax assets recorded (net of valuation allowance) on our consolidated balance sheet at March 31, 2007. However, if facts later indicate that we will be unable to recover all or a portion of our net deferred tax assets, our income tax expense would increase in the period in which we determine that recovery is unlikely.

 

Due to our size and the nature of our business, we are subject to ongoing reviews by taxing jurisdictions on various tax matters, including challenges to various positions we assert on our income tax returns. We accrue for tax contingencies based upon our best estimate of the taxes ultimately expected to be paid, which we update over time as more information becomes available. Such amounts are included in taxes payable or other non-current liabilities, as appropriate. If we ultimately determine that payment of these amounts is unnecessary, we reverse the liability and recognize a tax benefit during the period in which we determine that the liability is no longer necessary. We record additional tax expense in the period in which we determine that the recorded tax liability is less than we expect the ultimate assessment to be.

 

For additional information, see Item 3, “Key Information — Risk Factors” and Note 13 to our consolidated financial statements in Item 18.

 

Results of Operations

 

In fiscal years 2005 through 2007, there was a significant increase in net sales generated from our USA Fiber Cement operations primarily as a result of demand for our fiber cement products. To meet the increased demand, we have spent $379.6 million in capital investments during fiscal years 2005 to 2007 in this segment.

The following table shows our selected financial and operating data for continuing operations, expressed in millions of U.S. dollars and as a percentage of total net sales:

 

 

 

 

The following table provides a breakdown of our operating (loss) income:

 

 

 

 

Year Ended March 31, 2007 Compared to Year Ended March 31, 2006

 

Total Net Sales.  Total net sales increased 4% from $1,488.5 million in fiscal year 2006 to $1,542.9 million in fiscal year 2007. Net sales from USA Fiber Cement increased 4% from $1,218.4 million in fiscal year 2006 to $1,262.3 million in fiscal year 2007 due to a higher average net sales price, partially offset by decreased sales volume. Net sales from Asia Pacific Fiber Cement increased 4% from $241.8 million in fiscal year 2006 to $251.7 million in fiscal year 2007 due to increased sales volumes and favorable currency exchange rate differences, partially offset by a decreased average net sales price. Other net sales increased by 2% from $28.3 million in fiscal year 2006 to $28.9 million in fiscal year 2007 due to improved sales performance in the USA Hardie Pipe business and the Europe Fiber Cement business partially offset by decreased sales resulting from the sale of the Chile Fiber Cement business in July 2005.

 

USA Fiber Cement Net Sales.  Net sales increased 4% from $1,218.4 million in fiscal year 2006 to $1,262.3 million in fiscal year 2007 due to a higher average net sales price partially offset by decreased sales volume. Sales volume decreased 2% from 2,182.8 million square feet in fiscal year 2006 to 2,148.0 million square feet in fiscal year 2007, due mainly to a decrease in base demand in our products during the second half of fiscal year 2007 as a result of weaker residential housing construction activity, partially offset by growth in primary demand during the first half of fiscal year 2007. The average net sales price increased 5% from $558 per thousand square feet in fiscal year 2006 to $588 per thousand square feet in fiscal year 2007 primarily due to price increases for certain products that were implemented during fiscal year 2007 and an increased proportion of higher-priced, differentiated products in the sales mix.

 

The new housing construction market continued to weaken, with the U.S. Census Bureau reporting that new housing starts were down 25% and 30%, respectively, for the three months ended December 31, 2006 and March 31, 2007, compared to the same periods last year. Despite interest rates remaining relatively low, deepening problems in the sub-prime mortgage market kept builder and consumer confidence at weak levels.

 

According to Brian Catalde, President of the NAHB, “Builders, overall, have been systematically cutting back on new building activity for more than a year now. This slowdown is enabling them to reduce their inventory and better position themselves for the balance of the year, especially when faced with uncertainties over the impacts of the sub-prime-related tightening of mortgage lending standards on home sales.” Despite this, supply of new residential housing remains greater than demand and industry inventory levels at the end of the quarter continued to be above optimal levels at around 7 to 8 months supply, as reported by the NAHB.

 

Demand in our exterior products category for fiscal year 2007 was affected significantly by weaker housing construction activity. The decrease in net sales was due mainly to softer demand in our exterior products category, which spanned all regions except the mid-Atlantic region. Net sales were lower for all products in the exteriors category other than the higher-priced, differentiated products, XLD^® trim and the ColorPlus^® collection.

 

With all ColorPlus^® product lines now complete and operational, including those in our plants in Reno, Nevada and Pulaski, Virginia, the business has commenced launching the ColorPlus^® collection of products into both the Western and Southern divisions.

 

Repair and remodeling activity was relatively steady during fiscal year 2007 and sales in our interior products category were flat compared to the same period last year. Continued acceptance of Hardibacker 1/2” board as a wet area wall solution helped grow sales for that product during the quarter, almost off-setting weaker sales of our HardieBacker^tm 1/4” product in a number of our larger markets.

 

The net sales growth for the fiscal year 2007 largely reflects further market penetration against alternative materials, mainly wood and vinyl, across the Northern, Southern and Western Divisions and in the exterior and interior product categories, and an increase in the average net sales price.

 

Asia Pacific Fiber Cement Net Sales.  Net sales increased 4% from $241.8 million in fiscal year 2006 to $251.7 million in fiscal year 2007. Net sales in Australian dollars increased 2% due to a 6% increase in sales volume from 368.3 million square feet to 390.8 million square feet, partly offset by a 3% decrease in the average Australian dollar net sales price.

In our Australia and New Zealand Fiber Cement business, net sales increased 2% from $218.1 million in fiscal year 2006 to $223.4 million in fiscal year 2007. In Australian dollars, net sales increased 1% due to a 5% increase in sales volumes, partially offset by a 4% decrease in the average Australian dollar net sales price compared to fiscal year 2006. In the Australia and New Zealand business, both the new housing and renovation markets weakened during fiscal year 2007, but sales volumes increased compared to fiscal year 2006 due to market initiatives designed to grow primary demand for fiber cement and increase sales of value-added, differentiated products. There was strong sales growth in the recently-launched Scyon^tm range of premium products and in Linea^tm weatherboards. Selling prices for non-differentiated products continue to be subject to strong competitive pressures, leading to a lower average net sales price.

 

In the Philippines, net sales increased in fiscal year 2007 due to increased sales volumes, partially offset by a slight decrease in the average Philippine peso net sales price. The increase in sales volume in fiscal year 2007 was due to stronger domestic building and construction activity and increased export demand.

 

Other Sales.  Other sales include sales of Hardie^tm pipe in the United States and fiber cement operations in Europe.

 

In our U.S. pipes business, net sales increased in fiscal year 2007 as compared to fiscal year 2006 due to an increase in sales volume and a higher average net sales price.

 

In our Europe Fiber Cement business, net sales continued to grow steadily, albeit from a low base.

 

Gross Profit.  Gross profit increased 4% from $550.8 million in fiscal year 2006 to $573.0 million in fiscal year 2006. The gross profit margin increased 0.1 percentage points to 37.1% in fiscal year 2007.

 

USA Fiber Cement gross profit increased 5% compared to fiscal year 2006 due mainly to increases in net sales and, to a lesser extent, lower freight costs. The gross profit margin increased 0.5 percentage points in fiscal year 2007.

 

Asia Pacific Fiber Cement gross profit decreased 3% primarily due to reduced profitability in the Australian Fiber Cement business. The decrease was due mainly to a lower average net sales price, increased freight and raw material costs in Australia, costs associated with the start-up of the manufacture of new products, and inefficiencies associated with the rebuild of inventory at the Rosehill, New South Wales plant associated with the plant’s temporary closure in December 2006 for asbestos-related reasons. In Australian dollars, gross profit decreased 5% in fiscal year 2007. The gross profit margin decreased 2.2 percentage points in fiscal year 2007.

 

Selling, General and Administrative (SG&A) Expenses.  SG&A expenses increased 2% from $209.8 million in fiscal year 2006 to $214.6 million in fiscal year 2007, mainly due to an increase in spending in the USA Fiber Cement business reflecting expenditures on business initiatives including build-up of organizational infrastructure to drive growth strategies. As a percentage of sales, SG&A expense decreased 0.2 of a percentage point to 13.9% in fiscal year 2007.

 

Research and Development Expenses.  Research and development expenses include costs associated with “core” research projects that are designed to benefit all business units. These costs are recorded in the Research and Development segment rather than being attributed to individual business units. These costs were 10% lower at $25.9 million in fiscal year 2007. Other research and development costs associated with commercialization projects in business units are included in the business unit segment results. In total, these costs decreased 21% to $12.9 million for fiscal year 2007.