The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

Copart, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
January 31, 2016
(Unaudited)

NOTE 1 – Description of Business and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Description of Business

Copart, Inc. (the Company) provides vehicle sellers with a full range of services to process and sell vehicles over the Internet through the Company’s Virtual Bidding Third Generation (VB3) Internet auction-style sales technology. Sellers are primarily insurance companies but also include banks and financial institutions, charities, car dealerships, fleet operators, vehicle rental companies, as well as cars sourced from the general public. The Company sells principally to licensed vehicle dismantlers, rebuilders, repair licensees, used vehicle dealers, and exporters; however, at certain locations, the Company sells directly to the general public. The majority of vehicles sold on behalf of insurance companies are either damaged vehicles deemed a total loss or not economically repairable by the insurance companies or are recovered stolen vehicles for which an insurance settlement with the vehicle owner has already been made. The Company offers vehicle sellers a full range of services that expedite each stage of the vehicle sales process, minimize administrative and processing costs and maximize the ultimate sales price. In the United States and Canada (North America), Brazil, the United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.), Oman, Bahrain, and India, the Company sells vehicles primarily as an agent and derives revenue primarily from fees paid by vehicle sellers and vehicle buyers as well as related fees for services, such as towing and storage. In the United Kingdom (U.K.), the Company operates both on a principal basis, purchasing the salvage vehicle outright from the insurance company and reselling the vehicle for its own account, and as an agent. In Germany and Spain, the Company derives revenue from sales listing fees for listing vehicles on behalf of insurance companies.

Principles of Consolidation

The consolidated financial statements of the Company include the accounts of the parent company and its domestic and foreign wholly-owned subsidiaries. Intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.

In the opinion of management, the accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements contain all adjustments of a normal recurring nature, considered necessary for fair presentation of its financial position as of January 31, 2016 and July 31, 2015 , its consolidated statements of income and comprehensive income for the three and six months ended January 31, 2016 and 2015 , and its cash flows for the six months ended January 31, 2016 and 2015 . Interim results for the six months ended January 31, 2016 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for any future period, or for the entire year ending July 31, 2016 . These consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with the rules and regulations of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) have been condensed or omitted pursuant to such rules and regulations. The interim consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended July 31, 2015 .

Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Estimates include but are not limited to, vehicle pooling costs; self-insured reserves; allowance for doubtful accounts; income taxes; revenue recognition; stock-based payment compensation; purchase price allocations; long-lived asset and goodwill impairment calculations; and contingencies. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

Revenue Recognition

The Company provides a portfolio of services to its sellers and buyers that facilitate the sale and delivery of a vehicle from seller to buyer. These services include the ability to use the Company’s Internet sales technology and vehicle delivery, loading, title processing, preparation and storage. The Company evaluates multiple-element arrangements relative to its member and seller agreements.

The services provided to the seller of a vehicle involve disposing of a vehicle on the seller’s behalf and, under most of the Company’s current North American contracts, collecting the proceeds from the member. The Company applies Accounting Standard Update 2009-13, Revenue Recognition (Topic 605): Multiple-Deliverable Revenue Arrangements (ASU 2009-13) for revenue recognition. Pre-sale services, including towing, title processing, preparation and storage, as well as sale fees and other enhancement services meet the criteria for separate units of accounting. Revenue associated with each service is recognized upon completion of the respective service, net of applicable rebates or allowances. For certain sellers who are charged a proportionate fee based on high bid of the vehicle, the revenue associated with the pre-sale services is recognized upon completion of the sale when the total arrangement is fixed and determinable.

The estimated selling price of each service is determined based on management’s best estimate and allotted based on the relative selling price method.

Vehicle sales, where vehicles are purchased and remarketed on the Company’s own behalf, are recognized on the sale date, which is typically the point of high bid acceptance. Upon high bid acceptance, a legal binding contract is formed with the member, and the gross sales price is recorded as revenue.

The Company also provides a number of services to the buyer of the vehicle, charging a separate fee for each service. Each of these services has been assessed to determine whether the requirements have been met to separate them into units of accounting within a multiple-element arrangement. The Company has concluded that the sale and the post-sale services are separate units of accounting. The fees for sale services are recognized upon completion of the sale, and the fees for the post-sale services are recognized upon successful completion of those services using the relative selling price method.

The Company also charges members an annual registration fee for the right to participate in its vehicle sales program, which is recognized ratably over the term of the arrangement, and relist and late-payment fees, which are recognized upon receipt of payment by the member. No provision for returns has been established, as all sales are final with no right of return, although the Company provides for bad debt expense in the case of non-performance by its members or sellers.

The Company allocates arrangement consideration based upon management’s best estimate of the selling price of the separate units of accounting contained within arrangements including multiple deliverables. Significant inputs in the Company’s estimates of the selling price of separate units of accounting include market and pricing trends, pricing customization and practices, and profit objectives for the services.

Vehicle Pooling Costs

The Company defers in vehicle pooling costs certain yard operation expenses associated with vehicles consigned to and received by the Company, but not sold as of the end of the period. The Company quantifies the deferred costs using a calculation that includes the number of vehicles at its facilities at the beginning and end of the period, the number of vehicles sold during the period and an allocation of certain yard operation costs of the period. The primary expenses allocated and deferred are certain facility costs, labor, transportation, and vehicle processing. If the allocation factors change, then yard operation expenses could increase or decrease correspondingly in the future. These costs are expensed as vehicles are sold in subsequent periods on an average cost basis. Given the fixed cost nature of the Company’s business, there are no direct correlations for increases in expenses or units processed on vehicle pooling costs.

The Company applies the provisions of accounting guidance for subsequent measurement of inventory to its vehicle pooling costs. The provision requires that items such as idle facility expenses, double freight and rehandling costs be recognized as current period charges regardless of whether they meet the criteria of “abnormal” as provided in the guidance. In addition, the guidance requires that the allocation of fixed production overhead to the costs of conversion be based on the normal capacity of production facilities.

Foreign Currency Translation

The Company records foreign currency translation adjustments from the process of translating the functional currency of the financial statements of its foreign subsidiaries into the U.S. dollar reporting currency. The Canadian dollar, British pound, U.A.E. dirham, Bahraini dinar, Omani rial, Brazilian real, Indian rupee, and Euro are the functional currencies of the Company’s foreign subsidiaries as they are the primary currencies within the economic environment in which each subsidiary operates. The original equity investment in the respective subsidiaries is translated at historical rates. Assets and liabilities of the respective subsidiary’s operations are translated into U.S. dollars at period-end exchange rates, and revenues and expenses are translated into U.S. dollars at average exchange rates in effect during each reporting period. Adjustments resulting from the translation of each subsidiary’s financial statements are reported in other comprehensive income.

The cumulative effects of foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations were as follows (in thousands):

Income Taxes and Deferred Tax Assets

Income taxes are accounted for under the asset and liability method. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the estimated future tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities, their respective tax basis, and operating loss and tax credit carryforwards. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date.

In accordance with the provisions of ASC 740, Income Taxes , a two-step approach is applied to the recognition and measurement of uncertain tax positions taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. The first step is to determine if the weight of available evidence indicates that it is more likely than not that the tax position will be sustained in an audit, including resolution of any related appeals or litigation processes. The second step is to measure the tax benefit as the largest amount that is more than 50% likely to be realized upon ultimate settlement. The Company recognizes interest and penalties related to uncertain tax positions in the provision for income taxes on its consolidated statements of income.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

The Company considers all highly liquid investments purchased with original maturities of three months or less at the time of purchase to be cash equivalents. Cash and cash equivalents include cash held in checking, domestic certificates of deposit, and money market accounts. The Company periodically invests its excess cash in money market funds and U.S. Treasury Bills. The Company’s cash and cash equivalents are placed with high credit quality financial institutions.

Marketable Securities

Marketable securities consist of marketable equity securities and are classified as available-for-sale and stated at fair value. The cost basis of the marketable securities is based on the specific identification method. Unrealized gains or losses relating to available-for-sale securities are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income, net of income taxes. Reclassification adjustments out of accumulated other comprehensive income resulting from realized gains or losses from the sale of available-for-sale securities are included in other income. As of January 31, 2016 , the cost basis of the marketable securities was $21.1 million with a fair value of $17.5 million , resulting in an unrealized loss , net of tax of $3.6 million recorded in other comprehensive income.

Other Assets

Other assets consist of long-term deposits, contracted prepayments, notes receivable, and investments in unconsolidated affiliates. In accordance with ASC 323, Investments-Equity Method and Joint Ventures, the Company uses the equity method to account for investments in joint ventures and other unconsolidated entities if the Company has the ability to exercise significant influence over the financial and operating policies of those investees. Under the equity method, the Company records the initial investment in an entity at cost and subsequently adjusts the investment for the Company's share of the affiliate's undistributed earnings (losses) and distributions recorded in other income. The Company reviews the carrying amount of the investments in unconsolidated affiliates annually, or whenever circumstances indicate that the value of these investments may have declined. If the Company determines an investment is impaired on an other-than-temporary basis, a loss equal to the difference between the fair value of the investment and its carrying amount is recorded.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

The Company records its financial assets and liabilities at fair value in accordance with the framework for measuring fair value in U.S. GAAP. In accordance with ASC 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures , as amended by Accounting Standards Update 2011-04, the Company considers fair value as an exit price, representing the amount that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants under current market conditions. This framework establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value:

The amounts recorded for financial instruments in the Company's consolidated financial statements, which included cash, accounts receivable, accounts payable, accrued liabilities, and revolving loan facility approximated their fair values as of January 31, 2016 and July 31, 2015 , due to the short-term nature of those instruments, and are classified within Level II of the fair value hierarchy. Cash equivalents are classified within Level II of the fair value hierarchy because they are valued using quoted market prices of the underlying investments. See Note 2 – Long-Term Debt , Note 5 – Fair Value Measures , and Note 12 – Acquisitions .

Derivatives and Hedging

The Company had entered into two interest rate swaps to eliminate interest rate risk on the Company’s variable interest rate debt, and the swaps were designated as effective cash flow hedges under ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging. See Note 3 – Derivatives and Hedging . Each quarter, the Company measured hedge effectiveness using the “hypothetical derivative method” and recorded in earnings any hedge ineffectiveness with the effective portion of the change in fair value recorded in other comprehensive income or loss. The interest rate swaps expired in December 2015.

Capitalized Software Costs

The Company capitalizes system development costs and website development costs related to the enterprise computing services during the application development stage. Costs related to preliminary project activities and post implementation activities are expensed as incurred. Internal-use software is amortized on a straight-line basis over its estimated useful life, generally three years. The Company evaluates the useful lives of these assets on an annual basis and tests for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances occur that impact the recoverability of these assets.

Total gross capitalized software as of January 31, 2016 and July 31, 2015 was $70.5 million and $65.1 million , respectively. Accumulated amortization expense related to software as of January 31, 2016 and July 31, 2015 totaled $45.6 million and $42.6 million , respectively.

Accounting for Acquisitions

The Company recognizes and measures identifiable assets acquired and liabilities assumed in acquired entities in accordance with ASC 805, Business Combinations . The accounting for acquisitions involves significant judgments and estimates, including the fair value of certain forms of consideration, the fair value of acquired intangible assets, which involve projections of future revenues, cash flows and terminal value, which are then either discounted at an estimated discount rate or measured at an estimated royalty rate, and the fair value of other acquired assets and assumed liabilities, including potential contingencies and the useful lives of the assets. The projections are developed using internal forecasts, available industry and market data and estimates of long-term growth rates of the Company. Historical experience is additionally utilized, in which historical or current costs have approximated fair value for certain assets acquired.

Segments and Other Geographic Reporting

The Company’s North American and U.K. regions are considered two separate operating segments, which have been aggregated into one reportable segment because they share similar economic characteristics.

NOTE 2 – Long-Term Debt

Credit Facility

On December 14, 2010, the Company entered into an Amended and Restated Credit Facility Agreement (Credit Facility), with Bank of America, N.A. The Credit Facility was an unsecured credit agreement providing for (i) a $100.0 million revolving credit facility, including a $100.0 million alternative currency borrowing sublimit and a $50.0 million letter of credit sublimit and (ii) a term loan facility of $400.0 million . On September, 29, 2011, the Company amended the Credit Facility increasing the amount of the term loan facility from $400.0 million to $500.0 million .

Credit Agreement

On December 3, 2014 , the Company entered into a Credit Agreement with Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as administrative agent, and Bank of America, N.A., as syndication agent, which superseded the Credit Facility. The Credit Agreement provides for (a) a secured revolving loan facility in an aggregate principal amount of up to $300.0 million , none of which was outstanding at July 31, 2015 and $68.0 million was outstanding at January 31, 2016 (Revolving Loan Facility), and (b) a secured term loan facility in an aggregate principal amount of $300.0 million (Term Loan), which was fully drawn at closing. Proceeds from the Credit Agreement were used to repay all outstanding amounts under the Credit Facility totaling $275.0 million at December 3, 2014. The remaining proceeds are being used for general corporate purposes. The Revolving Loan Facility and the Term Loan facility mature on December 3, 2019 .

The Term Loan, which as of January 31, 2016 , had $206.3 million outstanding, amortized $18.8 million each quarter during December 31, 2014 through December 31, 2015 , then amortizes $7.5 million each quarter, with all outstanding borrowings due on December 3, 2019 . All amounts borrowed under the Term Loan may be prepaid without premium or penalty.

The Revolving Loan Facility and Term Loan under the Credit Agreement bear interest, at the election of the Company, at either (a) the Base Rate, which is defined as a fluctuating rate per annum equal to the greatest of (i) the Prime Rate in effect on such day; (ii) the Federal Funds Rate in effect on such date plus 0.50% ; or (iii) an adjusted LIBOR rate determined on the basis of a one-month interest period plus 1.0% , in each case plus an applicable margin ranging from 0.25% to 1.0% based on the Company’s consolidated total net leverage ratio during the preceding fiscal quarter; or (b) an adjusted LIBOR rate plus an applicable margin ranging from 1.25% to 2.0% depending on the Company’s consolidated total net leverage ratio during the preceding fiscal quarter. Interest is due and payable quarterly, in arrears, for loans bearing interest at the Base Rate, and at the end of an interest period (or at each three month interval in the case of loans with interest periods greater than three months) in the case of loans bearing interest at the adjusted LIBOR rate. The interest rate as of January 31, 2016 on the Company’s variable interest rate debt was the one month LIBOR rate of 0.43% plus an applicable margin of 1.25%. The carrying amount of the Credit Agreement is comprised of borrowings under which interest accrues under a fluctuating interest rate structure. Accordingly, the carrying value approximates fair value at January 31, 2016 , and was classified within Level II of the fair value hierarchy.

Amounts borrowed under the Revolving Loan Facility may be repaid and reborrowed until the maturity date of December 3, 2019 . The Company is obligated to pay a commitment fee on the unused portion of the Revolving Loan Facility. The commitment fee rate ranges from 0.20% to 0.35% , depending on the Company’s consolidated total net leverage ratio during the preceding fiscal quarter, on the average daily unused portion of the revolving credit commitment under the Credit Agreement. The Company had $68.0 million of outstanding borrowings under the Revolving Loan Facility as of January 31, 2016 and none were outstanding at July 31, 2015 .

The Company’s obligations under the Credit Agreement are guaranteed by certain of the Company’s domestic subsidiaries meeting materiality thresholds set forth in the Credit Agreement. Such obligations, including the guaranties, are secured by substantially all of the assets of the Company and the assets of the subsidiary guarantors pursuant to a Security Agreement, dated December 3, 2014, among the Company, the subsidiary guarantors from time to time party thereto, and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as collateral agent.

The Credit Agreement contains customary affirmative and negative covenants, including covenants that limit or restrict the Company and its subsidiaries’ ability to, among other things, incur indebtedness, grant liens, merge or consolidate, dispose of assets, make investments, make acquisitions, enter into transactions with affiliates, pay dividends, or make distributions on and repurchase stock, in each case subject to certain exceptions. The Company is also required to maintain compliance, measured at the end of each fiscal quarter, with a consolidated total net leverage ratio and a consolidated interest coverage ratio. The Company was in compliance with all covenants related to the Credit Agreement as of January 31, 2016 .

Note Purchase Agreement

On December 3, 2014 , the Company entered into a Note Purchase Agreement and sold to certain purchasers (collectively, the Purchasers) $400.0 million in aggregate principal amount of senior secured notes (Senior Notes) consisting of (i) $100.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.07% Senior Notes, Series A, due December 3, 2024 ; (ii) $100.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.19% Senior Notes, Series B, due December 3, 2026 ; (iii) $100.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.25% Senior Notes, Series C, due December 3, 2027 ; and (iv) $100.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.35% Senior Notes, Series D, due December 3, 2029 . Interest is due and payable quarterly, in arrears, on each of the Senior Notes. Proceeds from the Note Purchase Agreement are being used for general corporate purposes.

The Company may prepay the Senior Notes, in whole or in part, at any time, subject to certain conditions, including minimum amounts and payment of a make-whole amount equal to the discounted value of the remaining scheduled interest payments under the Senior Notes.

The Company’s obligations under the Note Purchase Agreement are guaranteed by certain of the Company’s domestic subsidiaries meeting materiality thresholds set forth in the Note Purchase Agreement. Such obligations, including the guaranties, are secured by substantially all of the assets of the Company and the subsidiary guarantors. The obligations of the Company and its subsidiary guarantors under the Note Purchase Agreement will be treated on a pari passu basis with the obligations of those entities under the Credit Agreement as well as any additional debt the Company may obtain.

The Note Purchase Agreement contains customary affirmative and negative covenants, including covenants that limit or restrict the Company and its subsidiaries’ ability to, among other things, incur indebtedness, grant liens, merge or consolidate, dispose of assets, make investments, make acquisitions, enter into transactions with affiliates, pay dividends, or make distributions and repurchase stock, in each case subject to certain exceptions. The Company is also required to maintain compliance, measured at the end of each fiscal quarter, with a consolidated total net leverage ratio and a consolidated interest coverage ratio. The Company was in compliance with all covenants related to the Note Purchase Agreement as of January 31, 2016 .

Related to the execution of the Credit Agreement and the Note Purchase Agreement, the Company incurred $2.1 million in costs, of which $1.0 million was capitalized as debt issuance fees and $1.1 million was recorded as a reduction of the long-term debt proceeds as a debt discount. Both the debt issuance fees and debt discount are amortized to interest expense over the term of the respective debt instruments.

NOTE 3 – Derivatives and Hedging

The Company had entered into two interest rate swaps to exchange its variable interest rate payments commitment for fixed interest rate payments through December 2015. The swaps were designated effective cash flow hedges under ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging . Each quarter, the Company measured hedge effectiveness using the “hypothetical derivative method” and recorded in earnings any hedge ineffectiveness with the effective portion of the change in fair value recorded in other comprehensive income or loss. The Company has reclassified $0.2 million and $0.4 million for the three months ended January 31, 2016 and 2015 , respectively, and $0.5 million and $0.9 million for the six months ended January 31, 2016 and 2015 , respectively, out of other comprehensive income into interest expense.

The interest rate swaps were classified within Level II of the fair value hierarchy as the derivatives were valued using observable inputs. The Company determined fair value of the derivative utilizing observable market data of swap rates and basis rates. These inputs were placed into a pricing model using a discounted cash flow methodology in order to calculate the mark-to-market value of the interest rate swaps. The interest rate swaps expired in December 2015. As of July 31, 2015 , the Company’s fair value of the interest rate swaps was $0.4 million and was classified as other liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets.

NOTE 4 – Goodwill and Intangible Assets

The following table sets forth amortizable intangible assets by major asset class:

Aggregate amortization expense on amortizable intangible assets was $1.5 million and $1.7 million for the three months ended January 31, 2016 and 2015 , respectively, and $3.0 million and $3.6 million for the six months ended January 31, 2016 and 2015 , respectively,

The change in the carrying amount of goodwill was as follows (in thousands):

During the six months ended January 31, 2016 , no transfers were made between any levels within the fair value hierarchy. See Note 1 – Description of Business and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies , Note 2 – Long-Term Debt , Note 3 – Derivatives and Hedging , and Note 12 – Acquisitions .

NOTE 6 – Net Income Per Share

The table below reconciles basic weighted shares outstanding to diluted weighted average shares outstanding:

There were no material adjustments to net income required in calculating diluted net income per share. Excluded from the dilutive earnings per share calculation were 7,750,598 and 5,104,400 stock options for the three months ended January 31, 2016 and 2015 , respectively, and 7,713,448 and 5,148,374 shares for the six months ended January 31, 2016 and 2015 , respectively, because their inclusion would have been anti-dilutive.

NOTE 7 – Stock-based Payment Compensation

The Company recognizes compensation expense for stock option awards on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period of the award. The following is a summary of activity for the Company’s stock options for the six months ended January 31, 2016 :

The aggregate intrinsic value is calculated as the difference between the exercise price of the underlying awards and the quoted price of the Company’s common stock. The number of options that were in-the-money was 13,324,066 at January 31, 2016 .

The table below sets forth the stock-based payment compensation recognized by the Company:

In accordance with ASC 718 , Compensation – Stock Compensation , the Company made an estimate of expected forfeitures and recognized compensation cost only for those equity awards expected to vest.

In October 2013, the Compensation Committee of the Company’s Board of Directors, subject to stockholder approval (which was subsequently obtained at the December 16, 2013 annual meeting of stockholders), approved the grant to each of A. Jayson Adair, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, and Vincent W. Mitz, the Company’s President, of nonqualified stock options to purchase 2,000,000 and 1,500,000 shares of the Company’s common stock, respectively, at an exercise price of $35.62 per share, which equaled the closing price of the Company’s common stock on December 16, 2013, the effective date of grant. Such grants were made in lieu of any cash salary or bonus compensation in excess of $1.00 per year or the grant of any additional equity incentives for a five -year period. Each option will become exercisable over five years, subject to continued service by Mr. Adair and Mr. Mitz, with 20% vesting on April 15, 2015 and December 16, 2014, respectively, and the balance vesting monthly over the subsequent four years.  Each option will become fully vested, assuming continued service on April 15, 2019 and December 16, 2018, respectively. If, upon or following a change in control, either the Company or a successor entity terminates the executive’s service without cause, or the executive resigns for good reason (as defined in the option agreement), then 100% of the shares subject to his stock option will immediately vest. On June 2, 2015, the Compensation Committee of the Company's Board of Directors approved the amendment of each of the stand-alone stock option agreements, by and between the Company and A. Jayson Adair and Vincent W. Mitz, respectively, to remove the provision providing at times prior to a "change in control" for the immediate vesting in full of the underlying option upon an involuntary termination of Mr. Adair or Mr. Mitz, as applicable, without "cause." The fair value of each option at the date of grant was $11.43 . The total estimated compensation expense to be recognized by the Company over the five year estimated service period for these options is $40.0 million . The Company recognized $3.8 million in compensation expenses for these grants in the six months ended January 31, 2016 and 2015 .

NOTE 8 – Common Stock Repurchases

On September 22, 2011 , the Company's board of directors approved a 40 million share increase in the Company's stock repurchase program, bringing the total current authorization to 98 million shares. The repurchases may be effected through solicited or unsolicited transactions in the open market or in privately negotiated transactions. No time limit has been placed on the duration of the stock repurchase program. Subject to applicable securities laws, such repurchases will be made at such times and in such amounts as the Company deems appropriate and may be discontinued at any time. The Company did not repurchase any common stock under the program during the six months ended January 31, 2016 or 2015 . As of January 31, 2016 , the total number of shares repurchased under the program was 50,518,282 , and 47,481,718 shares were available for repurchase under the program.

On December 30, 2015 , the Company completed a modified "Dutch Auction" tender offer, or tender offer, to purchase up to 7,317,073 shares of its common stock at a price not greater than $41.00 nor less than $38.00 per share. In connection with the tender offer, the Company accepted for payment an aggregate of 8,333,333 shares of its common stock at a purchase price of $39.00 per share for a total value of $325.0 million . The Company's directors and executive officers did not participate in the tender offer. The shares repurchased as a result of the tender offer are not part of the Company's stock repurchase program.

In fiscal 2015, certain executive officers and employees exercised stock options through cashless exercises. A portion of the options exercised were net settled in satisfaction of the exercise price and federal and state minimum statutory tax withholding requirements. The Company remitted $1.1 million for the six months ended January 31, 2015 to the proper taxing authorities in satisfaction of the employees' minimum statutory withholding requirements.

The stock options exercised by certain employees and executive officers through cashless exercises are summarized in the following table:

(1) Shares withheld for taxes are treated as a repurchase of shares for accounting purposes but do not count against the Company's stock repurchase program.

No stock options were exercised by certain employees and executive officers through cashless exercises during the three months ended January 31, 2015, October 31, 2015, and January 31, 2016.

NOTE 9 – Income Taxes

The Company applies the provisions of the accounting standard for uncertain tax positions to its income taxes. For benefits to be realized, a tax position must be more likely than not to be sustained upon examination. The amount recognized is measured as the largest amount of benefit that is greater than 50% likely of being realized upon ultimate settlement.

As of January 31, 2016 , the gross amounts of the Company’s liabilities for unrecognized tax benefits of $23.7 million , including interest and penalties, were classified as long-term income taxes payable in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. Over the next twelve months, the Company’s existing positions will continue to generate an increase in liabilities for unrecognized tax benefits, as well as a likely decrease in liabilities as a result of the lapse of the applicable statute of limitations and the conclusion of income tax audits. The expected decrease in liabilities relating to unrecognized tax benefits will have a positive effect on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial position when realized. The Company recognizes interest and penalties related to uncertain tax positions in income tax expense.

The Company files income tax returns in the U.S. federal jurisdiction, various states and foreign jurisdictions. The Company is currently under examination by certain taxing authorities in the U.S. for fiscal years between 2011 and 2013. At this time, the Company does not believe that the outcome of any examination will have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial position.

The Company has not provided for U.S. federal income and foreign withholding taxes on its foreign subsidiaries’ undistributed earnings as of January 31, 2016 because the Company intends to reinvest such earnings indefinitely in its foreign operations. Specifically, the earnings will be dedicated to the following areas outside the U.S. (i) funding operating and capital spending needs in existing foreign markets; (ii) funding merger and acquisition deals both in existing and new foreign markets; and (iii) other investments to help expand the Company's footprint in foreign emerging markets. The Company does not anticipate the need for any foreign cash in the U.S. operations. It is not practical to determine the taxes that might be incurred if these earnings were to be distributed in the form of dividends or otherwise. If distributed, however, foreign tax credits may become available under current law to reduce or eliminate the resultant U.S. income tax liability.

NOTE 10 – Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In November 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-17, Balance Sheet Classification of Deferred Taxes , which requires companies to classify all deferred tax assets and liabilities as non-current on the balance sheet, rather than separating deferred taxes into current and non-current amounts. This ASU is effective for annual and interim reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016 and can be adopted prospectively or retrospectively; however, early adoption is permitted. The Company’s adoption of ASU 2015-17 will not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial position.

In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-03, Interest - Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30), which requires that debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of that debt liability, consistent with debt discounts. The recognition and measurement guidance for debt issuance costs are not affected by the amendments in this ASU. The amendments are effective for financial statements issued for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2015. The amendments are to be applied on a retrospective basis, wherein the balance sheet of each individual period presented is adjusted to reflect the period-specific effects of applying the new guidance. The Company’s adoption of ASU 2015-03 will not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial position.

In February 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-02, Consolidation (Topic 810), which is intended to improve targeted areas of consolidation guidance for legal entities such as limited partnerships, limited liability corporations, and securitization structures (collateralized debt obligations, collateralized loan obligations, and mortgage-backed security transactions). The ASU focuses on the consolidation evaluation for reporting organizations that are required to evaluate whether they should consolidate certain legal entities. In addition to reducing the number of consolidation models from four to two, the new standard simplifies the FASB Accounting Standards Codification and improves current U.S. GAAP by placing more emphasis on risk of loss when determining a controlling financial interest, reducing the frequency of the application of related-party guidance when determining a controlling financial interest in a variable interest entity (VIE), and changing consolidation conclusions for companies in several industries that typically make use of limited partnerships or VIEs. The ASU will be effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2015. The Company’s adoption of ASU 2015-02 will not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial position.

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606), which supersedes the revenue recognition requirements in ASC 605, Revenue Recognition . ASU 2014-09 is based on the principle that revenue is recognized to depict the transfer of goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. ASU 2014-09 also requires additional disclosure about the nature, amount, timing and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from customer contracts, including significant judgments and changes in judgments and assets recognized from costs incurred to obtain or fulfill a contract. ASU 2014-09 is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2017. ASU 2014-09 allows adoption with either retrospective application to each period presented or retrospective application with the cumulative effect recognized as of the date of initial application. The Company has not determined the potential effects of implementing ASU 2014-09 on the consolidated financial statements.

NOTE 11 – Legal Proceedings

The Company is subject to threats of litigation and is involved in actual litigation and damage claims arising in the ordinary course of business, such as actions related to injuries, property damage, and handling or disposal of vehicles. The material pending legal proceedings to which the Company is a party, or of which any of the Company’s property is subject, include the following matters.

On November 1, 2013, the Company filed suit against Sparta Consulting, Inc. (now known as KPIT) in the 44th Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas, alleging fraud, fraudulent inducement, and/or promissory fraud, negligent misrepresentation, unfair business practices pursuant to California Business and Professions Code § 17200, breach of contract, declaratory judgment, and attorney’s fees. The Company seeks compensatory and exemplary damages, disgorgement of amounts paid, attorney’s fees, pre- and post-judgment interest, costs of suit, and a judicial declaration of the parties’ rights, duties, and obligations under the Implementation Services Agreement dated October 6, 2011. The suit arises out of the Company’s September 17, 2013 decision to terminate the Implementation Services Agreement, under which KPIT was to design, implement, and deliver a customized replacement enterprise resource planning system for the Company. On January 2, 2014, KPIT removed this suit to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas. On August 11, 2014, the Northern District of Texas transferred the suit to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California for convenience. On January 8, 2014, KPIT filed suit against the Company in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, alleging breach of contract, promissory estoppel, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, account stated, quantum meruit, unjust enrichment, and declaratory relief. KPIT seeks compensatory and exemplary damages, prejudgment interest, costs of suit, and a judicial declaration of the parties’ rights, duties, and obligations under the Implementation Services Agreement. The Company is pursuing its claim for damages, and defending KPIT’s claim for damages.

The Company provides for costs relating to these matters when a loss is probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. The effect of the outcome of these matters on the Company’s future consolidated results of operations and cash flows cannot be predicted because any such effect depends on future results of operations and the amount and timing of the resolution of such matters. The Company believes that any ultimate liability will not have a material effect on its consolidated results of operations, financial position or cash flows. However, the amount of the liabilities associated with these claims, if any, cannot be determined with certainty. The Company maintains insurance which may or may not provide coverage for claims made against the Company. There is no assurance that there will be insurance coverage available when and if needed. Additionally, the insurance that the Company carries requires that the Company pay for costs and/or claims exposure up to the amount of the insurance deductibles negotiated when the insurance is purchased.

Governmental Proceedings

The Georgia Department of Revenue, or DOR, has conducted a sales and use tax audit of the Company’s operations in Georgia for the period from January 1, 2007 through June 30, 2011. As a result of their initial audit, the DOR issued a notice of proposed assessment for uncollected sales taxes in which it asserted that the Company failed to collect and remit sales taxes totaling $73.8 million , including penalties and interest. According to the DOR, the proposed assessment was based on its initial determination that the Company's sales did not constitute nontaxable sales for resale.

The Company subsequently engaged a Georgia law firm and outside tax advisors to review the conduct of its business operations in Georgia, the notice of proposed assessment, and the DOR’s policy position. In particular, the Company’s outside legal counsel provided the Company an opinion that the sales for resale to non-U.S. registered resellers should not be subject to Georgia sales and use tax. In rendering its opinion, the Company’s counsel noted that non-U.S. registered resellers are unable to comply strictly with technical requirements for a Georgia certificate of exemption but concluded that its sales for resale to non-U.S. registered resellers should not be subject to Georgia sales and use tax notwithstanding this technical inability to comply.

Since the Company's receipt of the notice of proposed assessment, the Company and its counsel have engaged in active discussions with the DOR to resolve the matter. On June 5, 2015 , following the Company's discussions and after additional review of documentation, the DOR provided the Company with revised audit work papers computing a sales tax liability of $2.7 million before interest and any penalties.

On June 22, 2015 , representatives of the DOR and the Office of the Attorney General for the State of Georgia informed the Company's counsel that the DOR intended to issue a formal notice of assessment for an estimated $100.0 million , based on the DOR’s original proposed assessment of $73.8 million plus additional accumulated interest and penalties. On August 4, 2015 , the DOR issued an official Assessment and Demand for Payment for $96.1 million for sales taxes, penalties, and interest that the DOR alleges the Company owes the State of Georgia. The Company filed an appeal of this notice of assessment from the DOR with the Georgia Tax Tribunal on September 3, 2015.

Based on the opinion from the Company’s outside law firm, advice from its outside tax advisors, and the Company's best estimate of a probable outcome, the Company has adequately provided for the payment of any assessment in its consolidated financial statements. The Company believes it has strong defenses to the DOR’s notice of assessment and intends to defend this matter. There can be no assurance that this matter will be resolved in the Company’s favor or that the Company will not ultimately be required to make a substantial payment to the Georgia DOR. The Company understands that litigating and defending the matter in Georgia could be expensive and time-consuming and result in substantial management distraction. If the matter were to be resolved in a manner adverse to the Company, it could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial position.

NOTE 12 – Acquisitions

During the year ended July 31, 2014, the Company acquired one facility in Montreal, Canada; a salvage vehicle auction business in Brazil, which did not include any facilities; as well as the assets of an online marketing company, which included the rights to hundreds of web domains including www.cashforcars.com and www.cash4cars.com.

During the year ended July 31, 2015 , the purchase price allocations for the assets of the online marketing company and the salvage vehicle auction businesses in Montreal, Canada and Brazil were finalized. As a result, from the preliminary purchase price allocation as of July 31, 2014, goodwill decreased $0.8 million , primarily related to a $0.9 million increase in intangible assets, and changes to deferred taxes on acquired intangible assets. In accordance with ASC 805, any adjustments to the fair value of acquired assets and liabilities that occur subsequent to the measurement period will be reflected in the Company’s results of operations. There were no acquisitions during the six months ended January 31, 2016 .

These acquisitions were undertaken because of their strategic fit and have been accounted for using the purchase method in accordance with ASC 805, Business Combinations , which resulted in the recognition of goodwill in the Company's consolidated financial statements. Goodwill arose because the purchase price of each acquisition reflected a number of factors, including their future earnings and cash flow potential; the multiple to earnings, cash flow and other factors at which similar businesses have been purchased by other acquirers; the competitive nature of the process by which the Company acquired these businesses; and the complementary strategic fit and resulting synergies brought to existing operations. Goodwill that arose from these acquisitions was within Level III of the fair value hierarchy as it was valued using unobservable inputs. Unobservable inputs reflect the Company’s best estimate of what hypothetical market participants would use to determine the value of acquired assets at the reporting date based on the best information available in the circumstances. When a determination is made to classify items within Level III of the fair value hierarchy, the evaluation is based upon the significance of the unobservable inputs to the overall fair value measurement. Due to the limitation of goodwill asset market values or pricing information, the determination of fair value of the goodwill asset is inherently more difficult. Goodwill is not amortized for financial reporting purposes but could be amortizable for tax purposes. The intangible assets that arose from these acquisitions were also within Level III of the fair value hierarchy as it was valued using unobservable inputs, primarily from utilizing the Multi-Period Excess Earnings Method (MPEEM) model, which is an income-based approach that allocates to goodwill any acquisition costs not specifically assigned to intangibles, fixed assets or working capital. Intangible assets acquired include covenants not to compete, supply contracts, customer relationships, trade names, licenses and databases and software with a useful life ranging from three to eight years.

These acquisitions did not result in a significant change in the Company’s consolidated results of operations individually or in the aggregate; therefore, pro forma financial information has not been presented. The operating results have been included in the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial position since the acquisition dates.