Item 1A. Risk Factors
Item 1A.
Risk Factors
Operational Risks
Increased severity or frequency of accidents and other claims or a material unfavorable development of existing claims.
As noted above in Item 1, “Business — Factors Significant to the Company’s Operations — Self-Insured Claims,” potential liability associated with accidents in the trucking industry is severe and occurrences are unpredictable. For periods prior to May 1, 2019, Landstar retains liability for commercial trucking claims up to $5,000,000 per occurrence and maintains various third party
11
Table of Contents
insurance arrangements for liabilities in excess of its $5,000,000 self-insured retention. Effective May 1, 2019, the Company entered into a new three year commercial auto liability insurance arrangement for losses incurred between $5,000,000 and $10,000,000 (the “Initial Excess Policy”) with a third party insurance company. For commercial trucking claims incurred on or after May 1, 2019 through April 30, 2022, the Initial Excess Policy provides for a limit for a single loss of $5,000,000, with an aggregate limit of $15,000,000 for each policy year, an aggregate limit of $20,000,000 for the thirty-six
month term ended April 30, 2022, and options to increase such aggregate limits for pre-established
amounts of additional premium. If aggregate losses under the Initial Excess Policy exceed either the annual aggregate limit or the aggregate limit for the three year period ending April 30, 2022, and the Company did not elect to increase such aggregate limits for a pre-established
amount of additional premium, Landstar would retain liability of up to $10,000,000 per occurrence, inclusive of its $5,000,000 self-insured retention for commercial trucking claims during the remainder of the applicable policy year(s).
The Company also maintains third party insurance arrangements providing excess coverage for commercial trucking liabilities in excess of $10,000,000. These third party arrangements provide coverage on a per occurrence or aggregated basis. Landstar retains liability for commercial trucking claims in excess of our coverage limits under these third party insurance arrangements. Due to the increasing cost of commercial auto liability claims throughout the United States in recent years, the availability of such excess coverage has significantly decreased and the pricing associated with such excess coverage, to the extent available, has significantly increased. Effective May 1, 2020 with respect to the annual policy year ending April 30, 2021, the Company experienced an increase of approximately $14 million, or over 170%, in the premiums charged by third party insurance companies to the Company for excess coverage for commercial trucking liabilities in excess of $10,000,000. No assurances can be given that the availability of excess coverage for commercial trucking claims will not continue to deteriorate, that the pricing associated with such excess coverage, to the extent available, will not continue to increase, nor that insurance coverage from third party insurers for excess coverage of commercial trucking claims will even be available on commercially reasonable terms at certain levels. If any claim occurrence were to exceed our excess coverage limits under our third party insurance arrangements, such claim could have a material adverse effect on Landstar’s financial condition and results of operations.
Further, the Company retains liability of up to $1,000,000 for each general liability claim, up to $250,000 for each workers’ compensation claim and up to $250,000 for each cargo claim. In addition, under reinsurance arrangements by Signature of certain risks of the Company’s BCO Independent Contractors, the Company retains liability of up to $500,000, $1,000,000 or $2,000,000 with respect to certain occupational accident claims and up to $750,000 with respect to certain workers’ compensation claims. The Company’s exposure to liability associated with accidents incurred by Truck Brokerage Carriers, railroads and air and ocean cargo carriers who transport freight on behalf of the Company is reduced by various factors including the extent to which such carriers maintain their own insurance coverage. A material increase in the frequency or severity of accidents, cargo claims or workers’ compensation claims or the material unfavorable development of existing claims could have a material adverse effect on Landstar’s cost of insurance and claims and its results of operations.
Dependence on third party insurance companies.
The Company is dependent on a limited number of third party insurance companies to provide insurance coverage in excess of its self-insured retention amounts. Historically, the Company has maintained insurance coverage for commercial trucking claims in excess of its self-insured retention, up to various maximum amounts, with a limited number of third party insurance companies. In an attempt to manage the cost of insurance and claims, the Company has historically increased or decreased the level of its financial exposure to commercial trucking claims by increasing or decreasing its level of self-insured retention based on the estimated cost differential between proposed premiums from third party insurance companies and historical and actuarially projected losses experienced by the Company at various levels of self-insured retention. Similarly, in its excess insurance layers, the Company may increase or decrease the level of its financial exposure to commercial trucking claims, including through the use of additional self-insurance as well as deductibles, aggregate loss limits, quota shares and other arrangements with third party insurance companies, based on the estimated cost differential between proposed premiums from third party insurance companies and historical and actuarially projected losses experienced by the Company at various levels of excess insurance coverage. To the extent that the third party insurance companies propose increases to their premiums for coverage of commercial trucking claims, the Company may decide to pay such increased premiums or increase its financial exposure on an aggregate, per occurrence or other basis, including by increasing the amount of its self-insured retention. In fact, in recent years, three of the largest third party insurers providing excess coverage for commercial trucking claims in the United States announced that in light of increased severity trends related to the increase in losses attributable to unfavorable verdicts, they would no longer provide such coverage. Decisions by these third party insurers to exit this line of business have had a significant negative impact on the availability and pricing of excess coverage for commercial trucking claims in the United States. No assurances can be given that other third party insurers will not also decide to exit the market as a provider of excess coverage for commercial trucking claims in the United States, which could have a further negative effect on the availability and pricing of such coverage. Accordingly, no assurance can be given that insurance coverage from third party insurers for claims in excess of the Company’s current self-insured retentions will continue to be available on commercially reasonable terms.
12
Table of Contents
Dependence on independent commission sales agents.
As noted above in Item 1, “Business — Factors Significant to the Company’s Operations — Agent Network,” the Company markets its services primarily through independent commission sales agents. During fiscal year 2020, 508 agents generated revenue for Landstar of at least $1 million each, or in the aggregate approximately 92% of Landstar’s consolidated revenue. Landstar competes with motor carriers and other third parties for the services of these independent commission sales agents. Landstar has historically experienced very limited agent turnover in the number of its Million Dollar Agents. There can be no assurances, however, that Landstar will continue to experience very limited turnover of its Million Dollar Agents in the future. Landstar’s contracts with its agents, including its Million Dollar Agents, are typically terminable without cause upon 10 to 30 days’ notice by either party and generally contain significant but not unqualified non-compete
provisions limiting the ability of a former agent to compete with Landstar for a specified period of time post-termination, and other restrictive covenants. The loss of some of the Company’s Million Dollar Agents and/or a significant decrease in revenue generated by Million Dollar Agents could have a material adverse effect on Landstar, including its results of operations and revenue.
Dependence on third party capacity providers.
As noted above in Item 1, “Business — Factors Significant to the Company’s Operations — Transportation Capacity,” Landstar does not own trucks or other transportation equipment (other than trailing equipment) and relies on third party capacity providers, including BCO Independent Contractors, Truck Brokerage Carriers, railroads and air and ocean cargo carriers, to transport freight for its customers. The Company competes with motor carriers and other third parties for the services of BCO Independent Contractors and other third party capacity providers. The market for qualified truck owner-operators and other third party truck capacity providers is very competitive among motor carriers and no assurances can be given that the Company will be able to maintain or expand the number of BCO Independent Contractors or other third party truck capacity providers. Additionally, the Company’s third party capacity providers other than BCO Independent Contractors can be expected, under certain circumstances, to charge higher prices to cover increased operating expenses, such as any increases in the cost of fuel, and the Company’s operating income may decline without a corresponding increase in price to the customer. A significant decrease in available capacity provided by either the Company’s BCO Independent Contractors or other third party capacity providers, or increased rates charged by other third party capacity providers that cannot be passed through to customers, could have a material adverse effect on Landstar, including its results of operations and revenue.
The coronavirus (
“
COVID-19
”
) pandemic has had a significant adverse impact on our business.
The COVID-19
pandemic has caused and continues to cause significant disruptions in the global economy, which significantly intensified in the United States in late March and continued throughout the remainder of 2020. The situation with respect to the COVID-19
pandemic continues to evolve and its effects, both short and long-term, remain unknown. Economic disruptions and other effects on the global or domestic economies caused by the COVID-19
pandemic could have a material adverse impact on the demand for our services and our ability to obtain financing on favorable terms or at all.
In connection with the impact of the COVID-19
pandemic, the Company experienced a significant decline in truckload volumes during the second quarter of 2020 compared to the corresponding period of 2019 followed by a similarly significant yet more gradual sequential increase in demand during the third and fourth quarters of 2020. This significant, rapid decrease in demand followed by the similarly significant yet more gradual increase was unprecedented in the history of the Company. The extent to which the COVID-19
pandemic impacts the Company’s results in future quarters will depend on future developments that are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted, including the duration of the pandemic, the actions taken by federal, state and local governments in response to the pandemic, the availability and effectiveness of vaccines for COVID-19
and the length of time necessary for the economy to transition back to more normal operating conditions. These and other factors could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial position, results of operations and cash flows.
Moreover, the COVID-19
virus continues to spread in areas where we provide services. The Landstar network includes over 1,100 independent agent locations throughout North America where such independent agents provide shipment coordination and dispatch services, freight tracking, trailer management and numerous other operational functions. Similarly, the Landstar network includes tens of thousands of truck capacity providers who operate throughout North America without any Landstar truck terminals. Management believes the decentralized nature of our model should insulate Landstar’s freight operations in an environment where social distancing can disrupt centralized business structures. A significant disruption to our independent agent network and/or a significant decrease in available truck capacity providers due to illness or government restrictions related to the COVID-19
pandemic could have a material adverse effect on our ability to source capacity to service our customers and could have a significant impact on Landstar, including our results of operations, revenue and cash flows.
13
Table of Contents
In addition, the COVID-19
pandemic has caused significant disruptions in the Mexican economy. During the Company’s 2020 fiscal year, the value of the Mexican peso to the U.S. dollar significantly depreciated and may continue to depreciate further. No assurances can be given regarding the potential impact of the COVID-19
pandemic and other factors on the Mexican economy and the value of the Mexican peso relative to the U.S. dollar and could have a significant adverse impact on the financial condition and results of operations of our Mexican subsidiaries.
Disruptions or failures in the Company’s computer systems; cyber and other information security incidents.
As noted above in Item 1, “Business — Factors Significant to the Company’s Operations — Technology,” the Company’s information technology systems used in connection with its operations are located in Jacksonville, Florida and to a lesser extent in Rockford, Illinois. In addition, the Company utilizes several third party data centers throughout the U.S. Landstar relies, in the regular course of its business, on the proper operation of its information technology systems to link its extensive network of customers, employees, agents and third party capacity providers, including its BCO Independent Contractors. Moreover, in connection with the COVID-19
pandemic, the Company has temporarily transitioned the vast majority of its office-based employees to work-at-home
arrangements. Although the Company has redundant systems for its critical operations, any significant disruption or failure of its technology systems or those of third party data centers on which it relies could significantly disrupt the Company’s operations and impose significant costs on the Company. Moreover, it is critical that the data processed by or stored in the Company’s information technology systems or otherwise in the Company’s possession remain confidential, as it often includes confidential, proprietary and/or competitively sensitive information regarding our customers, employees, agents and third party capacity providers, key financial and operational results and statistics, and our strategic plans, including technology innovations, developments and enhancements. Cyber incidents that impact the security, availability, reliability, speed, accuracy or other proper functioning of these systems and data, including outages, computer viruses, break-ins
and similar disruptions, could have a significant impact on our operations. Accordingly, information security and the continued development and enhancement of the controls and processes designed to protect our systems, computers, software, data and networks from attack, damage or unauthorized access remain a priority for us. Although we believe that we have robust security procedures and other safeguards in place, as threats continue to evolve, we may be required to expend additional resources to continue to enhance our information security measures and/or to investigate and remediate any security vulnerabilities. For example, in the first quarter of 2016, we were subject to “spear-phishing” attacks through which third parties were able to obtain personal employee data. We have undertaken a number of remedial measures in response, including enhancing our security systems and additional training for our employees. Additional incidents may occur in the future and may have a material adverse effect on our business and operations. A significant incident, including system failure, security breach, disruption by malware, or other damage, could interrupt or delay our operations, damage our reputation, cause a loss of customers, agents and/or third party capacity providers, expose us to a risk of loss or litigation, and/or cause us to incur significant time and expense to remedy such an event, any of which could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations and financial condition.
Dependence on key vendors.
As described above under “ Dependence on third party insurance companies
”
and “ Disruptions or failures in the Company’s computer systems; cyber and other information security incidents,
” the Company is dependent on certain vendors, including third party insurance companies, third party data center providers, third party information technology application providers and third party payment disbursement providers. Any inability to negotiate satisfactory terms with one of these key vendors or any other significant disruption to or termination of a relationship with one of these key vendors could disrupt the Company’s operations and impose significant costs on the Company.
Catastrophic loss of a Company facility.
The Company faces the risk of a catastrophic loss of the use of all or a portion of its facilities located in Jacksonville, Florida, Laredo, Texas and Rockford, Illinois due to hurricanes, flooding, tornados, other weather conditions, natural disasters, terrorist attacks or otherwise. The Company’s corporate headquarters and approximately two-thirds
of the Company’s employees are located in its Jacksonville, Florida facility. In particular, a significant hurricane or similar catastrophic event that impacts the Jacksonville, Florida metropolitan area could significantly disrupt the Company’s operations and impose significant costs on the Company.
Although the Company maintains insurance covering its facilities, including business interruption insurance, the Company’s insurance may not be adequate to cover all losses that may be incurred in the event of a catastrophic loss of one of the Company’s facilities. In addition, such insurance, including business interruption insurance, could in the future become more expensive and difficult to maintain and may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all.
14
Table of Contents
Economic, Competitive and Industry Risks
Decreased demand for transportation services; U.S. trade relationships.
The transportation industry historically has experienced cyclical financial results as a result of slowdowns in economic activity, the business cycles of customers, and other economic factors beyond Landstar’s control. If a slowdown in economic activity or a downturn in the Company’s customers’ business cycles cause a reduction in the volume of freight shipped by those customers, the Company’s operating results could be materially adversely affected.
In addition, Landstar hauls a significant number of shipments that have either been imported into the United States or are destined for export from the United States. Any decision by the U.S. government to adopt actions such as a border tax on imports, an increase in customs duties or tariffs, the renegotiation of U.S. trade agreements or any other action that could have a negative impact on international trade could cause a reduction in the volume of freight shipped by many Landstar customers. Any changes in tax and trade policies in the United States and corresponding actions by other countries could adversely affect our financial performance.
Substantial industry competition.
As noted above in Item 1, “Business — Factors Significant to the Company’s Operations — Competition,” Landstar competes primarily in the transportation and logistics services industry. This industry is extremely competitive and fragmented. Landstar competes primarily with truckload carriers, intermodal transportation service providers, railroads, less-than-truckload carriers, third party logistics companies, digital freight brokers and other asset-light transportation and logistics service providers. Management believes that competition for the freight transported by the Company is based on service, efficiency and freight rates, which are influenced significantly by the economic environment, particularly the amount of available transportation capacity and freight demand. In recent years, the use of technology and the implementation of technology-based innovations have become increasingly important to compete within the transportation and logistics industry. In particular, management believes leadership in the development, operation and support of an ecosystem of digital technologies and applications is an ongoing part of providing high quality service. The failure of the Company to maintain or enhance its technology ecosystem in response to changing demands from customers, agents, and capacity providers could have a significant adverse impact on Landstar’s ability to compete for customers, agents and capacity providers in the transportation and logistics industry. Historically, competition has created downward pressure on freight rates. In addition, many large shippers are using third party logistics providers (“3PLs”) other than the Company to outsource the management and coordination of their transportation needs rather than directly arranging for transportation services with carriers. As noted above, there were 12 transportation service providers, including 3PLs, included in the Company’s top 25 customers for the fiscal year ended December 26, 2020. Usage by large shippers of 3PLs often provides carriers, such as the Company, with a less direct relationship with the shipper and, as a result, may increase pressure on freight rates while making it more difficult for the Company to compete primarily based on service and efficiency. A decrease in freight rates could have a material adverse effect on Landstar, including its revenue and operating income.
Legal, Tax, Regulatory and Compliance Risks
Status of independent contractors.
In recent years, the topic of the classification of individuals as employees or independent contractors has gained increased attention among federal and state regulators as well as the plaintiffs’ bar. Various legislative or regulatory proposals have been introduced at the federal and state levels that may affect the classification status of individuals as independent contractors or employees for either employment tax purposes (e.g., withholding, social security, Medicare and unemployment taxes) or other benefits available to employees (most notably, workers’ compensation benefits). Recently, certain states (most prominently, California) have seen significant increased activity by tax and other regulators and numerous class action lawsuits filed against transportation companies that engage independent contractors.
There are many different tests and standards that may apply to the determination of whether a relationship is that of an independent contractor or one of employment. For example, different standards may be applied by the Internal Revenue Service, the U.S. Department of Labor, the National Labor Relations Board, state unemployment agencies, state departments of labor, state taxing authorities, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, state discrimination or disability benefit administrators and state workers compensation boards, among others. For federal tax purposes, most individuals are classified as employees or independent contractors based on a multi-factor “common-law”
analysis rather than any definition found in the Internal Revenue Code or Internal Revenue Service regulations. In addition, under Section 530 of the Revenue Act of 1978, a taxpayer that meets certain criteria may treat an individual as an independent contractor for employment tax purposes if the taxpayer has been audited without being told to treat similarly situated workers as employees, if the taxpayer has received a ruling from the Internal Revenue Service or a court decision affirming the taxpayer’s treatment of the individual as an independent contractor, or if the taxpayer is following a long-standing recognized practice.
The Company classifies its BCO Independent Contractors and independent commission sales agents as independent contractors for all purposes, including employment tax and employee benefits. There can be no assurance that legislative, judicial, administrative or regulatory (including tax) authorities will not introduce proposals or assert interpretations of existing rules and regulations that would change the employee/independent contractor classification of BCO Independent Contractors or independent commission sales agents doing business with the Company. On September 18, 2019, California enacted Assembly Bill (AB) 5 into law, codifying the strict “ABC” test for purposes of determining a worker’s status as an independent contractor or employee under
15
Table of Contents
California law. While new in California, versions of the ABC test have existed in a number of other states over the years and have been challenged in various courts as violating the federal government’s exclusive right to regulate trucking in certain areas of law and interstate commerce. The Company continues to monitor and analyze the impact of the new law, which became effective as of January 1, 2020, including what steps may be necessary or advisable to adapt to a changing legal and regulatory environment in California. The Company has BCO Independent Contractors, Truck Brokerage Carriers and independent commission sales agents who reside in and/or principally operate their business in California that could be impacted by AB 5 or similar laws, which could eventually affect our relationship with them. Additionally, the new law may have a significant impact on our Truck Brokerage Carriers based in California who utilize owner-operators to provide various types of transportation services such as drayage, regional or local delivery. Since the Company is neither incorporated nor headquartered in California and the vast majority of BCO Independent Contractors, Truck Brokerage Carriers and independent commission sales agents currently doing business with the Company reside and principally operate outside of California, we do not expect AB 5 to have a material impact on Landstar’s overall network of BCO Independent Contractors, Truck Brokerage Carriers and independent commission sales agents. Nevertheless, there remains significant uncertainty regarding many aspects of the new law, including how the law will be interpreted and enforced by state and local governments as well as by courts.
Potential changes, if any, that could impact the legal classification of the independent contractor relationship between the Company and BCO Independent Contractors or independent commission sales agents could have a material adverse effect on Landstar’s operating model. Further, the costs associated with any such potential changes could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations and financial condition if Landstar were unable to pass through to its customers an increase in price corresponding to such increased costs. Moreover, class action litigation in this area against other transportation companies has resulted in significant damage awards and/or monetary settlements for workers who have been allegedly misclassified as independent contractors and the legal and other related expenses associated with litigating these cases can be substantial.
Regulatory and legislative changes.
As noted above in Item 1, “Business — Factors Significant to the Company’s Operations — Regulation,” certain of the Operating Subsidiaries are motor carriers and/or property brokers authorized to arrange for transportation services by motor carriers which are regulated by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (“FMCSA”), an agency of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and by various state agencies. Certain of the Operating Subsidiaries are licensed as Ocean Transportation Intermediaries by the U.S. Federal Maritime Commission as non-vessel-operating
common carriers and/or as ocean freight forwarders. The Company’s air transportation activities in the United States are subject to regulation by the U.S. Department of Transportation as an indirect air carrier. One of the Company’s subsidiaries is licensed by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security through the Bureau of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“U.S. Customs”) as a customs broker. The Company is also subject to regulations and requirements relating to safety and security promulgated by, among others, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security through U.S. Customs and the Transportation Security Administration, the Canada Border Services Agency and various state and local agencies and port authorities.
The transportation industry is subject to other potential regulatory and legislative changes (such as the possibility of more stringent environmental, climate change and/or safety/security regulations, limits on vehicle weight and size and regulations relating to the health and wellness of commercial truck operators) that may affect the economics of the industry by requiring changes in operating practices, by changing the demand for motor carrier services or the cost of providing truckload or other transportation or logistics services, or by adversely impacting the number of available commercial truck operators.
In particular, the FMCSA in recent years proposed a number of regulatory changes that affect the operation of commercial motor carriers across the United States. It is difficult to predict in what form FMCSA regulations may be implemented, modified or enforced and what impact any such regulations may have on motor carrier operations or the aggregate number of trucks that provide hauling capacity to the Company. For example, on January 6, 2020, the FMCSA implemented new requirements applicable to drug and alcohol testing by motor carriers. The new regulation expands motor carrier reporting requirements to include reporting of all operators who test positive and/or refuse to submit to a test as prescribed in the regulation. The new regulation also expands rules relating to the obligation of motor carriers to conduct queries to check if current or prospective operators are prohibited from operating a commercial motor vehicle due to a positive or unresolved drug or alcohol test. The expanded reporting of positive results, or of an operator’s refusal to meet FMCSA testing requirements, to a centralized clearinghouse prescribed by FMCSA has the potential to remove operators from service that may otherwise have been undetected or unreported.
In addition, in December 2010, the FMCSA introduced the Compliance Safety Accountability (“CSA”) motor carrier oversight program. The Company believes the intent of this program is to improve regulatory oversight of motor carriers and commercial drivers using a safety measurement system methodology that is fundamentally different from the methodology that the
16
Table of Contents
FMCSA historically relied upon. Under CSA, the FMCSA monitors seven Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Categories, or BASICs, under which a motor carrier may be evaluated against established threshold scores for each such BASIC. In the event a motor carrier has one or more BASIC scores that exceeds the applicable threshold, the motor carrier has an increased risk of roadside inspection and/or compliance review by FMCSA. Under the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act, or the “FAST Act” signed into law on December 4, 2015, the FMCSA was required to engage the National Research Council to conduct a study of CSA and the Safety Measurement System (“SMS”) utilized by the CSA program. As a result of the FAST Act, the FMCSA announced the removal of the BASIC scores from public view and that such scores are expected to remain hidden from public view while changes to CSA are considered. In 2018, the FMCSA announced significant anticipated changes to CSA that if enacted would be expected to have a material impact on the current program. No assurances can be given with respect to the changes that may be made to the CSA program, or any replacement or supplemental program, in the future and what impact a new or revised motor carrier oversight program implemented by the FMCSA could have on the Company, its motor carrier operations or the aggregate number of trucks that provide hauling capacity to the Company.
Regulations focused on diesel emissions and other air quality matters.
Focus on diesel emissions, climate change and related air quality matters has led to efforts by federal, state and local governmental agencies to support legislation and regulations to limit the amount of carbon emissions, including emissions created by diesel engines utilized in tractors such as those operated by the Company’s BCO Independent Contractors and Truck Brokerage Carriers. Moreover, federal, state and local governmental agencies may also focus on regulation in relation to trailing equipment specifications in an effort to achieve, among other things, lower carbon emissions. For example, under the federal Clean Air Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) is responsible for prescribing national ambient air quality standards (“NAAQS”) for certain air pollutants, and each state is responsible for implementing those standards within its borders. Specifically, each state must adopt, and submit for the EPA’s approval, a state implementation plan (“SIP”) that provides for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS. In connection with its efforts to comply with the NAAQS, the California Air Resources Board (“CARB”) has implemented regulations that restrict the ability of certain tractors and trailers from operating in California and that impose emission standards on nearly all diesel-fueled trucks with gross vehicle weight ratings in excess of 14,000 lbs. that operate in California. Moreover, these emission standards are scheduled to become increasingly stringent such that by January 1, 2023, nearly all diesel-fueled trucks with gross vehicle weight ratings in excess of 14,000 lbs. that operate in California will be required to have a 2010 or newer model year engine. In 2012, the EPA formally approved certain CARB regulations as part of California’s SIP, including CARB’s “Regulation to Reduce Emissions of Diesel Particulate Matter, Oxides of Nitrogen and Other Criteria Pollutants from In-Use
Heavy-Duty Diesel-Fueled Vehicles” (commonly referred to as the “Truck and Bus Regulation”) and “Regulation to Reduce Emissions of Diesel Particulate Matter, Oxides of Nitrogen and Other Criteria Pollutants from In-Use
Heavy-Duty Diesel-Fueled Drayage Trucks” (commonly referred to as the “Drayage Truck Regulation”). The EPA thereafter received express authorization to enforce California’s SIP, including the Truck and Bus Regulation and the Drayage Truck Regulation.
In June 2016, Landstar Ranger, Inc. received an information request from the EPA to determine the Clean Air Act compliance status of Landstar Ranger, Inc. with respect to the Truck and Bus Regulation and the Drayage Truck Regulation in the state of California. Landstar Ranger, Inc. believes it complied with this information request; however, the timing and outcome of the review by the EPA and any subsequent action by the EPA, if any, cannot be predicted. The Company may incur significant legal and other professional fees in connection with the EPA’s review. If the Company is found to be in noncompliance with CARB regulations, the EPA and CARB may seek to impose significant fines and penalties, or injunctive relief, on the Company. Further, the Company reorganized its entire fleet of van trailing equipment to maintain CARB-compliant trailer operations. Moreover, no assurances can be given with respect to the extent BCO Independent Contractors will choose to become CARB-compliant by purchasing a new or used CARB-compliant tractor, replacing the engine in their existing tractor with a CARB-compliant engine or performing an exhaust retrofit of their existing tractor by installing a particulate matter filter. Accordingly, many of the Company’s BCO Independent Contractors may choose not to haul loads that would require travel within California, which could affect the ability of the Company to service customer freight needs for freight originating from, delivering to or traveling through California. Furthermore, increased regulation of tractor or trailing equipment specifications, including emissions created by diesel engines, could create substantial costs for the Company’s third party capacity providers and, in turn, increase the cost of purchased transportation to the Company. An increase in the costs to purchase, lease or maintain tractor or trailing equipment or in purchased transportation cost caused by existing or new regulations without a corresponding increase in price to the customer could adversely affect Landstar, including its results of operations and financial condition.
17
Table of Contents
General Risk Factors
Potential changes in taxes.
From time to time, various legislative proposals are introduced to increase federal, state, or local taxes. On December 22, 2017, the President of the United States signed into law the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “Tax Reform Act”). The legislation significantly changed U.S. tax law by, among other things, lowering corporate income tax rates, implementing a territorial tax system and imposing a repatriation tax on deemed repatriated earnings of foreign subsidiaries. With respect to the change in corporate tax rates, the Tax Reform Act permanently reduced the U.S. corporate income tax rate from a maximum of 35% to a flat 21% rate, effective January 1, 2018. In connection with this reduction in the U.S. corporate income tax rate, the Company revalued its ending net deferred tax liabilities at December 30, 2017 resulting in a provisional $20,430,000 tax benefit in the Company’s consolidated statement of income for the fiscal year ended December 30, 2017. The Company cannot predict whether, or in what form, any increase in corporate income tax rates, motor fuel tax rates or other tax rates applicable to the transportation services provided by the Company will be enacted and, if enacted, how such increased tax rates may impact the Company. With respect to potential increases in fuel and similar taxes, it is unclear whether or not the Company’s Truck Brokerage Carriers would attempt to pass the increase on to the Company or if the Company will be able to reflect this potential increased cost of capacity, if any, in prices to customers. Any such increase in fuel taxes, without a corresponding increase in price to the customer, could have a material adverse effect on Landstar, including its results of operations and financial condition. Moreover, competition from other transportation service companies including those that provide non-trucking
modes of transportation would likely increase if state or federal taxes on fuel were to increase without a corresponding increase in taxes imposed upon other modes of transportation.
Intellectual property.
The Company uses both internally developed and purchased technology in conducting its business. Whether internally developed or purchased, it is possible that the use of these technologies could be claimed to infringe upon or violate the intellectual property rights of third parties. In the event that a claim is made against the Company by a third party for the infringement of intellectual property rights, any settlement or adverse judgment against the Company either in the form of increased costs of licensing or a cease and desist order in using the technology could have an adverse effect on the Company’s business and its results of operations.
Unclaimed property
. The Company is subject to federal and state laws relating to abandoned and unclaimed property. States routinely audit the records of companies to assess compliance with such laws. The Company is currently undergoing a multi-state unclaimed property audit. The Company is also undergoing a separate unclaimed property audit conducted by the State of Delaware, and in connection with that audit, the Company has entered into a voluntary disclosure agreement with the Delaware Department of Finance. The timing and outcome of either the multi-state unclaimed property audit or the Delaware audit cannot be predicted. The Company may incur significant professional fees in connection with these audits. If the Company is found to be in noncompliance with applicable unclaimed property laws or the manner in which such laws are interpreted or applied, states may determine that they are entitled to the remittance by the Company of significant amounts of unclaimed or abandoned property and further may seek to impose other significant costs on the Company, including penalties and interest.
Item 1B.
Unresolved Staff Comments
None.