1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND PRACTICES

Consolidation. The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Team, Inc. and our majority-owned subsidiaries where we have control over operating and financial policies. Investments in affiliates in which we have the ability to exert significant influence over operating and financial policies, but where we do not control the operating and financial policies, are accounted for using the equity method. All material intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

Use of estimates. Our accounting policies conform to GAAP. Our most significant accounting policies are described below. The preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and judgments that affect our reported financial position and results of operations. We review significant estimates and judgments affecting our consolidated financial statements on a recurring basis and record the effect of any necessary adjustments prior to their publication. Estimates and judgments are based on information available at the time such estimates and judgments are made. Adjustments made with respect to the use of these estimates and judgments often relate to information not previously available. Uncertainties with respect to such estimates and judgments are inherent in the preparation of financial statements. Estimates and judgments are used in, among other things, (1) aspects of revenue recognition, (2) valuation of tangible and intangible assets and subsequent assessments for possible impairment, (3) the fair value of the non-controlling interest in subsidiaries that are not wholly-owned, (4) estimating various factors used to accrue liabilities for workers’ compensation, auto, medical and general liability, (5) establishing an allowance for uncollectible accounts receivable, (6) estimating the useful lives of our assets and (7) assessing future tax exposure and the realization of tax assets.

Fair value of financial instruments. Our financial instruments consist primarily of cash, cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable and debt obligations. The carrying amount of cash, cash equivalents, trade accounts receivable and trade accounts payable are representative of their respective fair values due to the short-term maturity of these instruments. The fair value of our banking facility is representative of the carrying value based upon the variable terms and management’s opinion that the current rates available to us with the same maturity and security structure are equivalent to that of the banking facility.

Cash and cash equivalents. Cash and cash equivalents consist of all demand deposits and funds invested in highly liquid short-term investments with original maturities of three months or less.

Inventory. Inventory is stated at the lower of cost (first-in, first-out method) or market. Inventory includes material, labor and certain fixed overhead costs.

Property, plant and equipment. Property, plant and equipment are stated at cost less accumulated depreciation and amortization. Leasehold improvements are amortized over the shorter of their respective useful life or the lease term. Depreciation and amortization of assets are computed by the straight-line method over the following estimated useful lives of the assets:

Revenue recognition. We determine our revenue recognition guidelines for our operations guidance provided in applicable accounting standards and positions adopted by the FASB or the SEC. Most of our projects are short-term in nature and we predominantly derive revenues by providing a variety of industrial services on a time and material basis. For all of these services our revenues are recognized when services are rendered or when product is shipped to the job site and risk of ownership passes to the customer. However, due to various contractual terms with our customers, at the end of any reporting period, there may be earned but unbilled revenue that is accrued to properly match revenues with related costs. At May 31, 2013 and May 31, 2012, the amount of earned but unbilled revenue included in accounts receivable was $25.5 million and $20.6 million, respectively.

Goodwill, intangible assets, and non-controlling interest. Goodwill represents the excess of costs over fair value of assets of businesses acquired. Goodwill and intangible assets acquired in a purchase business combination and determined to have an indefinite useful life are not amortized, but are instead tested for impairment at least annually in accordance with the provisions of the FASB ASC 350. Intangible assets with estimated useful lives are amortized over their respective estimated useful lives to their estimated residual values and reviewed for impairment in accordance with ASC 350.

Through fiscal year 2013 we operated in only one segment—the industrial services segment (see Note 14). Within the industrial services segment, we were organized as two divisions. Our TCM division provides the services of inspection and assessment and field heat treating. Our TMS division provides the services of leak repair, fugitive emissions hot tapping, field machining, technical bolting and field valve repair. Each division has goodwill relating to past acquisitions and we assess goodwill for impairment at the lower TCM and TMS divisional level.

Our annual goodwill impairment test is conducted as of May 31 of each year, which is our fiscal year end. Conducting the impairment test as of May 31 of each fiscal year aligns with our annual budget process which is typically completed during the fourth quarter of each year. In addition, performing our annual goodwill impairment test as of this date allows for a thorough consideration of the valuations of our business units subsequent to the completion of our annual budget process but prior to our financial year end reporting date. Prior to the adoption of ASU 2011-08 at May 31, 2013, the annual impairment test for goodwill was a two-step process that involved comparing the estimated fair value of each business unit to the unit’s carrying value, including goodwill. If the fair value of a business unit exceeded its carrying amount, the goodwill of the business unit was not considered impaired; therefore, the second step of the impairment test was deemed unnecessary. If the carrying amount of a business unit exceeded its fair value, we would then perform a second step to the goodwill impairment test to measure the amount of goodwill impairment loss to be recorded. Consistent with prior years tested, the fair values of reporting units in fiscal year 2011 was determined using a method based on discounted cash flow models with estimated cash flows based on internal forecasts of revenues and expenses over a four year period plus a terminal value period (the income approach). The income approach estimated fair value by discounting each reporting unit’s estimated future cash flows using a discount rate that approximated both our weighted-average cost of capital and reflects current market conditions.

The fair value derived from the income approach in our fiscal year 2011 test for impairment, in the aggregate, approximated our market capitalization. At May 31, 2011, our market capitalization exceeded the carrying value of our consolidated net assets by approximately $250 million, or 117%, and the fair value of both our individual reporting units significantly exceeded their respective carrying amounts as of that date. Projected growth rates and other market inputs to our impairment test models, such as the discount rate, are sensitive to the risk of future variances due to market conditions as well as business unit execution risks. Consequently, if future results fall below our forward-looking projections for an extended period of time, the results of future impairment tests could indicate an impairment. Although we believe the cash flow projections in our income approach make reasonable assumptions about our business, a significant increase in competition or reduction in our competitive capabilities could have a significant adverse impact on our ability to retain market share and thus on the projected margins included in the income approach used to value our reporting units. We periodically reviewed our projected growth rates and other market inputs used in our impairment test models as well as changes in our business and other factors that could represent indicators of impairment. Subsequent to our May 31, 2011 annual impairment test, no such indicators of impairment were identified.

On May 31, 2012, we adopted ASU 2011-08 which requires reporting entities to assess relevant events and circumstances in evaluating whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than the carrying amount of goodwill. If, after assessing the totality of events and circumstances, an entity determines that it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is greater than the carrying amount, then the first and second steps of the goodwill impairment test are not necessary. We evaluated considerations under ASU 2011-08 such as macroeconomic effects on our business, industry and market considerations, cost factors that could have a negative effect on cash flows or earnings, overall financial performance, entity-specific events, events affecting reporting units, and any realization of a sustained decrease in the price of our stock. After consideration of the aforementioned events and circumstances, we concluded that it was more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit was greater than the carrying amount of goodwill. Accordingly, we did not perform the two-step process described above for our fiscal year 2012 and 2013 annual tests.

There was $103.5 million and $95.0 million of goodwill at May 31, 2013 and May 31, 2012, respectively. A summary of goodwill is as follows (in thousands):