COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES |
9 Months Ended |
|---|---|
Sep. 30, 2016 | |
| Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] | |
| COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES | COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Consumer Indemnity
As required by the Door-to-Door Sales Act in South Korea, the Company maintains insurance for consumer indemnity claims with a mutual aid cooperative by possessing a mutual aid contract with Mutual Aid Cooperative & Consumer (the “Cooperative”). The contract secures payment to members in the event that the Company is unable to provide refunds to members. Typically, requests for refunds are paid directly by the Company according to the Company’s normal Korean refund policy, which requires that refund requests be submitted within three months. Accordingly, the Company estimates and accrues a reserve for product returns based on this policy and its historical experience. Depending on the sales volume, the Company may be required to increase or decrease the amount of the contract. The maximum potential amount of future payments the Company could be required to make to address actual member claims under the contract is equivalent to three months of rolling sales. At September 30, 2016, non-current other assets include KRW 223 million (USD $203,000) underlying the contract, which can be utilized by the Cooperative to fund any outstanding member claims. The Company believes that the likelihood of utilizing these funds to provide for members claims is remote.
Securities Class Action
In January 2016, two purported securities class action complaints were filed against the Company and its top executives. On March 29, 2016, the court consolidated the purported securities class actions, appointed two Lead Plaintiffs, Messrs. Dao and Juan, and appointed the Rosen Law Firm and Levi & Korsinsky LLP as co-Lead Counsel for the purported class in the consolidated action. Plaintiffs filed a consolidated complaint on April 29, 2016. The consolidated complaint purports to assert claims on behalf of certain of our stockholders under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder against Natural Health Trends Corp., Chris T. Sharng, and Timothy S. Davidson, and to assert claims under Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 against Chris T. Sharng, Timothy S. Davidson, and George K. Broady. The consolidated complaint alleges, inter alia, that the Company made materially false and misleading statements regarding the legality of its business operations in China, including running an allegedly illegal multi-level marketing business. The consolidated complaint seeks an indeterminate amount of damages, plus interest and costs. The Company filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated complaint on June 15, 2016 and a reply in support of its motion to dismiss on August 22, 2016. The Court has not ruled on the Company’s motion to dismiss yet. The Company believes that these claims are without merit and intends to vigorously defend against the allegations in the consolidated complaint.
Shareholder Derivative Claim
In February 2016, a purported shareholder derivative complaint was filed in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles: Zhou v. Sharng. In March 2016, a purported shareholder derivative complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California: Kleinfeldt v. Sharng (collectively the “Derivative Complaints”). The Derivative Complaints purport to assert claims for breach of fiduciary duties, unjust enrichment, abuse of control, gross mismanagement and corporate waste against certain of the Company’s officers and directors. The Derivative Complaints also purport to assert fiduciary duty claims based on alleged insider selling and conspiring to enter into several stock repurchase agreements, which allegedly harmed the Company and its assets. The Derivative Complaints allege, inter alia, that the Company made materially false and misleading statements regarding the legality of its business operations in China, including running an allegedly illegal multi-level marketing business, and that certain officers and directors sold common stock on the basis of this allegedly material, adverse non-public information. The Derivative Complaints seek an indeterminate amount of damages, plus interest and costs, as well as various equitable remedies. The derivative cases have been stayed pending the resolution of the motion to dismiss in the securities class action, and the defendants have not yet filed a response. Nevertheless, the defendants believe that these claims are without merit and intend to vigorously defend against the allegations in these derivative actions.
The consolidated class action and the Derivative Complaints, or others filed alleging similar facts, could result in monetary or other penalties that may materially affect the Company’s operating results and financial condition.
Other Claims
|