1.              Description of Business and Basis of Presentation

Bruker Corporation, together with its consolidated subsidiaries (“Bruker” or the “Company”), is a designer and manufacturer of proprietary life science and materials research systems and associated products that address the rapidly evolving needs of a diverse array of customers in life science, pharmaceutical, biotechnology, clinical and molecular diagnostics research, as well as in materials and chemical analysis in various industries and government applications. The Company’s core technology platforms include X-ray technologies, magnetic resonance technologies, mass spectrometry technologies, optical emission spectroscopy and infrared and Raman molecular spectroscopy technologies. The Company also manufactures and distributes a broad range of field analytical systems for chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and explosives (“CBRNE”) detection. The Company also develops and manufactures superconducting and non-superconducting materials and devices for use in renewable energy, energy infrastructure, healthcare and “big science” research. The Company maintains major technical and manufacturing centers in Europe, North America and Japan, and has sales offices located throughout the world. The Company’s diverse customer base includes life science, pharmaceutical, biotechnology and molecular diagnostic research companies, academic institutions, advanced materials and semiconductor manufacturers and government agencies.

Management reports results on the basis of the following two segments:

·                  Scientific Instruments.  The operations of this segment include the design, manufacture and distribution of advanced instrumentation and automated solutions based on magnetic resonance technology, mass spectrometry technology, gas chromatography technology, X-ray technology, spark-optical emission spectroscopy technology, atomic force microscopy technology, stylus and optical metrology technology, and infrared and Raman molecular spectroscopy technology. Typical customers of the Scientific Instruments segment include: pharmaceutical, biotechnology and molecular diagnostic companies; academic institutions, medical schools and other non-profit organizations; clinical microbiology laboratories; government departments and agencies; nanotechnology, semiconductor, chemical, cement, metals and petroleum companies; and food, beverage and agricultural analysis companies and laboratories.

·                  Energy & Supercon Technologies.  The operations of this segment include the design, manufacture and marketing of superconducting materials, primarily metallic low temperature superconductors, for use in magnetic resonance imaging, nuclear magnetic resonance, fusion energy research and other applications, and ceramic high temperature superconductors primarily for fusion energy research applications. Typical customers of the Energy & Supercon Technologies segment include companies in the medical industry, private and public research and development laboratories in the fields of fundamental and applied sciences and energy research, academic institutions and government agencies. The Energy & Supercon Technologies segment is also developing superconductors and superconducting-enabled devices for applications in power and energy, as well as industrial processing industries.

The Company has announced plans to sell a minority ownership position in its Bruker Energy & Supercon Technologies, Inc. (“BEST”) subsidiary through an initial public offering of the capital stock of BEST. The Company believes the offering will provide Bruker shareholders greater visibility into BEST’s performance and growth and strengthen BEST’s access to financing for its revenue growth initiatives, including the development of products for the renewable energy and energy infrastructure markets.

The financial statements represent the consolidated accounts of the Company. All significant intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. The unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements as of June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 and for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”) for interim financial information and pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) for Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, the financial information presented herein does not include all of the information and footnotes required by GAAP for complete financial statements. In the opinion of management, all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. The results for interim periods are not necessarily indicative of the results expected for the full year. Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation. The prior year amounts, totaling $0.4 million and $0.6 million for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010, respectively, relate to amortization of certain technology-related intangible assets that were reclassified to cost of revenue from selling, general and administrative expenses. These reclassifications had no effect on previously reported net income or cash flows.

The Company has evaluated all subsequent events and determined that there are no material recognized or unrecognized subsequent events requiring disclosure, except for the internal investigation regarding FCPA compliance and related matters described more fully in Note 12.

At June 30, 2011, except as described below, the Company’s significant accounting policies and estimates, which are detailed in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010, have not changed.

Revenue Recognition

The Company recognizes revenue from systems sales when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, the price is fixed or determinable, title and risk of loss has been transferred to the customer and collectability of the resulting receivable is reasonably assured. Title and risk of loss is generally transferred to the customer upon receipt of signed customer acceptance for a system that has been shipped, installed, and for which the customer has been trained. As a result, the timing of customer acceptance or readiness could cause the Company’s reported revenues to differ materially from expectations. When products are sold through an independent distributor or a strategic distribution partner that assumes responsibility for installation, the Company recognizes revenue when the products have been shipped and the title and risk of loss has been transferred. The Company’s distributors do not have price protection rights or rights of return; however, products are warranted to be free from defect for a period that is typically one year. Revenue is deferred until cash is received when collectability is not reasonably assured, such as when a significant portion of the fee is due over one year after delivery, installation and acceptance of a system.

In September 2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) ratified Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2009-13, Revenue Recognition (Topic 605)—Multiple-Deliverable Revenue Arrangements. ASU 2009-13 amends existing revenue recognition accounting standards that are currently within the scope of ASU 605, Subtopic 25—Multiple-Element Arrangements. ASC 2009-13 provides for three significant changes to the existing guidance for multiple element arrangements:

·                  Removes the requirement to have objective and reliable evidence of fair value for undelivered elements in an arrangement. This may result in more deliverables being treated as separate units of accounting.

·                  Modifies the manner in which arrangement consideration is allocated to the separately identified deliverables. ASU 2009-13 requires an entity to allocate revenue in an arrangement using its best estimate of selling prices (“ESP”) of deliverables if a vendor does not have vendor-specific objective evidence of selling prices (“VSOE”) or third-party evidence of selling prices (“TPE”), if VSOE is not available. Each separate unit of accounting must have a selling price, which can be based on management’s estimate when there is no other means (VSOE or TPE) to determine the selling price of that deliverable.

·                  Eliminates the use of the residual method and requires an entity to allocate revenue using the relative selling prices method, which results in the discount in the transaction being evenly allocated to the separate units of accounting.

In September 2009, the FASB ratified ASU 2009-14, Software (Topic 985)—Certain Revenue Arrangements That Include Software Elements. ASU 2009-14 amends existing revenue recognition accounting standards to remove tangible products that contain software components and non-software components that function together to deliver the product’s essential functionality from the scope of industry specific software revenue recognition guidance.

The Company adopted these new accounting standards at the beginning of its first fiscal quarter of 2011 on a prospective basis for transactions originating or materially modified after January 1, 2011. These accounting standards generally do not change the units of accounting, for the Company’s revenue transactions, and most products and services qualify as separate units of accounting as was the case under previous accounting guidance. The impact of adopting these new accounting standards was not material to the Company’s financial statements for the three and six month periods ended June 30, 2011, and if applied in the same manner to 2010, there would not have been a material impact to revenue recorded in 2010 and 2009 or any interim periods therein.

The Company typically determines the fair value of its products and services based on VSOE. The Company determines VSOE based on its normal selling pricing and discounting practices for the specific product or service when sold on a stand-alone basis. In determining VSOE, the Company’s policy requires a substantial majority of selling prices for a product or service to be within a reasonably narrow range. The Company also considers the class of customer, method of distribution and the geographies into which products and services are being sold when determining VSOE. The Company typically has had VSOE for its products and services. If VSOE cannot be established, which may occur in instances where a product or service has not been sold separately, stand-alone sales are too infrequent or product pricing is not within a sufficiently narrow range, the Company attempts to establish the selling price based on TPE. TPE is determined based on competitor prices for similar deliverables when sold separately. When the Company cannot determine VSOE or TPE, it uses ESP in its allocation of management consideration. The objective of ESP is to determine the price at which the Company would typically transact a stand-alone sale of the product or service. ESP is determined by considering a number of factors including the Company’s pricing policies, internal costs and gross profit objectives, method of distribution, market research and information, recent technological trends, competitive landscape and geographies. The Company plans to analyze the selling prices used in its allocation of arrangement consideration, at a minimum, on an annual basis. Selling prices will be analyzed more frequently if a significant change in the Company’s business necessitates more frequent analysis or if the Company experiences significant variances in its selling prices.

Revenue from the sale of accessories and parts is recognized upon shipment and service revenue is recognized as the services are performed.

The Company also has contracts for which it applies the percentage-of-completion model of revenue recognition and the milestone model of revenue recognition. Application of the percentage-of-completion method requires the Company to make reasonable estimates of the extent of progress toward completion of the contract and the total costs the Company will incur under the contract. Changes in the estimates of progress toward completion of the contract and the total costs could affect the timing of revenue recognition.

Other revenues are comprised primarily of research grants and licensing arrangements. Grant revenue is recognized when the requirements in the grant agreement are achieved. Licensing revenue is recognized ratably over the term of the related contract.

2.              Acquisitions

On April 1, 2011, the Company completed the acquisition of Michrom Bioresources Inc. (the “HPLC business”), a privately owned company based in California, U.S.A., that provides high performance liquid chromatography instrumentation, accessories and consumables to the life science market. The acquisition of the HPLC business is being accounted for under the acquisition method. The components of the consideration transferred and the allocation of the consideration transferred in connection with the HPLC business is as follows (in millions):

The Company has not completed the final allocation of the consideration transferred in connection with the acquisition of the HPLC business because the valuation of inventory and intangible assets is not complete. The Company will complete the allocation related to the acquisition of the HPLC business within the measurement period. The results of the HPLC business have been included in the Scientific Instruments segment from the date of the acquisition. Pro forma information reflecting the acquisition of the HPLC business has not been provided because the impact on revenues, net income and net income per common share attributable to Bruker Corporation shareholders is not material.

In October 2010, the Company completed the acquisition of Veeco Metrology Inc., a scanning probe microscopy and optical industrial metrology instruments business (the “nano surfaces business”), from Veeco Instruments Inc. (“Veeco”) for cash consideration of $230.4 million. The Company financed the acquisition with $167.6 million borrowed under a revolving credit agreement and the balance with cash on hand. The acquired business complements the Company’s existing atomic force microscopy products and expands the Company’s offerings to industrial and applied markets, specifically in the fields of materials and nanotechnology research and analysis. Under the purchase agreement, $22.9 million of the purchase price was paid into escrow pending the resolution of indemnification obligations and working capital obligations of the seller. At June 30, 2011, the Company has not completed the local business transfer of the part of the acquired business in China because the Company is in the process of establishing a local legal entity. The Company paid approximately $7.2 million to Veeco for the net assets in China and has recorded this amount in other current assets because the Company expects to complete the local business transfer in the third quarter of 2011.

The acquisition of the nano surfaces business is being accounted for under the acquisition method. The Company made the following adjustments to its allocation of the consideration transferred in the first six months of 2011 (in millions):

The measurement period adjustments made during the first half of 2011 did not have a material impact on the results of operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, and would not have had a material impact on the results of operations for the three months ended December 31, 2010. The Company has not yet completed the final allocation of the consideration transferred in connection with the acquisition of the nano surfaces business because of the local business transfer of the part of the acquired business in China.

The following table sets forth pro forma financial information reflecting the acquisition of the nano surfaces business as if the results of the nano surfaces business had been included in the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statement of operations as of January 1, 2010 (in millions, except per share data):

The pro forma financial information presented above assumes that the acquisition of the nano surfaces business occurred as of January 1, 2009. The pro forma information as presented above is for informational purposes only and is not indicative of the results of operations that would have been achieved if the acquisition had taken place at the beginning of 2010.

3.              Stock-Based Compensation

The Company’s primary types of share-based compensation are in the form of stock options and restricted stock. The Company recorded stock-based compensation expense for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 as follows (in millions):

Compensation expense is amortized on a straight-line basis over the underlying vesting terms of the share-based award. Stock options to purchase the Company’s common stock are periodically awarded to executive officers and other employees of the Company subject to a vesting period of three to five years. The fair value of each option award is estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. Assumptions regarding volatility, expected life, dividend yield and risk-free interest rate are required for the Black-Scholes model and are presented in the table below:

The risk-free interest rate is the yield on zero-coupon U.S. Treasury securities for a period that is commensurate with the expected life assumption. Expected life is determined through the simplified method as defined in the SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 110. The Company believes that this is the best estimate of the expected life of a new option. Expected volatility can be based on a number of factors, but the Company currently believes that the exclusive use of historical volatility results is the best estimate of the grant-date fair value of employee stock options because it reflects the market’s current expectations of future volatility. Expected dividend yield was not considered in the option pricing formula since the Company does not pay dividends and has no current plans to do so in the future. The terms of some of the Company’s indebtedness also currently restrict the Company’s ability to pay dividends to its stockholders.

Bruker Corporation Stock Plan

In May 2010, the Bruker Corporation 2010 Incentive Compensation Plan (the “2010 Plan”) was approved by the Company’s stockholders. The 2010 Plan provides for the issuance of up to 8,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock. The Plan allows a committee of the Board of Directors (the “Committee”) to grant incentive stock options, non-qualified stock options and restricted stock awards. The Committee has the authority to determine which employees will receive the awards, the amount of the awards and other terms and conditions of any awards. Awards granted by the Committee typically vest over a period of three to five years.

Stock option activity for the six months ended June 30, 2011 was as follows:

(a)          In addition to the options that are exercisable at June 30, 2011, the Company expects a portion of the unvested options to become exercisable in the future. Options expected to vest in the future are determined by applying an estimated forfeiture rate to the options that are unvested as of June 30, 2011.

(b)         The aggregate intrinsic value is based on the positive difference between the fair value of the Company’s common stock price of $20.36 on June 30, 2011, or the date of exercises, as appropriate, and the exercise price of the underlying stock options.

Restricted stock activity for the six months ended June 30, 2011, was as follows:

At June 30, 2011, the Company expects to recognize pre-tax stock-based compensation expense of $12.3 million associated with outstanding stock option awards granted under the Company’s stock plans over the weighted average remaining service period of 2.0 years. In addition, the Company expects to recognize additional pre-tax stock-based compensation expense of $4.1 million associated with outstanding restricted stock awards granted under the Company’s stock plans over the weighted average remaining service period of 3.6 years.

Bruker Energy & Supercon Technologies Stock Plan

In October 2009, the Board of Directors of BEST adopted the Bruker Energy & Supercon Technologies, Inc. 2009 Stock Option Plan (the “BEST Plan”). The BEST Plan provides for the issuance of up to 1,600,000 shares of BEST common stock in connection with awards under the BEST Plan. The BEST Plan allows a committee of the BEST Board of Directors to grant incentive stock options, non-qualified stock options and restricted stock awards. The Compensation Committee of the BEST Board of Directors has the authority to determine which employees will receive the awards, the amount of the awards and other terms and conditions of any awards. Awards granted pursuant to the BEST Plan typically vest over a period of three to five years.

There has been no activity in the BEST Plan during the six months ended June 30, 2011. At June 30, 2011, there were 800,000 options outstanding under the BEST Plan. The Company expects to recognize pre-tax stock-based compensation expense of $1.5 million associated with outstanding stock option awards granted under the BEST Plan over the weighted average remaining service period of 2.8 years.

4.              Earnings per Share

Net income per common share attributable to Bruker Corporation is calculated by dividing net income by the weighted-average shares outstanding during the period. The diluted net income per share computation includes the effect of shares which would be issuable upon the exercise of outstanding stock options and the vesting of restricted stock, reduced by the number of shares assumed to be purchased by the Company based on the treasury stock method.

The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted weighted average shares outstanding for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 (in millions, except per share data):

Stock options to purchase approximately 0.1 million shares and 0.4 million shares were excluded from the computation of diluted earnings per share in the three months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively, and approximately 0.1 million shares and 0.4 million shares were excluded from the computation of diluted earnings per share in the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively, because their effect would have been anti-dilutive.

5.              Fair Value of Financial Instruments

The Company applies the following hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value into three levels and bases the categorization within the hierarchy upon the lowest level of input that is available and significant to the fair value measurement. The levels in the hierarchy are defined as follows:

·                  Level 1:  Inputs to the valuation methodology are quoted prices (unadjusted) for identical assets or liabilities in active markets.

·                  Level 2: Inputs to the valuation methodology include quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets, and inputs that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly, for substantially the full term of the financial instrument.

·                  Level 3:  Inputs to the valuation methodology are unobservable and significant to the fair value measurement.

The valuation techniques that may be used by the Company to determine the fair value of Level 2 and Level 3 financial instruments are the market approach, the income approach and the cost approach. The market approach uses prices and other relevant information generated by market transactions involving identical or comparable assets or liabilities. The income approach uses valuation techniques to convert future amounts to a single present value based on current market expectations about those future amounts, including present value techniques, option-pricing models and the excess earnings method. The cost approach is based on the amount that would be required to replace the service capacity of an asset (replacement cost).

The Company measures the following financial assets and liabilities at fair value on a recurring basis. The following table sets forth the Company’s financial instruments and presents them within the fair value hierarchy using the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement at June 30, 2011 (in millions):

The Company’s financial instruments consist primarily of cash equivalents, restricted cash, derivative instruments consisting of forward foreign exchange contracts, commodity contracts, derivatives embedded in certain purchase and delivery contracts and an interest rate swap, accounts receivable, short-term borrowings, accounts payable and long-term debt. The carrying amounts of the Company’s cash equivalents, short-term investments, restricted cash, accounts receivable, short-term borrowings and accounts payable approximate their fair value due to their short-term nature. Derivative assets and liabilities are measured at fair value on a recurring basis. The Company’s long-term debt consists of variable rate arrangements with interest rates that reset every three months and, as a result, reflect currently available terms and conditions. Consequently, the carrying value of the Company’s long-term debt approximates fair value.

6.              Inventories

Inventories consisted of the following at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 (in millions):

Finished goods include in-transit systems that have been shipped to the Company’s customers but not yet installed and accepted by the customer. As of June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, inventory-in-transit was $116.5 and $85.3 million, respectively.

The Company reduces the carrying value of its demonstration inventories for differences between its cost and estimated net realizable value through a charge to cost of product revenue that is based on a number of factors including, the age of the unit, the physical condition of the unit and an assessment of technological obsolescence. Amounts recorded in cost of revenue related to the write-down of demonstration units to net realizable value were $7.1 million and $5.6 million for the three months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively, and $13.6 million and $11.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

7.              Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets

The following table sets forth the changes in the carrying amount of goodwill for the six months ended June 30, 2011 (in millions):

Goodwill is not amortized, instead, goodwill is tested for impairment on a reporting unit basis annually, or on an interim basis when events or changes in circumstances warrant. The Company performed its annual test for impairment as of December 31, 2010 and determined that goodwill and other intangible assets were not impaired at that time. The Company did not identify any indicators of impairment during the six month period ended June 30, 2011 that would warrant an interim test.

The following is a summary of other intangible assets at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 (in millions):

Intangible assets with a finite useful life are amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives as follows:

For the three months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, the Company recorded amortization expense of $4.2 million and $0.7 million, respectively, related to intangible assets subject to amortization. For the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, the Company recorded amortization expense of $8.1 million and $1.1 million, respectively, related to intangible assets subject to amortization.

8.              Debt

At June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, the Company’s debt obligations consisted of the following (in millions):

On February 26, 2008, we entered into a credit facility, which we refer to as the Credit Agreement. The Credit Agreement, which was with a syndication of lenders, provided for a revolving credit line with a maximum commitment of $230.0 million and a term loan facility of $150.0 million. The outstanding principal under the term loan was payable in quarterly installments through December 2012. Borrowings under the Credit Agreement accrued interest, at our option, at either (i) the higher of the prime rate or the federal funds rate plus 0.50%, or (ii) adjusted LIBOR, plus margins ranging from 0.40% to 1.25% and a facility fee ranging from 0.10% to 0.20%.

In May 2011, we entered into an amendment to and restatement of the Credit Agreement, or the Amended Credit Agreement. The Company accounted for the amendment as a modification under FASB Accounting Standards Codification No. 470, Debt. The Amended Credit Agreement increases the maximum commitment on the Company’s revolving credit line to $250.0 million and extends the maturity date to May 2016. Borrowings under the revolving credit line of the Amended Credit Agreement accrue interest, at the Company’s option, at either (i) the higher of the prime rate, (ii) the federal funds rate plus 0.50%, (iii) adjusted LIBOR plus 1.00% or (iv) LIBOR, plus margins ranging from 0.80% to 1.65% and a facility fee ranging from 0.20% to 0.35%. The Amended Credit Agreement had no impact on the maturity or pricing of the Company’s existing term loan. As of June 30, 2011, the weighted average interest rate of borrowings under the term facility of the Amended Credit Agreement was approximately 2.7%.

Borrowings under the Amended Credit Agreement are secured by guarantees from certain material subsidiaries, as defined in the Credit Agreement, and Bruker Energy & Supercon Technologies, Inc. The Amended Credit Agreement also requires that we maintain certain financial ratios related to maximum leverage and minimum interest coverage, as defined in the Amended Credit Agreement. Specifically, our leverage ratio cannot exceed 3.0 and our interest coverage ratio cannot be less than 3.0. In addition to the financial ratios, the Amended Credit Agreement restricts, among other things, our ability to do the following: make certain payments; incur additional debt; incur certain liens; make certain investments, including derivative agreements; merge, consolidate, sell or transfer all or substantially all of our assets; and enter into certain transactions with affiliates. Our failure to comply with any of these restrictions or covenants may result in an event of default under the applicable debt instrument, which could permit acceleration of the debt under that instrument and require us to prepay that debt before its scheduled due date.

In addition to its long-term arrangements, the Company had the following amounts outstanding under revolving loan arrangements (in millions):

The following is a summary of the maximum commitments and the net amounts available to the Company under revolving loans as of June 30, 2011 (in millions):

Other revolving loans are with various financial institutions located primarily in Germany, Switzerland and France. The Company’s other revolving lines of credit are typically due upon demand with interest payable monthly. Certain of these lines of credit are unsecured while others are secured by the accounts receivable and inventory of the related subsidiary.

9.              Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities

Interest Rate Risks

The Company’s exposure to interest rate risk relates primarily to outstanding variable rate debt and adverse movements in the related short-term market rates. The most significant component of the Company’s interest rate risk relates to amounts outstanding under the Amended Credit Agreement. In April 2008, the Company entered into an interest rate swap arrangement to manage its exposure to interest rate movements and the related effect on its variable rate debt. Under this interest rate swap arrangement, the Company will pay a fixed rate of approximately 3.8% and receive a variable rate based on three month LIBOR. The initial notional amount of this interest rate swap was $90.0 million and it amortizes in proportion to the term debt component of the Amended Credit Agreement through December 2012. At June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, the notional amount of this interest rate swap was $58.5 million and $66.4 million, respectively. The Company concluded that this swap met the criteria to qualify as an effective hedge of the variability of cash flows of the interest payments and accounts for the interest rate swap as a cash flow hedge. Accordingly, the Company reflects changes in the fair value of the effective portion of this interest rate swap in accumulated other comprehensive income, a separate component of shareholders’ equity. Amounts recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income are reclassified to interest and other income (expense), net, in the consolidated statements of income when either the forecasted transaction occurs or it becomes probable that the forecasted transaction will not occur. The Company expects $1.8 million of accumulated losses to be reclassified into earnings over the next twelve months.

Foreign Exchange Rate Risk Management

The Company generates a substantial portion of its revenues and expenses in international markets, principally Germany and other countries in the European Union, Switzerland and Japan, which subjects its operations to the exposure of exchange rate fluctuations. The impact of currency exchange rate movement can be positive or negative in any period. Under these arrangements, the Company typically agrees to purchase a fixed amount of a foreign currency in exchange for a fixed amount of U.S. Dollars or other currencies on specified dates with maturities of less than twelve months. These transactions do not qualify for hedge accounting and, accordingly, the instrument is recorded at fair value with the corresponding gains and losses recorded in the consolidated statements of income. The Company had the following notional amounts outstanding under foreign currency contracts at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 (in millions):

In addition, the Company periodically enters into purchase and delivery contracts denominated in currencies other than the functional currency of the parties to the transaction. The Company accounts for these transactions separately valuing the “embedded derivative” component of these contracts. The contracts, denominated in currencies other than the functional currency of the transacting parties, amounted to $19.5 million for the delivery of products and $0.3 million for the purchase of products at June 30, 2011, and $16.1 million for the delivery of products and $0.3 million for the purchase of products at December 31, 2010. The changes in the fair value of these embedded derivatives are recorded in interest and other income (expense), net in the consolidated statements of income.

Commodity Price Risk Management

The Company has an arrangement with a customer under which the Company has a firm commitment to deliver copper based superconductors at a fixed price. In order to minimize the volatility that fluctuations in the price of copper have on the Company’s sales of these commodities, the Company enters into commodity hedge contracts. At June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, the Company had fixed price commodity contracts with notional amounts aggregating $5.5 million and $2.9 million, respectively. The changes in the fair value of these commodity contracts are recorded in interest and other income (expense), net in the consolidated statements of income.

The fair value of the derivative instruments described above at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 are recorded in our consolidated balance sheets as follows (in millions):

The losses recognized in other comprehensive income related to the effective portion of the interest rate swap designated as a hedging instrument for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 are as follows (in millions):

The losses related to the effective portion of the interest rate swap designated as a hedging instrument that were reclassified from other comprehensive income and recognized in net income for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 are as follows (in millions):

The Company did not recognize any amounts related to ineffectiveness in the results of operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010.

The impact on net income of changes in the fair value of derivative instruments not designated as hedging instruments for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 are as follows (in millions):

The amounts recorded in the results of operations related to derivative instruments not designated as hedging instruments are recorded in interest and other income (expense), net.

10.       Income Taxes

The Company accounts for income taxes using the asset and liability approach by recognizing deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected future tax consequences of differences between the financial statement basis and the tax basis of assets and liabilities, calculated using enacted tax rates in effect for the year in which the differences are expected to be reflected in the tax return. The Company records a valuation allowance to reduce deferred tax assets to the amount that is more likely than not to be realized. In addition, the Company accounts for uncertain tax positions that have reached a minimum recognition threshold.

The income tax provision for the three months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 was $10.4 million and $10.8 million, respectively, representing effective tax rates of 31.5% and 32.0%, respectively. The income tax provision for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 was $19.4 million and $21.4 million, respectively, representing effective tax rates of 36.1% and 35.5%, respectively.  The change in the Company’s effective tax rate relates primarily to an increase in losses incurred in the U.S. These losses have a negative impact on the overall tax rate because the Company is not able to record a tax benefit on these amounts.

The Company’s effective tax rate generally reflects the tax provision for non-U.S. entities only. A full valuation allowance will be maintained against all U.S. deferred tax assets, including U.S. net operating losses and tax credits, until evidence exists that it is more likely than not that the loss carryforward and credit amounts will be utilized to offset U.S. taxable income. The Company’s tax rate may change over time as the amount or mix of income and taxes outside the U.S. changes. The effective tax rate is affected by research and development tax credits, the expected level of other tax benefits, the impact of changes to the valuation allowance, and changes in the mix of the Company’s pre-tax income and losses among jurisdictions with varying statutory tax rates and credits.

The Company has unrecognized tax benefits of approximately $28.2 million as of June 30, 2011, of which $20.4 million, if recognized, would result in a reduction of the Company’s effective tax rate. The Company recognizes penalties and interest related to unrecognized tax benefits in the provision for income taxes. As of June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, approximately $4.7 million and $4.3 million, respectively, of accrued interest and penalties related to uncertain tax positions was included in other current liabilities on the unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheets. Penalties and interest related to unrecognized tax benefits in the provision for income taxes of $0.2 and $0.3 million were recorded during the three months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively, and $0.4 million and $0.5 million were recorded during the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

The Company files returns in many jurisdictions with varying statutes of limitations, but considers its significant tax jurisdictions to include the United States, Germany and Switzerland. The tax years 2003 to 2010 are open tax years in these major taxing jurisdictions. One of the Company’s Swiss entities is currently being audited for the tax years 2003 through 2006 and the audit is expected to be completed in the second half of 2011. In addition, all of the Company’s significant German subsidiaries are under tax audit for the years 2003 through 2008 and the audits are expected to be completed in the second half of 2011.

11.       Employee Benefit Plans

Substantially all of the Company’s employees in Switzerland, France and Japan, as well as certain employees in Germany, are covered by Company-sponsored defined benefit pension plans. Retirement benefits are generally earned based on years of service and compensation during active employment. Eligibility is generally determined in accordance with local statutory requirements; however, the level of benefits and terms of vesting varies among plans.

The components of net periodic pension cost for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 are as follows (in millions):

The Company made contributions of $1.7 million to its defined benefit plans during the six months ended June 30, 2011 and estimates contributions of $1.8 million will be made during the remainder of 2011.

13.       Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)

Comprehensive income (loss) refers to revenues, expenses, gains and losses that under U.S. GAAP are included in other comprehensive income, but excluded from net income as these amounts are recorded directly as an adjustment to shareholders’ equity, net of tax. The Company’s other comprehensive income (loss) is composed primarily of foreign currency translation adjustments, changes in the funded status of defined benefit pension plans and changes in the fair value of derivatives that have been designated as cash flow hedges. The following is a summary of comprehensive income (loss) for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 (in millions):