Key events

On September 18, 2015, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) publicly announced in a “Notice of Violation” that irregularities in relation to nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions had been discovered in emissions tests on certain vehicles with Volkswagen Group diesel engines. Volkswagen admitted to irregularities in this context. In its ad hoc release dated September 22, 2015, the Volkswagen Group announced that noticeable discrepancies between the figures achieved in testing and in actual road use had been identified in around eleven million vehicles worldwide with certain diesel engines.

On November 2, 2015, the EPA issued another “Notice of Violation” alleging that irregularities had also been discovered in the software installed in vehicles with type V6 3.0 l TDI diesel engines. Audi has confirmed that at least three auxiliary emission control devices (AECDs) were not disclosed in the course of the US approval documentation of vehicles with six-cylinder V6 3.0 l TDI diesel engines.

Consequently, the Volkswagen Group has recognized expenses directly related to the diesel issue in 2015 in the total amount of €16.2 billion in operating result. This primarily entailed recognizing provisions for field activities (service measures and recalls) and for repurchases in the amount of €7.8 billion, as well as €7.0 billion for legal risks.

Additional expenses of €6.4 billion were recognized in fiscal year 2016 in connection with the diesel issue. These additions resulted from an increase in expenses attributable to legal risks amounting to €5.1 billion, higher warranty costs amounting to €0.4 billion, specific sales programs amounting to €0.5 billion, impairment losses on inventories amounting to €0.3 billion and impairment losses on intangible assets and property, plant and equipment amounting to €0.3 billion, which are offset by impairment reversals of noncurrent and current lease assets in the amount of €0.1 billion. The impairment losses recognized on noncurrent assets resulted primarily from the lower value in use of various products in the Passenger Cars segment due to expected declines in volumes. In addition, provisions of €0.3 billion were recognized for the investments totaling USD 2.0 billion over 10 years in zero emissions vehicle infrastructure as well as corresponding access and awareness initiatives for these technologies to which the Volkswagen Group had committed itself in the settlement agreements. Unutilized provisions for legal risks and sales-related measures amounting to a total of €0.5 billion had an offsetting effect. The Volkswagen Group has started entering into exchange rate hedges relating to the outstanding obligations denominated in foreign currencies. The translation at the reporting date of provisions denominated in foreign currencies resulted in expenses of €0.2 billion after hedging.

In addition, expenses were recognized for restructuring measures in the trucks and passenger car business in South America (€0.3 billion) and in the Power Engineering segment (€0.2 billion). Provisions of €0.4 billion were recognized for the antitrust proceedings that the European Commission opened in 2011 against European truck manufacturers including MAN and Scania. Additional provisions amounting to €0.3 billion were recognized in the reporting period in connection with the replacement of potentially faulty airbags, manufactured and supplied by Takata, imposed by the competent authorities.

Further information on the litigation in connection with the diesel issue as well as the antitrust proceedings and the replacement of airbags manufactured and supplied by Takata can be found in the “Litigation” and “Contingent liabilities” sections.

Based on current information, fiscal year 2014 is not affected by the effects of the diesel issue. In the months after the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) study was published in May 2014, the test set-ups on which the ICCT study was based were repeated in house at Volkswagen and the unusually high NOx emissions confirmed. The US environmental authority of California – the California Air Resources Board (CARB) – was informed of this result, and at the same time the offer was made to recalibrate the type EA 189 diesel engines as part of a service measure that was already planned in the USA. This measure was evaluated and adopted by the Ausschuss für Produktsicherheit (APS – product safety committee), which includes, among others, employees from the technical development, quality assurance, sales, production, logistics, procurement and legal departments, as part of the existing processes within the Volkswagen Group. The APS thus plays a central role in the internal control system at Volkswagen AG. There are currently no findings to confirm that an unlawful “defeat device software” under US law was reported by the APS as the cause of the discrepancies to the persons responsible for preparing the 2014 annual and consolidated financial statements. Instead, at the time that the annual and consolidated financial statements were being prepared, this group of people remained under the impression that the issue could be solved with comparatively little effort as part of a field measure. By the summer of 2015, however, it was reliably recognized that the cause of the discrepancies was a software modification, that would qualify as a “defeat device” as defined by US environmental law. This culminated in the disclosure of the US “defeat device” to EPA and CARB on September 3, 2015. According to the assessment at that time of the members of the Board of Management dealing with the matter, the scope of the costs expected as a result by the Volkswagen Group (recall costs, retrofitting costs and financial penalties) was basically not dissimilar to that of previous cases in which other vehicle manufacturers were involved, and therefore appeared to be controllable overall with a view to the business activities of the Volkswagen Group. This appraisal by Volkswagen AG was based on the assessment of a law firm brought in in the USA for approval issues, according to which similar cases in the past were resolved amicably with the US authorities. Publication of a “Notice of Violation” by the EPA on September 18, 2015, which came as a surprise to the Company, on the facts and possible financial consequences, then presented the situation in a completely different light.

Also, the publications released by the reporting date, as well as the continued investigations and interviews in connection with the diesel issue, did not provide the Group Board of Management with any new reliable findings or assessments regarding the underlying facts and the assessment of the associated risks (e.g. investor lawsuits).