Quarterlytics / Axcelis

Axcelis

acls · NASDAQ
Claim this profile
Ticker acls
Exchange NASDAQ
Sector
Industry
Employees 501-1000
← All annual reports
FY2012 Annual Report · Axcelis
Sign in to download
Loading PDF…
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND  EXCHANGE  COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K

(Mark  One)
(cid:1)

ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE  ACT  OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012

(cid:2)

TRANSITION REPORT  PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from 

  to 
Commission file number 000-30941
AXCELIS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as  specified  in  its charter)

Delaware
(State or other jurisdiction
of incorporation or organization)

34-1818596
(IRS  Employer  Identification No.)

108 Cherry Hill Drive
Beverly, Massachusetts 01915
(Address of principal  executive offices) (zip  code)

(978)  787-4000
(Registrant’s telephone  number, including area  code)

Securities registered  pursuant to  Section  12(b)  of  the  Act:

Title of each class

Name  of  each  exchange on which  registered

Common Stock, $.001 par  value

The Nasdaq Stock  Market LLC

Securities registered pursuant to  Section  12(g) of  the  Act:
None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a  well-known  seasoned issuer, as  defined in  Rule 405  of  the  Securities

Act. Yes (cid:2) No (cid:1)

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant  to  Section 13  or  Section 15(d)  of  the

Act. Yes (cid:2) No (cid:1)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has  filed  all reports  required to be filed by Section  13  or  15(d) of

the Securities Exchange Act of 1934  during the preceding  12 months  (or  for such  shorter  period that the  registrant was
required to file such reports), and (2)  has been  subject to such  filing  requirements for  the past  90  days. Yes (cid:1) No (cid:2)

Indicate by checkmark whether the registrant  has  submitted electronically  and  posted on  its  corporate  Web  site, of
any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and  posted  pursuant  to  Rule 405  of  Regulation S-T during the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that  the  registrant  was required  to  submit  and post  such
files). Yes (cid:1) No (cid:2)

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent  filers  pursuant to Item 405  of  Regulation S-K  is  not  contained

herein, and will not be contained, to the best of  registrant’s  knowledge, in  definitive  proxy or  information statements
incorporated by reference in Part III of  this Form 10-K or  any amendment  to  this  Form  10-K. (cid:1)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant  is a large  accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the  definitions  of  ‘‘large  accelerated  filer,’’ ‘‘accelerated filer’’ and  ‘‘smaller
reporting company’’ in Rule 12b-2 of the  Exchange  Act.
Large accelerated filer (cid:2) Accelerated filer  (cid:1) Non-accelerated filer (cid:2) Smaller reporting  company  (cid:2)

(Do not check if a smaller
reporting company)
Indicate  by check mark whether the registrant is  a  shell company  (as  defined  in Rule  12b-2 of the  Act).  Yes (cid:2)  No (cid:1)

Aggregate market value of the voting stock held by  non-affiliates  of  the  registrant  as of June 30,  2012: $127,487,448

Number of shares outstanding of the registrant’s Common  Stock, $0.001  par value,  as of February 25,  2013:

108,233,274.

Portions of the definitive Proxy Statement  for Axcelis Technologies,  Inc.’s  Annual Meeting of Stockholders  to be

held on May 14, 2013 are incorporated by reference  into  Part III  of  this  Form  10-K.

Documents incorporated by reference:

Item 1. Business.

Overview of Our Business

PART I

Axcelis Technologies, Inc. (‘‘Axcelis,’’ the  ‘‘Company,’’ ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’  or  ‘‘our’’) designs, manufactures

and services ion implantation, dry strip  and  other  processing equipment used in the fabrication of
semiconductor chips. We sell to leading semiconductor chip manufacturers worldwide. The ion
implantation business comprised approximately  76.7% of our revenue in  2012 with the  remaining  23.3%
of revenue derived from our dry strip  and  other  processing systems.  In addition to equipment,  we
provide extensive aftermarket service  and support,  including spare parts,  equipment upgrades,
maintenance services and customer training.

In December 2012, we sold to Lam Research Corporation (‘‘Lam’’) the  intellectual property rights

and other assets relating to our dry strip  systems  product line. The purchased intellectual  property
rights include, among other things, worldwide patent rights, patent applications, copyrights,  industrial
designs, know-how and related rights used by us in our  dry strip business. As  a result of this
transaction, we will cease the sale of  300 mm  dry strip  wafer processing  equipment in September 2013.
We  will be able to continue to sell dry strip systems  for  smaller wafers until December 2015 and
support our installed base of dry strip systems indefinitely.

Axcelis’ business commenced in 1978 and  its  current corporate  entity was incorporated in

Delaware in 1995,  headquartered in Beverly, Massachusetts. We maintain an Internet  site at
http://www.axcelis.com. We make available free  of  charge  on  and through this website  our annual
reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments
to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a)  or  15(d)  of the Exchange  Act as  soon  as
reasonably practicable after we electronically  file such material with,  or furnish it to, the Securities and
Exchange Commission. Our website and  the  information contained therein or connected thereto shall
not be deemed to be incorporated into this Form  10-K.

Industry Overview

Semiconductor chips, also known as integrated circuits, are  used  in personal computers,

telecommunication equipment, digital consumer  electronics,  wireless communication  products and other
applications. Types of semiconductor  chips include memory chips  (which store and retrieve
information), microprocessors (logic devices  which process information) and ‘‘system on chip’’ devices
(which have both logic and memory features). Most semiconductor  chips are built  on a wafer of silicon
of either 200mm (8 inches) or 300mm (12 inches) in diameter. Each semiconductor  chip is made up of
millions of tiny transistors or ‘‘switches’’  to  control  the functions of the  device. Transistors are  created
in the silicon wafer by introducing various precisely  placed impurities into  the silicon in specific
patterns. The process steps in the formation of transistors  are  traditionally referred to as
‘‘front-end-of-line.’’ The ‘‘back-end-of-line’’  process steps connect the transistors and other components
together through several overlapping  layers of metal  wires, known  as interconnect, creating a complete
circuit. Each layer of metal interconnect  must be separated  by a non-conductive or insulating material
called inter-level dielectric. Each layer  that is added is selectively patterned to all previous  layers
through a process called photolithography.

Semiconductor chip manufacturers utilize many different types of equipment  in the making  of
integrated circuits. Over 300 process  steps utilizing over  50  different  types of process tools are required
to make a single device like a microprocessor. Semiconductor chip manufacturers seek efficiency
improvements through increased throughput, equipment utilization and  higher manufacturing yields.
Capacity is added by increasing the amount of  manufacturing equipment in  existing fabrication  facilities
and by constructing new fabrication facilities.  Periodically the semiconductor  industry  adopts  a larger

1

silicon wafer size to achieve lower manufacturing costs. Semiconductor  manufacturers  can produce
more chips on a larger wafer, thus reducing the overall manufacturing cost per chip.  For example, the
use of 200mm wafers in production began at the end of the  1980s. The migration from 200mm to
300mm began at the end of the 1990s. The majority of wafer fabrication facilities today are  using
wafers with a diameter of 300mm. In  2012, Axcelis derived  76.6%  of  total systems  revenue (a
component of product revenue) from sales of 300mm equipment. In  2011, industry participants began
planning for the next wafer size transition, to 450mm diameter wafers. The schedule for  this future
transition will vary by customer.

The customer base is also changing. Given the  magnitude of the investment needed to build  a new

wafer fabrication facility (often referred to as  a ‘‘fab’’),  which  can be over  $4 billion  for a  new 300mm
fab, many customers are entering into partnerships  to  offset  the cost of technology development  and
manufacturing. In addition, many chip  developers outsource all or part of their chip  manufacturing
requirements to contract manufacturers,  known as foundries.  Foundries  are significant purchasers of
semiconductor manufacturing equipment.

The semiconductor industry is highly cyclical, as global chip production capacities successively
exceed, then lag behind, global chip demand. When chip demand is high, and inventories low,  chip
manufacturers add capacity though capital  equipment purchases. Given the difficulties of forecasting
and calibrating chip demand and production capacity,  the industry periodically  experiences excess chip
inventories and softening chip prices.  Our customers  react with muted capital spending, lowering the
demand for our equipment. Changes  in  consumer  and business  demand for  products in  which chips  are
used also affect the industry. A successful semiconductor equipment manufacturer must not only
provide some of the most technically complex  products manufactured  in the world  but also  must  design
its  business to thrive during the inevitable low  points in the cycle.

Weak industry conditions that began in mid-2011 continued through  2012, resulting  in a decline in
our  2012 revenues as compared with  2011. The Company’s 2012 results also  reflect  our  efforts in recent
years to lower our  breakeven revenue  levels to avoid significant  losses in a downturn. Although  future
market conditions are difficult to predict, we anticipate the industry will continue  to  experience  similar
conditions into 2013.

Axcelis’ Strategy

Axcelis’ 2013 strategic goal is to return to being a successful, financially  strong company.  To

accomplish this, we intend to:

(cid:127) Reestablish Axcelis as a leader in ion implant  across all  customer  segments with a  competitive,

single wafer product portfolio;

(cid:127) Expand our product penetrations beyond  our  strong position  in memory into the foundry and

logic segments; and

(cid:127) Continue to build on our strong Global Service  Solutions base.

The transaction with Lam Research in  December 2012  represents an important  step in the
execution of our strategy, allowing us to focus  on ion implant. The collaboration with  Lam Research
will also allow us to identify value for  our customers as we explore the interrelationships  between
implant, etch, deposition, dry strip and  clean applications. We expect that this partnership will  enhance
our  ability to compete and gain implant  market share.

We  have continued to invest in research  and development through  the industry cycles to assure our

products meet the needs of our customers. We take pride  in our  scientists  and engineers who continue
to add  to our portfolio of patents and  unpatented proprietary technology  to ensure  that  our investment
in technology leadership is translated into unique product  advantages. We strive  for operational

2

excellence by focusing on ways to lower  our manufacturing  and design costs  and to improve  our
delivery times to our customers. Finally, we  have established Global Customer Teams  and a  focused
account management structure to maintain and  strengthen our customer relationships and increase
customer satisfaction.

Ion Implantation Systems

Ion implantation is a principal step in the  transistor  formation cycle  of the semiconductor
manufacturing process. An ion implanter  is a  large, technically  advanced system  that  injects dopants
such as arsenic, boron or phosphorus into a  silicon  wafer.  These dopants  are ionized and therefore
have electric charges. With an electric  charge they can  be  manipulated, moved  and accelerated with
electric and magnetic fields. Ion implanters  use these fields to create a beam of ions  with a precisely
defined amount of energy (ranging between  several hundred and three million electron-volts) and with
a precisely defined amount of beam current (ranging  from microamps  to  milliamps).  Certain areas of
the silicon wafer are blocked off by a polymer material known as  photoresist, which  acts  as a ‘‘stencil’’
to pattern devices so that the dopants  will  only enter the wafer where needed.  The dopants change the
electrical properties of the silicon wafer  to  create the  active components of  a chip, called the
transistors. Typical process flows require  twenty  implant steps, with the most  advanced processes
requiring thirty or more. Each implant  step is characterized by  four key parameters: dopant type, dose
(amount of dopant), energy (depth into  the silicon) and  tilt (angle  of  wafer  relative to the  ion beam).

In order to cover the wide range of implant steps, three  different types of  implanters have  been

developed, each designed to cover a specific range of applications, primarily  defined by dose and
energy. The three traditional implanter types are referred  to as medium current, high current and  high
energy:

(cid:127) Medium current (mid dose) implanters are the original model of ion implanter, with mid to

low-range energy and dose capability. These implanters are single wafer systems  in which  only
one wafer at a time is slowly moved in front of  the ion beam.

(cid:127) High current (high dose) implanters were the second type  of implanter  to  emerge,  having low

energy capability and high dose range. High  current implanters were initially designed  as ‘‘multi
wafer’’ or ‘‘batch’’ tools for maximum productivity, processing multiple  wafers  at the same time.
To address smaller device geometries and provide high  tilt, single wafer high current  implanters
now dominate the sector.

(cid:127) High energy implanters emerged to address the  need  for  deeper implants with a  high energy

range and low dose. High energy implanters are available in both multi wafer and single wafer
architectures.

Axcelis offers a complete line of high energy, high current and medium current  implanters for all

application requirements.

(cid:127) High Energy Implant. Axcelis is a market leader in high energy ion implanters. Our  single wafer

tool for high energy applications is the Optima  XEx.  The Optima  XEx combines  Axcelis’
production-proven RF Linac high energy, spot beam technology with  a high-speed,
state-of-the-art single wafer end station,  enabling unmatched throughput.  Axcelis’ advanced spot
beam ensures that all points across the  wafer see the same beam  at  the same beam  angle,
resulting in exceptional process control and maximum yield. We  expect  to  maintain  our
leadership in the high energy segment through sales of our multi wafer high  energy systems and
the Optima XEx.

(cid:127) High Current Implant. Our single wafer product for high current applications is  the Optima
HDx. We use the term ‘‘high dose’’ or ‘‘HD’’ in connection with this product because the
Optima HDx fulfills all traditional high current requirements while  extending beyond traditional

3

high current energy and dose ranges.  In  order  to  maximize utilization and flexibility, the
OptimaHDx can process some traditional mid current implants.  In addition,  the Optima  HDx  is
extendable into ultra-low energy applications to satisfy  future process  requirements including
leakage current performance.

(cid:127) Medium Current Implant. In 2012, Axcelis shipped its first Purion M  medium  current ion

implant system. Axcelis has recently not had  a competitive  offering  in this market space.  This
new system will offer industry leading purity, precision and productivity through enhanced single
magnet scanned spot beam architecture at a higher  productivity (500 wafer per hour throughput)
and lower cost of ownership than competitive offerings, in addition to other advantages.

We  believe our ion implant products will  continue to meet customer demand  for advantages in

productivity, simplicity, process performance and technical extendibility.

Dry Strip

In the process steps prior to ion implantation, a  light sensitive, polymer-based liquid  called

photoresist is spread in a uniformly thin film  on the  wafer. Through a process known as
photolithography, the photoresist is developed into a  pattern  like a stencil. Once the  subsequent
implant processes and etch steps (in  which the top layer of the surface  of  the wafer  not  covered by
photoresist is removed) are completed, the photoresist is no longer necessary  and must be removed.
The primary means of removing photoresist and residue is a process called  ‘‘dry  strip’’  or ‘‘ashing.’’ Our
dry strip machines, also called ‘‘ashers,’’  use microwave  and radio  frequency energy to turn process
gases into plasma,  which then acts to  ‘‘clean’’ the  surface  of  the  wafer  by removing the  photoresist and
unwanted residue.

Axcelis has offered a full line of dry  strip tools that  cover the entire range of customer

applications. In December 2012, Lam  purchased  the intellectual property rights  relating to our dry strip
systems business. As a result of this transaction, we will cease the sale of  300  mm dry strip wafer
processing equipment in September 2013. We will be able to  continue to sell dry strip systems for
smaller wafers until December 2015 and support our installed base of dry strip systems indefinitely.

Aftermarket Support and Services

We  offer our customers extensive aftermarket service and support  throughout the  lifecycle  of  the

equipment we manufacture as well as  equipment  we previously  manufactured.  We  believe that
approximately 3,000 of our products are in use in 32 countries worldwide. The service and support  that
we provide include spare parts, equipment upgrades, and maintenance services. We provide varying
levels of sales, service and applications  support out  of  our field offices to  customers located  in
32 countries. Revenue generated through our service and  support business represented  about 61.0%,
46.2% and 51.7% of revenue in 2012, 2011,  and  2010, respectively.

To support our aftermarket business  we have  several hundred staff members,  including sales and

marketing personnel, field service engineers, and spare parts and applications engineers, as well as
employees located at our manufacturing  facilities who  work with  our customers to provide  customer
training and documentation, product, process and applications support. In 2012,  Ulvac Techno, a
Japanese company, began providing aftermarket services and support services for our products  in
Japan.

Most of our customers maintain spare parts inventories  for our  machines.  In  addition to our

web-based spare parts management and  replenishment  tracking  program, we offer a number of
Business-to-Business options to support our customers’ parts  management requirements.  Our Axcelis
Managed Inventory service offering, a parts consignment arrangement, provides the customer with  full
spares support, with Axcelis retaining responsibility  for the complete supply  chain. The expansion of

4

these services provides ease of use alternatives that help us reduce order fulfillment costs and  improve
cycle time, resulting in an expanded customer  base  for this service offering.

Sales and Marketing

We  primarily sell our equipment and services through  our direct sales  force. We conduct sales and

marketing activities from our sales offices  located  in the United  States, Taiwan, South  Korea, China,
Germany, Singapore and Italy.

Since March 2009, SEN Corporation, or ‘‘SEN’’ (our former Japanese  joint venture, which was

divested in 2009), has held a non-exclusive license  to  use certain patented and  unpatented technology
associated with legacy products owned  by  the Company. Axcelis benefits  from a reciprocal  license of
implant technology from SEN. These royalty-free,  perpetual cross  licenses do not restrict our  ability to
sell any of our products in Japan or elsewhere in the  world.

Concurrently with the sale of assets to Lam  Research in  December 2012, the  Company and Lam

entered into a Transition Agreement  pursuant to which Lam  granted us a worldwide, non-exclusive,
non-transferable, royalty free license to use the dry strip intellectual property rights sold by the
Company. The license allows us to make  and  sell dry strip wafer processing equipment  for
semiconductor applications for a limited transition period after the closing and to support our installed
base of dry strip equipment on a perpetual basis.

International revenue, including export sales from our U.S.  manufacturing facilities to foreign

customers, sales by foreign subsidiaries and  branches, accounted for 70.2% of total revenue  in 2012,
72.3% of total revenue in 2011, and 75.8%  in 2010. Substantially all  of  our sales are  denominated in
U.S. dollars. See Note 17 to our Consolidated Financial Statements contained in Item  15 of this
Form 10-K for a breakdown of our revenue and long-lived assets in  the United States,  Europe and
Asia.

Customers

In 2012, the top 20 semiconductor manufacturers  accounted for  approximately 85.6%  of  total

semiconductor industry capital spending,  up from 83.6% in 2011.  These manufacturers are  from the
largest semiconductor manufacturing  regions  in the world: the United  States, Asia Pacific (Taiwan,
South Korea, Singapore, and China),  Japan and Europe. The Company  serves  all  leading
semiconductor manufacturers.

Revenue from our ten largest customers accounted for 70.6%, 68.6%, and 62.7% of  revenue in
2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively. We  expect that sales of  our products to relatively few  customers will
continue to account for a high percentage  of  revenue for the foreseeable future.  In 2012, one customer
accounted for 18.2% of revenue. In 2011, one customer  accounted for  21.2% of revenue.  In 2010, one
customer accounted for 18.6% of revenue.

Our Beverly, Massachusetts Advanced Technology Center houses  a  process  development laboratory
with 12,500 sq. ft. of class 10/100/1000 clean room for product  demonstrations  and process development
and a 34,000 sq. ft. customer training center. The Advanced Technology Center provides infrastructure
and process capabilities that allow customers  to  test their unique process steps  on our systems  under
conditions that substantially replicate the  customers’ production environment.  This facility also  provides
significant capability for our research  and  development efforts.

Research and Development

Our industry continues to experience  rapid technological change, requiring us to frequently
introduce new products and enhancements. Our  ability to remain competitive in this  market  will

5

depend  in part upon our ability to develop new and enhanced systems and to introduce these systems
at competitive prices on a timely and cost  effective basis.

We  devote a significant portion of our personnel and  financial  resources to  research  and
development programs and seek to maintain close relationships with  our  customers to remain
responsive to their product needs. We  have also sought  to reduce  the development cycle for new
products through a collaborative process  whereby  our engineering, manufacturing  and marketing
personnel work closely together with  one another and with our customers at  an earlier stage in the
process. We also use 3D, computer-aided design,  finite  element  analysis and other computer-based
modeling methods to test new designs.

Our expenditures for research and development were $40.4 million, $47.2 million, and
$39.5 million in 2012, 2011, and 2010,  respectively, or  19.9%, 14.8%, and  14.4% of revenue,
respectively. We expect that research  and  development expenditures will continue to represent  a
substantial investment in future years.

Manufacturing

We  manufacture products at our 417,000  sq. ft. ISO 9000:2008, ISO 14001:2004 certified plant in

Beverly, Massachusetts. Our facility employs  best in  class manufacturing techniques  including lean
manufacturing, six sigma controls and  advanced inventory management, purchasing and  quality systems.
Our clean manufacturing process uses  class 1000/10,000 space to facilitate  most of our manufacturing
requirements.

The Company’s core manufacturing competency is built around system  assembly and  test which
remains an in house capability due to  the high degree of expertise and intellectual property associated
with the process and design. Non-core work is  sourced to one  of several global  partners  and includes
items such as power distribution, vacuum systems, wafer handling  and  commodity level  components. We
continuously pursue outsourcing opportunities where the economics are justified,  with a goal of
enabling factory capacity, quality and margin improvement. Our  supply chain  team is  globally focused
and is located in Beverly and Singapore.  Customized and commercially available software solutions
drive our planning, purchasing and inventory tracking process.

Our products are designed to be assembled  and  tested in  a  modular fashion, which  facilitates our

industry-recognized ‘‘ship-from-cell’’ process. Specially developed  test stands,  software and tooling
provide the framework for this accelerated delivery  process. Customers that  choose  ship-from-cell
substantially improve their delivery times  while receiving the same high  level of quality provided by
more traditional longer cycle integration techniques.  Product margins and inventory turns also  improve
as a result of shorter factory cycle times  and increased labor  productivity.

Installation of our equipment is provided by factory and field teams. The process includes placing
and leveling the equipment at its installation site, connecting it  to  sources  of gas, water  and electricity
and recalibrating it to specifications that  had previously been  met  during  factory testing.

Competition

The semiconductor wafer fabrication  equipment  market  is highly  competitive  and is characterized

by a small number of medium to large size  participants.  We have competed in two principal product
markets of the semiconductor wafer  fabrication process: ion implantation and dry strip. In December
2012, we divested our dry strip intellectual property and will cease selling 300 mm  dry  strip  systems in
September 2013. See ‘‘Overview of Our Business.’’ In ion  implantation, we compete against Applied
Materials, Inc., SEN, Nissin Electric Co.,  Ltd. and Advanced Ion Beam Technology,  Inc. Significant
competitive factors in the semiconductor  equipment market include price, cost of ownership,  equipment
performance, customer support, capabilities and breadth of product line.

6

Intellectual Property

We  rely on patent, copyright, trademark and trade secret protection, in  the United States  and in
other countries, as well as contractual restrictions,  to  protect our  proprietary rights in our products and
our  business. As of January 1, 2013, we  had 288  active patents  issued in the United  States and  348
active  patents granted in other countries, as well as 383 patent  applications (44 in the United States
and 339 in other countries) on file with  various patent agencies  worldwide.  Patents  are generally in
effect for up to 20 years from the filing  of the application.

We  intend to file additional patent applications and grow our  intellectual  property  portfolio  as

appropriate. Although patents are important to our business,  we do not believe  that  we are
substantially dependent on any single patent or  any group of patents.

We  have trademarks, both registered and unregistered, that  are  maintained to provide customer

recognition for our products in the marketplace. Trademark registrations generally remain in effect  as
long as the trademarks are in use.

From time to time, we enter into license agreements  with third parties under which we  obtain  or

grant rights to patented or proprietary  technology.  Except  for our license  agreement with SEN and our
license from Lam Research (described  above  under ‘‘Sales and  Marketing’’), we do not believe that any
of our licenses are currently material  to  us.

We  can give no assurance that we, our  licensors,  licensees, customers or suppliers will  not  be
subject to claims of patent infringement or claims  to  invalidate our patents, or  that  any such claims will
not be successful, requiring us to pay substantial damages or remove certain  features from our products
or both.

Backlog

As of December 31, 2012, our systems  backlog (excluding deferred systems revenue) was $11.6
million, as compared to $10.8 million  as of December 31, 2011.  Systems  backlog including  deferred
systems revenue was $18.5 million and $23.1  million  as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
The slight increase in backlog is not  indicative of an improvement in  the semiconductor equipment
market, as we expect the overall trend  of  a market slowdown to continue into 2013. We believe  it is
meaningful to investors to include deferred systems revenue as part of our backlog.  Deferred systems
revenue represents revenue that will  be  recognized  in future periods based on prior shipments. Our
policy is to include in backlog only those  system  orders  for  which we have  accepted purchase orders
and typically are due to ship within six months. Backlog  does not  include  orders received  for our
service business (spare parts, consumables and service contracts) due to the turn rate associated  with
that business. Generally, orders for services or  parts  received during the quarter are performed  or
shipped within the same quarter. All orders are subject to cancellations  or  rescheduling by customers
with limited or no penalties. Due to possible changes  in system delivery schedules, cancellations of
orders, and delays in systems shipments,  our  backlog at any particular  date is  not  necessarily  indicative
of our actual sales for any succeeding period. In addition, our  backlog at  the beginning of a quarter
typically does not include all orders required to achieve our  sales objectives  for that quarter and is  not
a reliable indicator of our future sales.

Employees

As of December 31, 2012, we had 879 employees  and 8  temporary  staff worldwide, of  which 656

work in North America, 171 in Asia  and 60 in Europe. We  consider our relationship  with our
employees to be good. Our employees  are  not  represented by a  labor union and  are not subject to a
collective bargaining agreement. One of  our  European locations has formed a  work council, which  has
certain information and discussion rights  under  applicable  law.

7

Environmental

We  are subject to environmental laws and  regulations  in the  countries in which we operate that

regulate, among other things: air emissions;  water discharges; and the generation, use, storage,
transportation, handling and disposal of  solid and hazardous  wastes produced  by  our  manufacturing,
research and development and sales activities. As with  other companies engaged in  like businesses,  the
nature of our operations exposes us to  the  risk of  environmental liabilities, claims, penalties and orders.
We  believe, however, that our operations  are in substantial compliance with applicable  environmental
laws and regulations and that there are no pending environmental  matters  that  would have a  material
impact on our business. We are ISO-14001 certified  at our  Beverly,  MA facility.

Executive Officers of the Registrant

Mary G. Puma, 55, has been our President and Chief  Executive Officer since January 2002 and

Chairman since 2005. From May 2000  until January 2002, Ms. Puma  was  our President and Chief
Operating Officer, prior to which she served as a Vice President of Axcelis  from February 1999.  In
1998, she became General Manager and Vice President  of the Implant Systems Division  of  Eaton
Corporation, a global diversified industrial manufacturer. In  May 1996,  she joined Eaton as  General
Manager of the Commercial Controls Division. Prior  to  joining  Eaton,  Ms. Puma spent 15 years in
various marketing and general management  positions  for General Electric Company. Ms. Puma  is a
director  of Nordson Corporation, North Shore Medical  Center and  Semiconductor Equipment and
Materials International (SEMI).

Jay  Zager, 63, became our Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer in January 2011.

Prior to joining Axcelis, from 2007 until 2010,  Mr. Zager was Executive Vice  President and Chief
Financial Officer at 3Com Corporation,  a global enterprise networking solutions provider  acquired  by
Hewlett Packard. From February 2005  until June  2007, Mr.  Zager was Executive  Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer at Gerber Scientific, Inc.,  a supplier  of  automated manufacturing  systems. Prior
to joining Gerber,  Mr. Zager was Senior  Vice President and Chief Financial Officer  of Helix
Technology Corp., a semiconductor equipment  manufacturer, from February 2002 to January 2005.

Kevin J. Brewer, 54, has been our Executive Vice President, Global Operations since 2008.
Mr. Brewer held the position of Senior  Vice  President, Manufacturing Operations since May 2005,
prior to which he had been Vice President  of  Manufacturing Operations since October  2002 and
Director of Operations from 1999 to 2002.  Prior to joining Axcelis  in 1999,  Mr.  Brewer was Director of
Operations, Business Jets at Raytheon  Aircraft Company,  a  leading  manufacturer  of  business  and
special mission aircraft owned by Raytheon Company, a  manufacturer of defense,  government and
commercial electronics, as well as aircraft. Prior to that,  Mr. Brewer  held various management  positions
in operations and strategic planning in  Raytheon Company’s Electronic Systems and Missile Systems
groups.

Lynnette C. Fallon, 53, is our Executive Vice President, Human Resources/Legal and General
Counsel, a position she has held since  May 2005.  Prior to that, Ms. Fallon was Senior Vice  President
HR/Legal and General Counsel since 2002,  and  Senior  Vice President  and  General Counsel  since 2001.
Ms. Fallon has also been our corporate Secretary since  2001. Before joining Axcelis, Ms. Fallon was a
partner in the Boston law firm of Palmer & Dodge LLP since 1992, where she was head  of  the
Business Law Department from 1997  to  2001.

William Bintz, 56, has been our Executive Vice President, Product  Development, Engineering  and

Marketing since 2011. Prior to that, he was  our Senior  Vice  President, Marketing since  September
2007, after joining Axcelis in early 2006  as Director  of  Marketing for  curing and  cleaning  products and
shortly thereafter becoming Vice President  of  Product Marketing. Prior  to  joining Axcelis,  from 2002
Mr. Bintz was Product Director for Medium Current and High Energy Ion Implant System at Varian
Semiconductor Equipment Associates,  Inc.  Before that, he was General Manager of the  Materials

8

Delivery Products  Group at MKS Instruments, beginning in 1999, and General Manager of the
Thermal Processing Systems Division  at Eaton Corporation (now  Axcelis) beginning in 1995.

John E. Aldeborgh, 56, has been our Executive Vice President, Customer Operations since February

2013, having joined Axcelis in January  2013 as our  Senior Vice President,  Customer Operations. Prior
to joining Axcelis, Mr. Aldeborgh served  as the Chief Executive  Officer and President, and as  a
Director, of  innoPad, Inc., a privately  held  manufacturer  of  Chemical Mechanical  Planarization pads,
since 2006. Mr. Aldeborgh served in  various marketing and sales position at Varian Semiconductor
Equipment Associates Inc. from 2002  to  2005, including Vice President of Sales and Marketing. Prior
to Varian, Mr. Aldeborgh served as President and  Chief  Operating  Officer  of Ebara  Technologies,  Inc.,
from 1998 to 2002. Mr. Aldeborgh also held various positions, at Genus,  Inc. from 1989 to 1998,
including Executive Vice President and  Chief Operating Officer.

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

Risks Related to Our Business and Industry

Set forth below and elsewhere in this Form 10-K  and  in other documents we file with  the SEC are
risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results  to  differ materially  from the results  contemplated
by the forward-looking statements contained in  this  Form 10-K. We note that factors set forth below,
individually or in the aggregate, may cause our actual  results  to  differ  materially from expected and
historical results. We note these factors for investors as permitted by the Private Securities Litigation
Reform Act of 1995. You should understand that it is not possible to predict  or identify  all  such factors.
Consequently, you should not consider the following to be  a complete discussion  of  all  potential risks
or uncertainties.

If semiconductor manufacturers do not make sufficient capital expenditures, our sales and  profitability will be
harmed.

Almost all of our new orders will depend upon demand from semiconductor  manufacturers  who
build or  expand fabrication facilities. When the  rate  of  construction or  expansion of fabrication  facilities
declines, demand for our systems will  decline, reducing our revenue. Revenue decline also hurts  our
profitability because our established  cost structure and our  continued investments in engineering,
research and development and marketing necessary to develop new products and  to  maintain  extensive
customer service and support capabilities  limit our ability to reduce expenses  in proportion to declining
sales.

If we fail to develop and introduce reliable new or enhanced products and services that meet the  needs  of
semiconductor manufacturers, our results will suffer.

Rapid  technological changes in semiconductor manufacturing processes require  us  to  respond
quickly to changing customer requirements. Our future success will depend in part upon  our  ability  to
develop, manufacture and successfully  introduce  new systems and product  lines with improved
capabilities and to continue to enhance existing products. This will  depend upon a variety of factors,
including new product selection, timely  and efficient  completion of product  design and development
and of manufacturing and assembly processes, product  performance in the field and effective sales and
marketing. In particular:

(cid:127) We must develop competitive technical  specifications of new systems,  or enhancements to our

existing systems, and manufacture and ship these  systems or  enhancements in  volume in  a timely
manner.

9

(cid:127) We will need to accurately predict  the schedule on  which our customers  will be ready to

transition to new products, in order to accurately forecast  demand  for new products  while
managing the transition from older products.

(cid:127) We will need to effectively manage product reliability or quality problems that often exist  with

new systems, in order to avoid reduced orders, higher  manufacturing costs, delays  in acceptance
and payment and additional service and warranty expenses.

(cid:127) Our new products must be accepted in  the marketplace.

(cid:127) Our failure to meet any of these requirements will have a material  adverse effect  on our

operating results and profitability.

We may  be unable to obtain needed additional  capital  to finance our operations.

Our capital requirements may vary widely from  quarter to quarter, depending on, among other

things, capital expenditures, fluctuations in our  operating results,  financing  activities, acquisitions and
investments and inventory and receivables  management. We believe that our  existing cash and  cash
equivalents will be sufficient to satisfy  our anticipated  cash requirements through the end  of 2013 and
beyond, but this, of course, depends on the  accuracy  of our assumptions about  levels of  sales and
expenses. A number of factors, including  those described in  these  ‘‘Risk Factors,’’ could prove our
assumptions wrong and cause us to require additional  capital  from  external sources. Depending on
market conditions, future debt or equity  financings may not  be  possible on attractive terms  or at  all. In
addition, future debt or equity financings  could be dilutive  to  the existing holders  of our  common stock.

Our financial results may fluctuate significantly.

We  derive our systems revenue from the sale of a  relatively small number  of  expensive products to
a small  number of customers. The list prices on  these  products range from  $0.2 million to $5.0 million.
At our current sales level, each sale,  or  failure to make a sale,  has a material effect on us in a
particular quarter. In a given quarter, a number of factors can adversely  affect our revenue  and results,
including changes in our product mix,  increased fixed expenses per unit due to reductions in  the
number of products manufactured, and  higher fixed costs due to increased  levels of  research  and
development and expansion of our worldwide sales and marketing organization. Our financial results
also fluctuate based on gross profit realized on sales. A variety of factors  may cause  gross profit as a
percentage of revenue to vary, including the  mix and average  selling prices  of  products sold,  costs to
manufacture and customize systems and  warranty  costs. New product  introductions may also  affect our
gross  margins. Fluctuations in our financial results may have an  adverse effect on the  price of our
common stock.

Our financial results may fall short of anticipated levels; forecasting revenue and profitability is  complex  and
may be inaccurate.

Management may from time to time  provide  financial  forecasts. These forecasts are  based on
assumptions, believed to be reasonable when  made, of  fab  utilization,  shipment timing and system
acceptance timing. Any of these assumptions can prove  erroneous and the level of revenue  recognizable
in a particular quarter may vary from  the forecast. Our lengthy  sales  cycle,  coupled  with customers’
competing capital budget considerations,  make the timing of customer orders uneven and difficult to
predict. In addition, our backlog at the  beginning  of  a quarter  typically does  not  include all orders
required to achieve our sales objectives for that quarter and is  not  a reliable indicator of our future
sales. As a result, our revenue and operating results for  a quarter  depend on our shipping orders as
scheduled during that quarter, receiving  customer acceptance of previously shipped products, and
obtaining new orders for products to  be  shipped  in that same quarter. Any delay in, or cancellation of,

10

scheduled shipments and customer acceptances  or in shipments from new orders could materially and
adversely affect our financial results.

Accounting rules addressing revenue  recognition have  added additional  complexity in  forecasting
quarterly revenue  and profitability. Orders for our products usually contain multiple delivery elements
that result in revenue deferral under generally accepted accounting principles. Due to the foregoing
factors, investors should understand that  our actual financial results  for  a quarter may vary significantly
from our forecasts of financial performance  for  that quarter. Failure to meet forecasted financial
performance may have an adverse effect  on  the price of  our common stock.

The semiconductor industry is highly cyclical and we  expect that demand for  our  products will regularly
increase and decrease, making it difficult to manage the business  and potentially causing harm  to our sales
and profitability.

The semiconductor business is highly cyclical, experiencing upturns when the demand for our
products is high and downturns when our customers  are not  investing in new or  expanded  fabrication
facilities. From time to time, inventory  buildups in  the semiconductor industry, resulting  in part from
periodic downturns, produce an oversupply of semiconductors. This will cause semiconductor
manufacturers to revise capital spending  plans, resulting in reduced demand for capital equipment such
as our products. If an oversupply is not  reduced by  increasing demand from  the various industries  that
use semiconductors, which we cannot  accurately  predict, our  sales and profitability will be harmed.  Our
revenue can vary significantly from one  point  in the cycle to another, making it difficult to manage the
business, both when revenue is increasing and when  it is  decreasing. In addition, a substantial portion
of our operating expenses do not fluctuate with changes in volume. Significant decreases in  revenue can
therefore have a disproportionate effect  on profitability.

If we fail to compete successfully in the  highly  competitive semiconductor  equipment industry,  our sales and
profitability will decline.

The market for semiconductor manufacturing equipment is highly  competitive and includes
companies with substantially greater financial, engineering, manufacturing, marketing and customer
service and support resources than we have that may  be  better positioned to compete successfully in
the industry. In addition, there are smaller, emerging  semiconductor equipment companies  that  provide
innovative systems with technology that may have performance advantages over  our  systems. We expect
our  competitors to continue to improve  the  design and  performance of their existing  products and
processes and to introduce new products and processes with  improved price  and performance
characteristics. If we are unable to improve  or introduce competing  products when demanded by the
markets, our business will be harmed.  In  addition, if competitors enter into strategic relationships with
leading semiconductor manufacturers  covering products  similar to those sold or being developed by us,
our  ability to sell products to those manufacturers  may  be adversely  affected. Finally, if we must lower
prices to remain competitive without commensurate cost  of  goods savings, our  gross margins  and
profitability will be adversely affected.

We have  been dependent on sales to a limited number of large customers; the loss  of any  of  these customers or
any reduction in orders from them could  materially affect our sales.

Historically, we have sold a significant portion of our products and services to a  limited number of

fabricators of semiconductor products. For  example, in 2012, our top  ten customers  accounted for
70.6% of our net sales. None of our  customers has entered into a long-term agreement requiring it  to
purchase our products. Although the composition of the group comprising our largest customers has
varied from year to year, the loss of a significant customer or  any  reduction or delays in orders from
any significant customer could adversely affect us. The  ongoing consolidation of semiconductor
manufacturers may also increase the  harmful effect of losing  one or more significant customers.

11

Axcelis is  subject to the risks of operating internationally and we derive a substantial  portion of our  revenue
from  outside the United States, especially from Asia.

We  are substantially dependent on sales of our products and services to customers outside the

United States. International sales, including export sales  from  our U.S. manufacturing facilities to
non-U.S.  customers and sales by our  non-U.S. subsidiaries  and branches,  accounted for 70.2% of  total
revenue in 2012 in comparison to 72.3% in 2011 and 75.8% in 2010.  System shipments to Asian
customers represented 71.3% of total shipment dollars  in 2012 in comparison to 60% in 2011 and 68%
in 2010. We anticipate that international sales will continue to account for a significant portion of  our
revenue. Because of our dependence upon international  sales, our results and prospects may be
adversely affected by a number of factors, including:

(cid:127) unexpected changes in laws or regulations resulting  in more burdensome governmental controls,

tariffs,  restrictions, embargoes or export  license requirements;

(cid:127) difficulties in obtaining required export licenses;

(cid:127) volatility in currency exchange rates;

(cid:127) political and economic instability;

(cid:127) difficulties in accounts receivable collections;

(cid:127) extended payment terms beyond those customarily  offered in the  United States;

(cid:127) difficulties in managing suppliers, service providers or  representatives outside the  United States;

(cid:127) difficulties in staffing and managing  foreign subsidiary and branch  operations; and

(cid:127) potentially adverse tax consequences.

We may  not be able to maintain and expand our  business if  we  are  not  able to hire,  retain and  integrate
qualified personnel.

Our business depends on our ability to attract  and  retain qualified, experienced  employees. There

is substantial competition for experienced engineering, technical, financial, sales and marketing
personnel in our industry. In particular, we must attract and retain  highly skilled design and  process
engineers. Competition for such personnel  is intense, particularly in the  Boston metropolitan area,  as
well as in other locations around the  world. If  we are  unable to retain  our  existing key personnel, or
attract and retain additional qualified personnel,  we may  from  time to time experience levels  of  staffing
inadequate to develop, manufacture  and market our products and perform  services for  our customers.
As a result, our growth could be limited or we could fail  to meet our delivery  commitments or
experience deterioration in service levels or decreased customer satisfaction, all of  which could
adversely affect our financial results.

Our dependence upon a limited number  of  suppliers for many components and sub-assemblies  could result in
increased costs or delays in the manufacture and sale of our products.

We  rely to a substantial extent on outside vendors to manufacture many of the  components and
sub-assemblies of our products. We obtain many of these components and sub-assemblies from either a
sole source or a limited group of suppliers.  Accordingly, we  may be unable to obtain an adequate
supply of  required components on a  timely  basis, on  price and  other terms acceptable to us, or at all.

In addition, we often quote prices to our customers and  accept customer orders for our products

before purchasing components and sub-assemblies from our suppliers.  If our suppliers increase the cost
of components or sub-assemblies, we  may not have  alternative sources of supply and  may not be able

12

to raise the price of our products to  cover all or part of the increased cost  of  components, negatively
impacting our gross margins.

The manufacture of some of these components and sub-assemblies is an extremely complex

process and requires long lead times.  As  a result, we  have in the past, and may in  the future,
experience delays or shortages. If we  are  unable  to  obtain  adequate  and timely  deliveries of our
required components or sub-assemblies, we  may  have to seek  alternative sources of supply or
manufacture these components internally.  This could delay  our ability to manufacture  or to ship our
systems on a timely basis, causing us to  lose  sales,  incur additional costs, delay new  product
introductions and suffer harm to our reputation.

Our international operations involve currency risk.

Substantially all of our sales are billed in U.S. dollars, thereby reducing the impact of  fluctuations

in foreign exchange rates on our results. Operating margins  of  our foreign operations can fluctuate with
changes in foreign exchange rates to  the extent  revenues are  billed  in U.S.  dollars and operating
expenses are incurred in the local functional currency.  During the  year ended December  31, 2012,
approximately 29.0% of our revenue was derived from foreign operations with  this inherent risk.  In
addition, at December 31, 2012, our operations outside of the  United States accounted for
approximately 42.4% of our total assets,  the majority  of which was denominated  in currencies other
than the U.S. dollar.

We may  incur additional expenses in connection with developing processes to comply with the  SEC’s new
Conflict Minerals Rule; failure to comply would  have negative consequences.

As with all public companies, Axcelis will  need to develop  processes  to  comply with Rule  13p-1

issued by the Securities and Exchange  Commission under  the U.S. Securities and Exchange Act
regarding reporting obligations for the  use of tin, tantalum,  tungsten and gold that could have
originated in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and adjoining countries. In light of the complexity
of the new rule, Axcelis has begun considering  how our purchasing and legal functions will  need  to
adapt to the new reporting and disclosure requirements.  We will  likely incur  additional expense in
connection with our preparation of our  first Form SD covering  the 2013 calendar year for filing  with
the Commission by May 31, 2014. If we do  not  comply with this new regulatory requirement, or
requirements imposed by our customers  as  a result of  the new rule, our business and  stock price may
be affected.

We are subject to cyber security risks, which could adversely affect our  business.

We  and certain of our third-party vendors receive and store personal information in  connection
with our human resources operations and other aspects of our  business.  Despite our implementation of
security measures, our IT systems are vulnerable to damages from computer viruses, natural disasters,
unauthorized access, cyber-attack and other similar disruptions. Any system  failure, accident or  security
breach could result in disruptions to  our  operations. A material network breach in the  security of our
IT systems could include the theft of  our  intellectual property or trade  secrets. To the extent that any
disruptions or security breach results in  a  loss or damage to  our data,  or in inappropriate disclosure of
confidential information, it could cause significant damage to our reputation,  affect our relationships
with our customers, lead to claims against us and ultimately  harm our business. In addition,  we may be
required to incur significant costs to protect  against  damage caused by  these disruptions or  security
breaches in the future.

13

Our stock price has been volatile and you could  lose the  value of your investment.

Our stock price has been volatile and  has fluctuated significantly to date.  The trading price  of  our
stock is likely to continue to be highly volatile  and  subject to  wide fluctuations. Your investment  in our
stock could lose value. Some of the factors that could significantly  affect  the market  price of our stock
include:

(cid:127) actual or anticipated variations in results;

(cid:127) analyst  reports or recommendations;

(cid:127) changes in interest rates; and

(cid:127) other events and factors, many of which are  beyond our control.

The stock market in general has experienced  extreme price  fluctuations.

Our proprietary technology may be vulnerable to  efforts  by competitors to challenge or design  around,
potentially reducing our market share.

We  rely on a combination of patents, copyrights, trademark and trade  secret laws, non-disclosure
agreements and other intellectual property protection methods to protect our proprietary technology.
Despite our efforts to protect our intellectual property, our competitors may be able to legitimately
ascertain the non-patented proprietary technology  embedded in our  systems. If this occurs, we may  not
be able to prevent their use of this technology.  Our means of protecting  our  proprietary rights may not
be adequate and our patents may not  be  sufficiently  broad to prevent others  from using technology that
is similar to or the same as our technology. In addition,  patents issued to us have  been, or might  be
challenged, and might be invalidated or  circumvented and  any rights granted under  our patents  may
not provide adequate protection to us. Our  competitors  may  independently develop similar technology,
duplicate features  of our products or  design around  patents that may be issued  to  us. As a  result of
these threats to our proprietary technology,  we may have to resort to costly litigation to enforce or
defend  our intellectual property rights.  Finally, all patents expire after  a  period  of  time (in the  U.S.,
patents expire 20 years from the date  of  filing  of  the patent  application). Our market share could be
negatively impacted by the expiration  of  a patent which  had created a barrier for our competitors.

Axcelis also has agreements with third parties  for licensing of patented or proprietary  technology
with Axcelis as the licensor or the licensee.  Termination  of  license agreements  could  have an adverse
impact on our financial performance or  ability to ship  products  with existing configurations.

We (or customers that we indemnify) might face  intellectual  property infringement claims or patent disputes
that may be costly to resolve and, if resolved against us, could be very costly to  us and prevent  us from
making and selling our systems.

From time to time, claims and proceedings have been  or may  be  asserted  against us relative to
patent validity or infringement matters.  We  typically agree to  indemnify our customers from liability to
third parties for intellectual property  infringement  arising  from the use  of  our products in  their
intended manner. Therefore, we occasionally  receive notification from  customers who  believe that we
owe them indemnification or other obligations related to infringement claims made  against the
customers by third parties. Our involvement in any patent dispute or other intellectual property dispute
or action to  protect trade secrets, even if the  claims  are without  merit, could be very expensive  to
defend  and could divert the attention  of our management. Adverse  determinations  in any litigation
could subject us to significant liabilities to third parties,  require us  to  seek  costly  licenses from  third
parties and prevent us from manufacturing and selling  our systems. In addition, infringement
indemnification clauses in system sale agreements may require us to take other actions  or require us to

14

provide certain remedies to customers  who are exposed to indemnified liabilities.  Any  of  these
situations could have a material adverse effect on our  business results.

If operations were disrupted at Axcelis’ primary manufacturing facility  it would  have  a negative impact on our
business.

We  have one primary manufacturing  facility, located in Massachusetts. Its operations could be

subject to disruption for a variety of reasons, including, but not limited to natural  disasters, work
stoppages, operational facility constraints  and  terrorism.  Such disruption could cause delays in
shipments of products to our customers  and could result in cancellation of orders or  loss of  customers,
which  could seriously harm our business.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.

None.

Item 2. Properties.

We  own one property and lease 39 properties, of which 15  are located in  the United  States  and
the remainder are located in Asia and  Europe, including offices in  Taiwan, Singapore, South Korea,
China, Malaysia, Italy, and Germany.

We  own our principal facility in Beverly, Massachusetts, which comprises  417,000  square feet. The

facility is principally used for manufacturing, research and development,  sales/marketing, customer
support, advanced process development, product  demonstration, customer-training center and  corporate
headquarters.

Although we are currently operating significantly  below normal capacity as a result of the

continuing downturn in the industry, we believe that there  is no material long-term, excess capacity  in
our  manufacturing facilities, although utilization is subject  to change  based on  customer demand.  We
believe that our manufacturing facilities  and equipment generally are well maintained, in good
operating condition, suitable for our  purposes, and  adequate  for our  present  operations.  Our Beverly,
Massachusetts facility is Massachusetts  facility is  ISO 9001:2008 and ISO  14001:2004 and our  European
office is ISO 9001:2008 certified.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings.

The Company is not presently a party to any litigation that it  believes  might have a  material
adverse effect on its business operations.  The Company is, from time to time, a party  to  litigation  that
arises in  the normal course of its business operations.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures.

Not applicable.

15

PART II

Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related  Stockholder Matters  and Issuer Purchases

of Equity Securities.

Our common stock trades on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol ACLS.  The
following table sets forth the high and  low sale  prices as reported on the Nasdaq Global Select Market
during each of the quarters for the two  most  recent years. As of  February 25,  2013, we  had
approximately 5,000 stockholders of record. We have never paid  any cash dividends to our shareholders
and do not anticipate paying cash dividends in  the future  and  in any event, we would be restricted from
doing so by the terms of our bank credit agreement.

Common Stock Price

High

Low

2011
First Quarter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Second Quarter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Third Quarter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Fourth Quarter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2012
First Quarter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Second Quarter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Third Quarter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Fourth Quarter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$3.77
$2.69
$1.94
$1.55

$1.88
$1.76
$1.20
$1.40

$2.20
$1.48
$1.14
$1.00

$1.36
$1.00
$0.78
$0.84

16

Item 6. Selected Financial Data.

The following selected consolidated statements of operations  data for each of the three years
ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and  2010 and the  consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31,
2012 and 2011 have been derived from  the  audited consolidated  financial statements contained in
Item 15 of Part IV of this Form 10-K.  The  selected  consolidated balance sheet data as of  December 31,
2010 and 2009, and the statement of operations  data for  the years ended  December 31, 2009 and 2008,
have been derived from the audited  financial statements contained in our Form  10-K filed  on
March 14, 2011. The consolidated balance sheet data as  of December 31,  2008 has been derived from
the audited financial statements contained  in our Form 10-K filed  on March  31, 2009.

The historical financial information set forth below may not  be  indicative of our future

performance and should be read together with ‘‘Management’s Discussion  and Analysis of  Financial
Condition and Results of Operations’’ and  our  historical consolidated financial statements and notes  to
those statements included in Item 7  of  Part  II and Item 15  of  Part IV, respectively,  of this  Form 10-K.

Consolidated statements of operations data:
Revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Gross profit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Equity loss of SEN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Income (loss) from operations . . . . . . . . . . . .
Income (loss) before income taxes . . . . . . . . .
Net income (loss) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net income (loss) per share:
Basic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Diluted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Shares used in computing basic and diluted

per  share amounts:

Years ended December 31,

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

(In thousands, except per share amounts)

$203,385
58,171
—
(30,938)
(32,388)
(34,034)

$319,416
114,737
—
7,132
7,471
5,077

$275,212
85,838
—
(13,367)
(17,261)
(17,573)

$133,022
28,064
(3,238)
(69,434)
(76,603)
(77,468)

$ 250,214
62,615
(3,667)
(186,837)
(195,803)
(196,664)

$
$

(0.32) $
(0.32) $

0.05
0.05

$
$

(0.17) $
(0.17) $

(0.75) $
(0.75) $

(1.91)
(1.91)

Basic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Diluted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

107,619
107,619

106,234
109,098

104,522
104,522

103,586
103,586

102,739
102,739

Consolidated balance sheet data:
Cash and cash equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Working capital
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Long-term liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 44,986
145,443
222,158
6,300
186,076

$ 46,877
164,561
269,245
7,218
214,555

$ 45,743
160,501
280,872
7,176
205,567

$ 45,020
163,849
250,603
4,447
216,399

$ 37,694
111,182
455,181
5,808
319,377

17

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and  Analysis of Financial  Condition and  Results  of Operations.

Certain statements in ‘‘Management’s Discussion and Analysis  of Financial Condition  and Results
of Operations’’ are forward-looking statements that involve risks  and uncertainties. Words  such as  may,
will, should, would, anticipates, expects, intends, plans, believes, seeks, estimates  and similar  expressions
identify such forward-looking statements.  The forward-looking statements contained  herein  are based
on current expectations and entail various risks and  uncertainties that could cause actual results to
differ  materially from those expressed  in  such forward-looking statements. Factors  that  might cause
such a difference include, among other things,  those set  forth under ‘‘Liquidity and Capital Resources’’
and ‘‘Risk Factors’’ and others discussed  elsewhere in this Form 10-K. Readers are cautioned  not  to
place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which  reflect management’s analysis only as
of the date hereof. We assume no obligation to update  these  forward-looking statements  to  reflect
actual results or changes in factors or assumptions  affecting forward-looking statements,  except as  may
be required by law.

Overview

The semiconductor capital equipment industry  is subject  to significant  cyclical swings  in capital

spending by semiconductor manufacturers. Capital spending is influenced  by  demand for
semiconductors and the products using them, the utilization rate and capacity of existing  semiconductor
manufacturing facilities and changes  in semiconductor technology, all of  which are outside of our
control. As a result, our revenue and gross  margins fluctuate from  year to  year and period to period.
We  typically become more efficient in  manufacturing products as  they  mature. Our established cost
structure does not  vary significantly with  changes  in volume, which  limits our  ability to reduce costs in
proportion to declining sales. Therefore, we  experience  fluctuations in operating results and cash  flows
depending on our revenue as driven  by the level of capital expenditures by  semiconductor
manufacturers.

In December 2012, we sold to Lam Research Corporation the intellectual property rights and

other assets relating to our dry strip systems  product line. The  purchased intellectual property rights
include, among other things, worldwide  patent  rights, patent  applications, copyrights, industrial designs,
know-how and related rights used by us  in our dry strip products.  As a result of this transaction, Lam
granted us a worldwide, non-exclusive, non-transferable,  royalty free license to use the  intellectual
property rights sold by us. The license allows us to make and  sell 300 mm  dry  strip  wafer processing
equipment for semiconductor applications through  September 2013. We  will  continue to sell dry strip
systems for smaller wafers until December 2015 and support  our installed base of dry strip systems
indefinitely. As a result of this continuing interest  in the dry strip  business,  the sale  of the intellectual
property rights and other assets to Lam  have  been reported in continuing operations.

The sizable expense of building, upgrading  or expanding a semiconductor fabrication facility  is

increasingly causing semiconductor companies to contract with foundries to  manufacture their
semiconductors. In addition, consolidation and partnering within the semiconductor manufacturing
industry is increasing. We expect these trends to continue to reduce the  number of  our potential
customers. This growing concentration of Axcelis’ customers may increase pricing pressure as higher
percentages of our total revenue are tied  to the buying decisions of  a particular customer or a small
number of customers. Our net revenue  from our ten largest  customers accounted for 70.6%  of  total
revenue for the year ended December  31, 2012  compared  to,  68.6%, and 62.7% of revenue for  the
years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

Weak industry conditions that began in mid-2011 continued through  2012. This resulted in  a
decline  in our 2012 revenues as compared  with 2011,  with ongoing  weak sales of ion  implant and dry
strip systems in addition to lower aftermarket revenues, which were negatively impacted by low fab
utilization rates and customers holding  back  on spending for  consumables, spare parts and upgrades.

18

During  this period of market uncertainty, we continued to align our  organization with market  demands.
In addition to tight control of discretionary  spending,  we also  implemented other actions including
headcount reductions and three weeks of unpaid shutdowns. Our 2012 results also reflect efforts in
recent years to lower our breakeven  revenue levels to avoid  significant  losses in a  downturn, while
continuing to invest a significant portion  of our personnel  and  financial resources in  research  and
development programs. Although future  market  conditions  are  difficult to predict, we anticipate the
industry will continue to experience similar conditions into 2013.

In the event that industry conditions  cause the demand for our  products to decline in future
periods, we believe that we can align  manufacturing  and operating expense levels to changing business
conditions and provide sufficient liquidity to support operations.

Operating results for the years presented are not  necessarily indicative of the results  that  may be

expected for future interim periods or years as a  whole.

Critical Accounting Estimates

Management’s discussion and analysis of our financial  condition and results  of  operations  are
based upon Axcelis’ consolidated financial  statements,  which have been  prepared  in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted  in the United States. The  preparation of these financial
statements requires management to make estimates  and  judgments that  affect the  reported amounts of
assets, liabilities, revenue and expenses,  and  related disclosure of contingent assets and  liabilities. On an
on-going basis, we evaluate our estimates and assumptions. Management’s estimates are  based on
historical experience and on various  other assumptions that are believed  to be reasonable under  the
circumstances, the results of which form the  basis for making judgments  about  the carrying values of
assets and liabilities that are not readily  apparent from other sources. Actual results may  differ  from
these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.

We  believe the following accounting policies are critical in the portrayal of our financial condition

and results of operations and require management’s most  significant judgments and  estimates in  the
preparation of our consolidated financial statements. For additional accounting  policies  see Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements Note  2. Summary  of  Significant Accounting Policies.

Revenue Recognition

Our revenue recognition policy involves  significant judgment by  management. As  described below,

we consider a broad array of facts and circumstances  in determining when  to  recognize revenue,
including contractual future service obligations to the customer, the complexity of the  customer’s
post-delivery acceptance provisions, payment history, customer creditworthiness and  the installation
process. In the future, if the post-delivery acceptance  provisions and installation  process become more
complex or result in a materially lower rate  of acceptance,  we  may  have to revise  our revenue
recognition policy, which could delay the  timing of revenue recognition.

Our system sales transactions are made up of multiple  elements,  including  the system itself and

elements that are not delivered simultaneously  with the  system. These undelivered  elements might
include a combination of installation services, extended  warranty  and support and spare parts, all of
which  are generally covered by a single sales price. In January 2011, we adopted the accounting
standards update for multiple deliverable  revenue  arrangements, as required, using the prospective
method. Accordingly, this guidance is  being  applied  to  all system  revenue arrangements  entered into or
materially modified on or after January 1,  2011. The adoption of the amended guidance did not change
the accounting for arrangements entered  into  prior to January  1, 2011. There was no  material  impact
on our financial position, results of operations or  cash flows  upon  adoption.

19

The impact of adopting this amended guidance on our  results of operations has been limited to
transactions involving the sale of systems. The update amended the previous guidance for multiple-
element arrangements. Pursuant to the amended  guidance, our system revenue arrangements  with
multiple elements are divided into separate units of accounting if  specified criteria are met, including
whether the delivered element has stand-alone value to the  customer.  If the criteria are met, then the
consideration received is allocated among the separate units  based on their relative selling price,  and
the revenue is recognized separately for each  of  the separate  units.

We  determine selling price for each unit of accounting (element)  using vendor  specific objective

evidence (‘‘VSOE’’) or third-party evidence (‘‘TPE’’), if they exist, otherwise, we  use best estimated
selling price (‘‘BESP’’). The Company  generally expects that it  will not be able to establish TPE due to
the nature of its products, and, as such, the  Company typically will  determine selling price  using  VSOE
or BESP.

Where required, the Company determines  BESP for an individual element based on consideration

of both market and Company-specific  factors, including the selling  price and  profit margin  for similar
products, the cost to produce the deliverable and  the anticipated  margin on that deliverable  and the
characteristics of the varying markets in which the deliverable is sold.

The total consideration to be received  in the transaction is allocated  to  each element in the

arrangement based upon the relative  selling price of each element when compared  to  the consideration
received.

Systems are not sold separately and VSOE  or TPE is  not available for the  systems element.

Therefore the selling price associated  with systems is  based on BESP. The allocated value for
installation in the arrangement includes (a) the  greater of (i) the relative  selling price of the  installation
or (ii) the portion or the sales price that will not be received until  the installation is completed (the
‘‘retention’’). The selling price of installation  is based upon  the fair value of the  service  performed,
including labor, which is based upon  the  estimated  time to complete  the installation at hourly rates,
and material components, both of which  are  sold  separately. The selling price  of  all  other elements
(extended warranty for support, spare parts, and labor) is based upon the price  charged when  these
elements are sold separately, or VSOE.

Product revenue for products which have  demonstrated market acceptance,  is generally recognized

upon shipment provided title and risk of loss  has passed to the customer,  evidence of an arrangement
exists, prices are contractually fixed or determinable, collection is  reasonably  assured through  historical
collection results and regular credit evaluations, and there are  no  uncertainties regarding customer
acceptance. Revenue from installation  services is recognized  at  the time formal  acceptance  is received
from the customer or, for certain customers,  when both  the formal acceptance  and retention payment
have been received. Revenue for other elements is  recognized at  the time  products are  shipped or the
related services are performed.

We  generally recognize product revenue for systems  which have demonstrated market acceptance

at the time of shipment because the  customer’s post-delivery  acceptance provisions  and installation
process have been established to be routine, commercially inconsequential and  perfunctory. While some
customers accept Axcelis’ standard specifications, the  majority of Axcelis’ systems are designed and
tailored to meet the customer’s specifications, as  outlined in the contract between the  customer and
Axcelis. To ensure that the customer’s specifications are  satisfied,  many customers  request  that  new
systems be tested at Axcelis’ facilities prior to shipment, normally with the customer present, under
conditions that substantially replicate the  customer’s production environment  and the  customer’s
criteria are confirmed to have been met. We believe  the risk of failure to complete a  system installation
is remote. Should an installation not  be  completed  successfully, the contractual provisions do not
provide for forfeiture, refund or other  purchase price concession beyond  those prescribed by the
provisions of the Uniform Commercial Code applicable generally to such transactions.

20

For initial shipments of systems with new technologies  or in the small number  of  instances where

we are unsure of meeting the customer’s  specifications or obtaining customer  acceptance upon
shipment of the system, we will defer the recognition of systems revenue and  related costs until written
customer acceptance of the system is obtained. This deferral period  is generally within twelve months
of shipment.

Revenue related to maintenance and service contracts  is recognized ratably over  the duration of

the contracts, or based on parts usage,  where appropriate. Revenue related to service hours is
recognized when the services are performed.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

We  record impairment losses on long-lived  assets when events and circumstances indicate that

these assets might  not be recoverable. Recoverability  is measured by a comparison of  the assets’
carrying  amount to their expected future  undiscounted net cash  flows. If such  assets are considered to
be impaired, the impairment is measured  based on  the amount by  which the carrying  value exceeds its
fair value.

Future actual performance could be  materially different from our current forecasts, which could
impact future estimates of undiscounted cash  flows and may result  in the impairment of  the carrying
amount of the long-lived assets in the future. This could be caused by  strategic decisions made in
response to economic and competitive  conditions, the impact of the economic environment on our
customer base, or a material adverse  change in our relationships with significant  customers.

We  completed a test for recoverability due  to  indicators present  at December 31, 2012; specifically

the carrying value of our net assets exceeded our current market capitalization. As of  December 31,
2012, the undiscounted cash flows used  in the analysis significantly exceeded the  carrying value of our
assets. As a result no impairment was  recorded. The undiscounted cash flows  used in the analysis were
derived from our long-term strategic plan.

We  did  not record an impairment charge  for  the years ended  December  31, 2011, or 2010.

Accounts  Receivable—Allowance for Doubtful  Accounts

We  record an allowance for doubtful accounts  for estimated  losses resulting  from the inability of
our  customers to make required payments. Our allowance for doubtful  accounts is  established based on
a specific assessment of collectability  of  our customer accounts. If  the financial condition of our
customers were to deteriorate, resulting in an  impairment of their ability to make  payments, additional
allowances may be necessary.

Inventory—Allowance for Excess and Obsolescence

We  record an allowance for estimated excess and obsolete inventory.  The allowance  is determined

using management’s assumptions of materials usage,  based on estimates  of forecasted and  historical
demand and market conditions. If actual  market conditions  become less favorable than those projected
by management, additional inventory write-downs  may  be  required.

Although we make every effort to ensure  the accuracy of our  forecasts or product  demand and

pricing assumptions, any significant unanticipated changes in demand,  pricing, or  technical
developments would significantly impact the value of our inventory and our  reported operating results.
In the future, if we find that estimates  are too  optimistic and determine that inventory needs to be
written down, the Company will recognize such  costs in our  cost of revenue at the time of such
determination. Conversely, if we find our  estimates  are too pessimistic and we subsequently  sell product
that has previously been written down, our gross margin in  that period will be favorably impacted.

21

In 2012, we recorded a $14.5 million increase to our inventory reserves.  During the fourth quarter,
as a result of industry consensus indicating  that  the semiconductor industry downturn will  continue into
2013, along with our internal projections,  we performed a comprehensive  review and  analysis of our
worldwide inventory levels based on historic and projected inventory requirements  for all of  our
products, components and parts. As  a  result, we  recorded a $13.4 million increase to inventory reserves
in the fourth quarter of 2012.

Product Warranty

We  generally offer a one year warranty for all of our systems, the terms and  conditions of which

vary depending upon the product sold.  For  all systems sold, we accrue a liability for the estimated cost
of standard warranty at the time of system shipment and defer  the portion of systems revenue
attributable to the fair value of non-standard  warranty. Costs for  non-standard warranty are  expensed
as incurred. Factors that affect our warranty liability include  the number of installed  units, historical
and anticipated product failure rates, material  usage and service  labor costs. We periodically assess the
adequacy of our recorded liability and  adjust the  amount  as  necessary.

Share-Based  Compensation

Stock-based compensation expense is  estimated  as of the grant date based on the fair  value of the
award and is recognized as expense over the requisite service  period, which generally equals the  vesting
period, based on the number of awards that  are expected to vest. Estimating  the fair value for stock
options requires judgment, including the  expected  term of our  stock options,  volatility  of our  stock,
expected dividends, risk-free interest  rates over the expected term of the options and  the expected
forfeiture rate.

We  use the straight-line attribution method to recognize expense for stock-based awards such  that

the expense associated with awards is  evenly  recognized  throughout  the period.

We  are responsible for estimating volatility and  have considered a number of factors when

estimating volatility. Our method of  estimating expected volatility for  all stock options granted relies on
a combination of historical and implied volatility.  We believe that  this blended volatility results  in a
more accurate estimate of the grant-date fair  value of  employee  stock options because it  more
appropriately reflects the market’s current  expectations of  future volatility.

The amount of stock-based compensation  recognized is based on the  value  of  the portion of the

awards that are ultimately expected to  vest. We estimate  forfeitures  at the time of grant and revise
them, if necessary, in subsequent periods  if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates. The term
‘‘forfeitures’’ is distinct from ‘‘cancellations’’ or ‘‘expirations’’ and represents  only  the unvested portion
of the surrendered stock-based award.

The benefits of tax deductions in excess of recognized  compensation cost is reported  as a financing

cash flow, rather than as an operating cash flow. Because the Company  does not recognize the  benefit
of tax deductions in excess of recognized  compensation cost due to its  cumulative net  operating loss
position, this had no impact on the Company’s consolidated statement of  cash flows as of and for the
years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010.

Income Taxes

We  record income taxes using the asset and  liability  method. Deferred income tax assets and

liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences  attributable  to  differences between the
financial statement carrying amounts of  existing assets and liabilities and their respective income tax
bases, and net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards.

22

Our consolidated financial statements contain certain  deferred tax  assets which have  arisen
primarily as a result of operating losses,  as  well as other temporary differences between financial and
income tax accounting.

We  establish a valuation allowance when  it is  more likely  than not that some portion or all of  the

deferred tax assets will not be realized.  Significant management judgment  is required in determining
our  provision for income taxes, the deferred tax assets and liabilities and any valuation allowance
recorded  against those net deferred tax  assets.

We  evaluate the weight of all available  evidence such as historical losses, projected future taxable

income and the expected timing of the  reversals of existing temporary differences  to  determine  whether
it is more likely than not that some portion or  all of the net deferred income tax  assets will not be
realized.

Based on our level of deferred tax assets  as of December 31, 2012 and our level of  historical U.S.

losses, we have determined that the current uncertainty  regarding  the realization of  these assets is
sufficient to warrant the need for a full  valuation allowance against our U.S. net deferred  tax assets.
We  have also determined that a valuation allowance is required on a portion of our foreign deferred
tax assets.

Our income tax expense includes the  largest  amount  of  tax benefit for  an  uncertain tax position

that is more likely than not to be sustained upon  audit based  on the technical merits  of  the tax
position. Settlements with tax authorities, the  expiration of statutes of limitations  for particular  tax
positions, or obtaining new information  on particular tax positions may cause a  change  to  the effective
tax rate. The Company recognizes accrued interest related to unrecognized  tax benefits as interest
expense and penalties as operating expense.

23

Results of Operations

The following table sets forth our results of operations  as a percentage of total revenue:

Years Ended December 31,

2012

2011

2010

Revenue:

Product . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

85.7%
14.3

90.0%
10.0

88.2%
11.8

Total revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

100.0

100.0

100.0

Cost of revenue:

Product . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total cost of revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Gross profit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Operating expenses:

Research and development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sales and marketing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
General and administrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Gain on sale of dry strip systems assets and  intellectual  property . . . . . .
Restructuring charges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total operating expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Income (loss) from operations: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other income (expense):

Interest income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other, net

Total other income (expense) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

60.8
10.6

71.4

28.6

19.9
12.7
13.1
(3.9)
2.0

43.8

(15.2)

—
(0.7)

(0.7)

Income (loss) before income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(15.9)
0.8

56.8
7.3

64.1

35.9

14.8
9.1
9.8
—
—

33.7

2.2

—
0.1

0.1

2.3
0.7

61.1
7.7

68.8

31.2

14.4
10.0
11.7
—
—

36.1

(4.9)

—
(1.5)

(1.5)

(6.4)
—

Net income (loss) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(16.7)%

1.6%

(6.4)%

Revenue

The following table sets forth our revenues.

Years ended
December 31,

Period-to-Period
Change

Years ended
December  31,

Period-to-Period
Change

2012

2011

$

%

2011

2010

$

%

(dollars in thousands)

Revenues:

Product . . . . . . . . .

$174,309

$287,324

$(113,015)

(39.3)% $287,324

$242,771

$44,553

18.4%

Percentage of

revenues . . . . .
Service . . . . . . . . . .

Percentage of

85.7%

90.0%

90.0%

88.2%

29,076

32,092

(3,016)

(9.4)% 32,092

32,441

(349)

(1.1)%

revenues . . . . .

14.3%

10.0%

10.0%

11.8%

Total revenues . . .

$203,385

$319,416

$(116,031)

(36.3)% $319,416

$275,212

$44,204

16.1%

24

2012 Compared with 2011

Product

Product revenue which includes system sales, sales of spare parts  and product upgrades was
$174.3 million or 85.7% of revenue in 2012, compared with $287.3  million,  or 90.0% or revenue in
2011. The decrease in product revenue  in 2012  is attributable to the continued weak semiconductor
market and a related decrease in capital spending by  semiconductor manufacturers during 2012.
Ongoing  weak sales of our ion implant and dry strip systems combined  with our customers’  suspended
spending for consumables, spare parts and upgrades resulted in  this  decline in product revenue in 2012
compared with 2011.

Approximately 23.4% of systems revenue in 2012  was from  sales of  200mm products and  76.6%

was from sales of 300mm products, compared with  24.9% and 75.1%  for sales of 200mm products  and
300mm products in 2011, respectively.

A portion of our revenue from system  sales  is deferred until installation  and other services  related
to future deliverables are performed. The  total  amount of deferred revenue at  December 31,  2012 and
2011 was $6.9 million and $12.3 million, respectively.  The  decrease  was mainly due to the decrease in
systems sales in 2012 and the timing  of acceptance of deferred system sales.

Service

Service revenue, which includes the labor  component  of maintenance and service contracts  and
fees for service hours provided by on-site service personnel, was $29.1 million, or 14.3% of  revenue for
2012, compared with $32.1 million, or  10.0% of  revenue for  2011. Although  service  revenue should
increase with the expansion of the installed base of systems, it can  fluctuate from  period to period
based on capacity utilization at customers’ manufacturing facilities, which  affects the need for
equipment service. The decrease during  2012 was primarily due to a decrease  in fabrication utilization
in the semiconductor industry during 2012.

2011 Compared with 2010

Revenue increased significantly in 2011  compared to 2010 as  the  Company benefited  from
improving market conditions and increased capacity utilization at customers’ manufacturing facilities
during the first half of 2011. However during the second half  of  2011, deterioration within the industry
environment resulted in a decrease in our  revenues as compared to the first half of the year.

Product

Product revenue was $287.3 million or  90.0% of revenue in 2011, compared with $242.8  million, or
88.2% of revenue in 2010. The increase in product  revenue in 2011 is attributable to the  strengthening
of the semiconductor market and a related increase in capital  spending by semiconductor
manufacturers during the first half of  2011. However, our revenues  decreased during the  second  half of
2011 due to the weakening of the semiconductor market and the  related delay in capital  spending  by
semiconductor manufacturers. In addition, we had delays in key penetrations  in the second half of
2011. These delays were a function of poor market conditions and  issues in our prioritization of new
technology. Despite this market slowdown we  believe we gained market traction with our single wafer
ion implant systems. During 2011, we  also gained  market  share  with our Integra dry strip products.

Approximately 24.9% of systems revenue in 2011  was from  sales of  200mm products and  75.1%

was from sales of 300mm products, compared with  12.8% and 87.2%  for sales of 200mm products  and
300mm products in 2010, respectively.

25

A portion of our revenue from system  sales  is deferred until installation  and other services  related
to future deliverables are performed. The  total  amount of deferred revenue at  December 31,  2011 and
2010 was $12.3 million and $16.3 million, respectively. The decrease  was  mainly due to the decrease  in
systems sales in the second half of 2011  and the  timing of acceptance of deferred  system sales.

Service

Service revenue was $32.1 million, or 10.0% of  revenue for  2011, compared  with $32.4 million, or

11.8% of revenue, for 2010. The slight  decrease during 2011 was primarily due to a decrease  in
fabrication utilization in the semiconductor  industry particularly during the second half of 2011.

Revenue Categories used by Management

As an alternative to the line item revenue  categories  discussed above, management also uses

revenue categorizations which look at revenue by product  line (the most significant of which  is ion
implant) and by aftermarket, as described below.

2012 Compared with 2011

Ion Implant

Included in total revenue of $203.4 million in 2012 is revenue  from  sales  of ion implantation

products and related service of $156.1 million,  or 76.7% of total revenue, compared with $237.9 million,
or 74.5%, of total  revenue in 2011. The dollar decrease  was due  to  the  factors discussed  above for
product  revenue. Annual revenue from the  sale of ion implantation products  and service typically
averages from 70% to 80% of total revenue.

Aftermarket

The Company’s product revenue includes sales of spare parts and product upgrades as  well as
complete systems. We refer to the business of selling spare parts  and product upgrades, combined with
the sale of maintenance labor and service contracts and service hours, as the  ‘‘aftermarket’’ business.
Included in total revenue of $203.4 million in 2012 is revenue  from  our aftermarket  business  of
$124.1 million, compared to $147.6 million for 2011. Aftermarket revenue generally increases with
expansion of the installed base of systems but can  fluctuate from period to period  based on  capacity
utilization at customers’ manufacturing  facilities which  affects the sale of  spare parts and  demand for
equipment service. The decrease in aftermarket  revenue in 2012  compared to 2011 was  due  to  a
decrease in fabrication utilization in the  semiconductor industry during 2012.

2011 Compared with 2010

Ion Implant

Included in total revenue of $319.4 million in 2011 is revenue  from  sales  of ion implantation

products and related service of $237.9 million,  or 74.5% of total revenue, compared with $232.4 million,
or 84.4%, of total  revenue in 2010. The dollar increase was  due to the factors discussed  above for
product  revenue.

Aftermarket

Included in total revenue of $319.4 million in 2011 is revenue  from  our aftermarket  business  of

$147.6 million, compared to $142.2 million for 2010.

26

Gross  Profit / Gross Margin

The following table sets forth our gross  profit.

Years ended
December 31,

Period-to-Period
Change

Years ended
December  31,

Period-to-Period
Change

2012

2011

$

%

2011

2010

$

%

(dollars in thousands)

Gross Profit:

Product . . . . . . . . . . . .
Product gross margin .
Service . . . . . . . . . . . .
Service  gross margin .

$50,716

$106,083

$(55,367) (52.2)% $106,083

$74,724

$31,359

42.0%

29.1%
7,455
25.6%

36.9%

$ 8,654

(1,199) (13.9)%

27.0%

36.9%
8,654
27.0%

30.8%

$11,114

(2,460) (22.1)%

34.3%

Total gross profit . .

$58,171

$114,737

$(56,566) (49.3)% $114,737

$85,838

$28,899

33.7%

Gross margin . . . . .

28.6%

35.9%

35.9%

31.2%

2012 Compared with 2011

Product

Gross margin from product revenue was 29.1% for the twelve months ended December  31, 2012,

compared to 36.9% for the twelve months ended December 31, 2011, a decrease  of 7.8 percentage
points. Gross profit decreased by 7.7  percentage  points due  to  a higher excess inventory provision  of
$13.4 million recorded during the fourth quarter of 2012, as a result of our comprehensive review of
our  worldwide inventory levels. Lower systems sales volumes and the related unfavorable absorption  of
fixed overhead costs also contributed to the reduction  in gross  profit  by 9.0 percentage points. These
decreases were partially offset by an  8.9  percentage point  increase in gross  profit resulting  from a
higher  margin mix of parts and upgrade revenue.

Service

Gross margin from service revenue was 25.6%  for the twelve months ended December 31,  2012,
compared to 27.0% for the twelve months ended December 31, 2011. The decrease  in gross profit is
attributable to changes in the mix of service  contracts  and the unfavorable absorption of fixed service
costs.

2011 Compared with 2010

Product

Gross profit from product revenue was 36.9%  for the  twelve months ended December 31, 2011,
compared to 30.8% for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010. The increase  in gross profit of
6.1 percentage points is due primarily  to  a favorable mix of products at higher  margins and leveraging
our  on-going efforts to drive labor and material  productivity through  efficient use of  labor  and our
global  sourcing efforts.

Service

Gross profit from service revenue was 27.0% for the twelve  months ended December 31,  2011,
compared to 34.3% for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010. The decrease  in gross profit is
attributable to changes in the mix of service  contracts  and the unfavorable absorption of fixed service
costs.

27

Operating Expenses

The following table sets forth our operating  expenses:

Years ended
December 31,

Period-to-
Period
Change

Years  ended
December 31,

Period-to-
Period
Change

2012

2011

$

%

2011

2010

$

%

(dollars in thousands)

Research and development

. . . . .
Percentage of revenues . . . . . . .
Sales and marketing . . . . . . . . . .
Percentage of revenues . . . . . . .
General and administrative . . . . .
Percentage of revenues . . . . . . .

Gain on sale of  dry  strip  assets

and intellectual property . . . . . .
Percentage of revenues . . . . . . .
Restructuring charges . . . . . . . . .
Percentage of revenues . . . . . . .

$40,401

$ 47,176

(6,775)

(14.4)% $ 47,176

$39,524

$7,652

19.4%

19.9%

14.8%

14.8%

14.4%

25,889

29,255

(3,366)

(11.5)% 29,255

27,549

1,706

6.2%

12.7%

9.2%

9.2%

10.0%

26,554

31,174

(4,620)

(14.8)% 31,174

32,132

(958)

(3.0)%

13.1%

9.8%

(7,904)

(3.9)%

4,169

2.0%

— (7,  904)
0.0%
—
0.0%

4,169

—

—

9.8%

11.7%

—
0.0%
—
0.0%

—
0.0%
—
0.0%

—

—

—

—

Total operating expenses . . . . . . .

$89,109

$107,605

$(18,496)

17.2% $107,605

$99,205

$8,400

8.5%

Percentage of revenues . . . . . .

43.8%

33.7%

33.7%

36.1%

Our operating expenses consist primarily  of  personnel costs, including salaries,  commissions,
bonuses, share-based compensation and related benefits  and  taxes;  project  material  costs related to the
design and development of new products and enhancement  of  existing products; and professional fees,
travel and depreciation expenses. Personnel costs are our  largest expense,  representing  $52.5 million, or
56.5% of our total operating expenses,  excluding the  gain on sale of the dry strip assets and  intellectual
property of $7.9 million and restructuring charges of $4.2 million, for  the year ended December 31,
2012; $62.5 million, or 58.1%, of our  total operating expenses for the year ended December 31, 2011;
and $56.9 million, or 57.4%, of our total  operating expenses for the year ended December 31,  2010.

In 2012, we continued to align our organization with market demands and tightened  control over

our  discretionary spending. As a result  of  the current  economic conditions in the  semiconductor
industry, we took a number of actions  during  2012 to reduce our operating  expenses and manage our
cash. These actions included a reduction  in our global workforce, focusing our R&D spending on
critical programs and asking our employees to take three  weeks of unpaid shutdowns.

The impact of these actions and our  operating results are discussed  below.

Research and Development

Years ended
December 31,

Period-to-
Period
Change

Years ended
December 31,

Period-to-
Period
Change

2012

2011

$

%

2011

2010

$

%

Research and development

. .
Percentage of revenues . . . . .

$40,401

$47,176

19.9% 14.8%

(dollars in thousands)
(14.4)% $47,176

(6,775)

$39,524

$7,652

19.4%

14.8% 14.4%

Our ability to remain competitive depends largely on continuously developing innovative

technology, with new and enhanced features and systems  and  introducing them at competitive  prices on
a timely basis. Accordingly, based on  our  strategic plan, we establish annual R&D budgets to fund
programs that we expect will drive competitive advantages.

28

2012 Compared with 2011

Research and development expense was $40.4 million in  2012,  a  decrease of approximately
$6.8 million, or 14.4%, compared with  $47.2 million in  2011.  The  decrease was primarily due to the
reduction in payroll costs of $2.4 million  as  a result of  lowering  our headcount through  reductions in
force and the cost savings realized by three  weeks  of unpaid furloughs  taken by our employees.  As we
focused our R&D spend on critical programs, consulting and project  material  costs decreased by
$2.6 million and depreciation expense  for internal use assets  used  as demonstration  and/or test systems
decreased by $1.4 million.

2011 Compared with 2010

Research and development expense was $47.2 million in  2011,  an increase of $7.7 million,  or
19.4%, compared with $39.5 million  in  2010. The  increase was  primarily  due  to  higher payroll costs  of
$3.8 million as a result of an increase  in headcount. Depreciation costs  for internal use  assets used as
demonstration and/or test systems of $1.8 million, increased project  material costs of $1.1  million, and
increased professional fee expenses $1.0  million also contributed.

Sales and Marketing

Years ended
December 31,

Period-to-
Period
Change

Years ended
December 31,

Period-to-
Period
Change

2012

2011

$

%

2011

2010

$

%

(dollars in thousands)

Sales and marketing . . . . . . .
Percentage of revenues . . .

$25,889

$29,255

$(3,366)

(11.5)% $29,255

$27,549

$1,706

6.2%

12.7%

9.2%

9.2% 10.0%

Our sales and marketing expenses result  primarily from  the  sale of our equipment and  services

through our direct sales force.

2012 Compared with 2011

Sales and marketing expense was $25.9 million in 2012, a decrease of $3.4  million, or  11.5%,
compared with $29.3 million in 2011.  The decrease  was primarily due to the reduction in payroll costs
of $5.0 million as a result of lowering our headcount through reductions  in force and  the cost savings
realized by three weeks of unpaid furloughs  taken by our employees. In addition, freight expenses
decreased by $0.5 million due to lower  shipments and travel costs decreased by $0.8 million due to
reduced travel. The decreases in expenses were  partially offset by a one-time marketing expense of
$2.1 million associated with our evaluation  programs and an increase in consulting expenses  of
$0.4 million.

2011 Compared with 2010

Sales and marketing expense was $29.3 million in 2011, an  increase of $1.7  million,  or 6.2%,
compared with $27.5 million in 2010.  The increase  was driven primarily by increased payroll  costs of
$2.5 million, increased travel costs of $0.4  million  and increased freight costs of $0.1 million due to
increased system shipments during the  first half of 2011, offset by a decrease in supplies and marketing
costs of $1.6 million.

29

General and Administrative

Years ended
December 31,

Period-to-
Period
Change

Years ended
December  31,

Period-to-
Period
Change

2012

2011

$

%

2011

2010

$

%

(dollars in thousands)

General and administrative . .
Percentage of revenues . . .

$26,554

$31,174

$(4,620)

(14.8)% $31,174

$32,132

$(958)

(3.0)%

13.1%

9.8%

9.8% 11.7%

2012 Compared with 2011

General and administrative expense was $26.6  million in 2012,  a decrease of $4.6 million,  or 14.8%

compared with $31.2 million in 2011.  The decrease  was due to the  reduction in  payroll costs of
$2.6 million as a result of lowering our  headcount through reductions in force  and the  cost savings
realized by three weeks of unpaid furloughs  taken by our employees, lower  facility related costs  of
$1.1 million, which were partially due  to  the three weeks of  plant shutdowns, lower professional fees of
$0.3 million and lower consulting costs  of $0.6  million.

2011 Compared with 2010

General and administrative expense was $31.2  million in 2011,  a decrease of $1.0 million,  or 3.0%
compared with $32.1 million in 2010.  The lower general  and administrative  expense in  2011 was driven
primarily by decreased incentive compensation  expense of $1.9 million and professional fees of
$1.0 million. The decrease was partially offset by  increased salaries  and related expenses  of
$1.3 million, which was primarily comprised  of  increases in salary expense of $0.3 million, stock
compensation expense of $0.3 million,  fringe benefit expense  of $0.4 million and separation  costs of
$0.3 million associated with the retirement of a  former executive of  the Company.

Gain on Sale of Dry Strip Assets and Intellectual Property

On December 3, 2012, we entered into a  strategic collaboration agreement with Lam. As part of

the agreement, we sold our dry strip  system  assets and intellectual  property to Lam Research. The
purchase price was $10.7 million, of which  $2.0 million is contingent upon reaching  certain milestones.
The $7.9 million gain on sale of dry strip assets and intellectual  property is  comprised of the
$8.7 million in proceeds received for  the  sale, offset by approximately $0.8  million of  product and
material costs related to the lab system and other components purchased by  Lam.

Restructuring

During  2012, we implemented a reduction in force to improve the focus of our operations, control

costs to achieve future profitability and conserve cash. We  recorded a restructuring expense  for
severance and related costs of $4.2 million, which  included a $0.1 million non-cash charge related to
the modification of a share-based award  during  twelve  months ended December 31, 2012.
Approximately $0.5 million of the restructuring costs  were  associated  with the sale of the dry strip
assets and intellectual property.

Other Income (Expense)

2012 Compared with 2011

Other expense was $1.5 million for the twelve months  ended  December  31, 2012 compared  to
other income of $0.3 million for the  twelve months  ended December 31, 2011. Other income (expense)
consists primarily of foreign exchange gains  and losses attributable to fluctuations  of the U.S. dollar

30

against the local currencies of certain of the countries in  which  we  operate, interest earned  on our
invested cash balances and bank fees  associated with  maintaining our credit facility.

During  the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, we had no significant  off-balance-sheet risk

such as foreign exchange contracts, option contracts or other foreign hedging arrangements

2011 Compared with 2010

Other income was $0.3 million for the  twelve  months ended December  31, 2011  compared to other

expense of $3.9 million for the twelve  months  ended December  31, 2010.  For  the year  ended
December 31, 2011 the Company incurred $1.2 million of  foreign exchange gains.  For the  year ended
December 31, 2010 the Company incurred $1.9 million of  foreign exchange losses.  Included in foreign
exchange losses in 2010 are $0.3 million  of foreign exchange  losses  relating  to  currency  hedging
activities.

Income Taxes

Income tax expense was $1.6 million, $2.4  million  and $0.3 million for the twelve months  ended
December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively. Our  income tax expense is due primarily  to  operating
results of foreign entities in jurisdictions  in  Europe and Asia,  where we earn taxable income. We have
significant net operating loss carryforwards in the United States and certain European jurisdictions,
and, as a result, we do not currently pay  significant  income taxes in those jurisdictions.  Additionally, we
do not recognize the tax benefit for such  losses  in the United States  and  certain European taxing
jurisdictions.

During  2012, we settled a tax dispute  with a foreign jurisdiction for an  amount,  $0.9 million, equal

to the charge we had previously recorded  in 2011  related to an uncertain tax  position.  The  settlement
did not have an impact on our results of  operations or  cash flows  for the twelve months  ended
December 31, 2012.

During  2010, the Company performed an evaluation of the deferred tax assets of certain of our

foreign subsidiaries for which we had previously established a valuation allowance. Based on the
subsidiaries’ recent and expected ability to generate taxable income,  the Company  reduced  the
subsidiaries’ corresponding valuation  allowance and recognized a tax benefit  of $1.3 million.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Our liquidity is affected by many factors. Some of these relate specifically to the  operations  of  our

business, for example, the rate of sale of our product lines, and  others relate to the  uncertainties of
global  economies, including the availability  of credit and the condition of the  overall  semiconductor
equipment industry. Our established cost structure  does not  vary  significantly with changes  in volume,
which  limits our ability to reduce costs  in proportion to declining sales. We have tried  to  reduce
operating expense to achieve profitability towards the lower end of  our quarterly revenue  swings.
Therefore, we experience fluctuations  in operating  results and  cash flows  depending on  our revenue as
driven by the level of capital expenditures  by semiconductor manufacturers.

Although the Company generated operating cash in  the third and fourth quarters of 2012,  in the
full year 2012, $10.6 million of cash was  used to support operating activities. Cash generation in the last
two quarters was due to tight management of material purchases.  This compares to cash  generated by
operations of $3.5 million in 2011. The  $14.1 million increase in cash used by operations in 2012  was
predominately driven by the Company’s  loss from operations excluding non-cash charges for
depreciation and amortization and stock  based  compensation expense. The $8.7 million in cash received
in the Lam transaction in December 2012,  partially  offset the use of cash  in operations, resulting in
cash and cash equivalents at December 31, 2012 of  $45.0 million, compared to $46.9 million at

31

December 31, 2011. Working capital  at  December  31, 2012 was $145.4 million. Approximately
$15.0 million of cash was located in foreign jurisdictions as of  December 31, 2012.

Capital expenditures were $0.6 million and $2.1 million for  the years ended December 31, 2012

and 2011, respectively. We have no significant  capital projects  planned for 2013 and total capital
expenditures for 2013 are projected to remain consistent  with 2012. Future capital expenditures beyond
2013 will depend on a number of factors,  including the  timing and rate of expansion of our business
and our ability to generate cash to fund  them.

We  have outstanding standby letters of credit, statutory liability  deposits  and surety bonds  in the
amount of $5.5 million to support certain operating programs, workers’ compensation insurance, and
certain value added tax claims in Europe,  of  which $0.1  million at December  31, 2012 was supported by
cash pledged as collateral. The pledged cash is reflected as  current restricted cash  on the consolidated
balance sheet.

The following represents our commercial commitments  as of  December  31, 2012 (in thousands):

Amount of
Commitment
Expiration by Period

Other Commercial Commitments

Total

2013

2014-2015

Surety bonds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Standby letters of credit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Statutory liability deposits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$1,816
3,575
106

$1,164
3,575
106

$5,497

$4,845

$652
—
—

$652

The following represents our contractual obligations  as of December  31, 2012  (in  thousands):

Contractual Obligations

Total

2013

2014-2015

2016-2017

Payments Due by Period

Purchase order commitments . . . . . . . . . . .
Operating leases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$14,879
6,143

$14,879
3,057

$ —
2,862

$21,022

$17,936

$2,862

$ —
224

$224

We  have no off-balance sheet arrangements  at December 31, 2012.

We  have net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards,  the tax effect of which aggregate

$118.0 million at December 31, 2012.  These carryforwards,  which expire principally between 2013 and
2032, are available to reduce future income tax liabilities in the United States and certain  foreign
jurisdictions.

It  is Company policy to provide taxes for the total anticipated tax impact  of the undistributed
earnings of our wholly-owned foreign  subsidiaries’ as such earnings are  not expected  to  be  reinvested
indefinitely. The Company anticipates that US tax  resulting from remitting such earnings will be off-set
by net operating loss or credit carryforwards to the extent  available. In  addition, the Company does not
anticipate incurring a foreign withholding tax on  remitting such earnings since it does not intend to
remit the earnings as dividends.

Our revolving credit facility with a bank provides  for borrowings up  to  $30 million based primarily

on accounts receivable. The facility has  certain financial covenants requiring us to maintain minimum
levels of operating results and liquidity. The agreement will  terminate on April 10,  2015. We use the
facility to support letters of credit and for  short term borrowing as needed.  At December  31, 2012, our
available borrowing capacity under the credit facility was $17.3 million and we were compliant with all

32

covenants of the loan agreement. There  were no borrowings against  this facility during the  twelve
months ended December 31, 2012.

We  believe that based on our current  market,  revenue, expense and cash flow forecasts, our
existing cash and cash equivalents will be sufficient to satisfy  our anticipated cash requirements  for the
short and long-term. In the event that demand  for our  products  declines in future periods, we believe
we can align manufacturing and operating spending levels  to the changing business conditions and
provide sufficient liquidity to support  operations.

Related-Party Transactions

There are no significant related-party  transactions that require disclosure in  the consolidated
financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2012,  or in this Annual Report  on Form 10-K.

Recent  Accounting Pronouncements

A discussion of recent accounting pronouncements is included in Note 2 to the  consolidated

financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2012  included in  this  Annual Report on
Form 10-K.

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative  Disclosures  about Market  Risk.

Interest Rate Sensitivity

Our exposure to market risk for changes in interest  rates relates primarily to our investment
portfolio, which consists entirely of cash-equivalents at December 31, 2012. The primary objective of
our  investment activities is to preserve  principal while  maximizing yields without  significantly  increasing
risk. This is accomplished by investing  in  marketable high investment grade securities. We do not use
derivative financial instruments in managing our investment  portfolio. Due  to  the nature of our
investments, we do not expect our operating  results or cash  flows to be affected to any significant
degree by any change in market interest rates.

Foreign Currency Exchange Risk

Substantially all of our sales are billed in U.S. dollars, thereby reducing the impact of  fluctuations
in foreign exchange rates on our results. Operating margins  of  certain foreign operations can  fluctuate
with changes in foreign exchange rates  to  the extent revenues  are  billed in U.S. dollars  and operating
expenses are incurred in the local functional currency.  During the  years  ended December  31, 2012 and
2011, approximately 29% and 21% of our revenue  were  derived  from  foreign operations with  this
inherent risk. In addition, at both December 31, 2012 and  2011, our operations outside of the United
States accounted for approximately 42%  and 37%  of  our  total  assets, respectively, the  majority of which
was denominated in currencies other  than the  U.S. dollar.

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary  Data.

Response to this Item is submitted as  a separate  section  of  this report  immediately following

Item 15.

Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants  on Accounting  and Financial Disclosure.

None.

33

Item 9A. Controls and Procedures.

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and  Procedures.

Our management, with the participation of  our principal  executive officer and principal financial

officer, has evaluated the effectiveness  of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Rule 13a-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the ‘‘Exchange Act’’) as of the
end of the period covered by this annual report (the ‘‘Evaluation Date’’). Based on this evaluation, our
principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded  that, as of the  Evaluation Date,
these disclosure controls and procedures  are  effective.

34

Internal Control over Financial Reporting

Management’s Annual Report on Internal  Control over Financial Reporting

Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal  control  over
financial reporting, as such term is defined in  Rule 13a-15(f)  under the Exchange  Act.  Because of its
inherent limitations, internal control over  financial reporting  may  not prevent or  detect  all
misstatements. A control system, no  matter how well designed  and operated, can provide only
reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation and  presentation. Projections of
any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are  subject to the  risk that  controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or  that  the degree  of compliance with  the policies or
procedures may deteriorate.

Management assessed the effectiveness  of  our internal  control over financial  reporting as of

December 31, 2012. In making this assessment, management used the  criteria set forth in the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations  of the Treadway Commission (COSO)  Internal Control—
Integrated Framework.

Based on this assessment, management has concluded  that, as of  December 31, 2012, our internal

control over financial reporting is effective based on those criteria.

The independent registered public accounting firm of Ernst & Young LLP,  as auditors of our
consolidated financial statements, has  issued an attestation report  on its  assessment  of  our  internal
control over financial reporting.

35

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting  Firm

The Board of Directors and Stockholders of Axcelis Technologies, Inc.

We  have audited Axcelis Technologies,  Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting as  of

December 31, 2012, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by
the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the  Treadway Commission  (the  COSO criteria). Axcelis
Technologies, Inc.’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial
reporting, and for its assessment of the  effectiveness of internal control  over financial reporting
included in the accompanying Management’s Annual Report  on Internal  Control  over Financial
Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion  on the Company’s internal control over financial
reporting based on our audit.

We  conducted our audit in accordance  with the  standards of  the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States). Those  standards require that we  plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether  effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained
in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an  understanding  of internal control  over
financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design
and operating effectiveness of internal control based on  the assessed risk, and performing such other
procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We  believe that our audit provides a
reasonable basis for our opinion.

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a  process designed to provide  reasonable

assurance regarding the reliability of  financial reporting and the preparation  of  financial  statements for
external  purposes in accordance with  generally accepted  accounting  principles. A company’s internal
control over financial reporting includes those policies  and procedures that (1)  pertain to the
maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail,  accurately and fairly reflect the  transactions and
dispositions of the assets of the company; (2)  provide reasonable assurance that transactions  are
recorded  as necessary to permit preparation of  financial statements in  accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles, and that receipts  and  expenditures of the company are being made  only
in accordance with authorizations of management  and  directors of the company; and  (3) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or
disposition of the company’s assets that  could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial  reporting may not prevent or

detect misstatements. Also, projections  of any  evaluation of  effectiveness to future periods are  subject
to the risk that controls may become inadequate because  of changes in conditions, or  that  the degree
of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

In our opinion, Axcelis Technologies,  Inc. maintained, in all  material respects, effective  internal

control over financial reporting as of  December  31, 2012, based on the COSO criteria.

We  also have audited, in accordance  with the  standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), the  consolidated balance  sheets of Axcelis  Technologies,  Inc. as of
December 31, 2012 and 2011, and the related  consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive
income, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for  each of the three  years  in the period ended
December 31, 2012 of Axcelis Technologies, Inc. and our report dated March 1,  2013 expressed an
unqualified opinion thereon.

Boston, Massachusetts
March 1, 2013

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

36

Changes  in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

There was no change in our internal  control over financial  reporting (as defined in Rule 13a-15(f)

under the Exchange Act) identified in  connection  with the  evaluation  of our  internal control that
occurred during our fourth quarter that has materially  affected, or is  reasonably  likely to materially
affect, our internal control over financial  reporting.

Item 9B. Other Information.

The Company entered into Amended and  Restated  Indemnification Agreements  dated

February 28, 2012 with each of its current directors and officers  to  conform to an updated form  of
Indemnification Agreement. The previous form  of  Indemnification Agreement was  adopted in June,
2000 and the Board determined that certain  provisions required clarification or  enhancement  in light of
court decisions interpreting indemnification agreements  during the  period since the previous  form was
adopted. These amendments:

(cid:127) add language providing for a neutral decision-maker in the event of a change in control and

certain presumptions benefiting the director or  officer;

(cid:127) clarify and elaborate on a number  of definitions and  other terms;

(cid:127) eliminate the Company’s obligation to maintain an  escrow account  for the  benefit of the

indemnitees.

Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate  Governance.

PART III

A portion of the information required by Item 10  of Form  10-K  is incorporated  by  reference from
the information responsive thereto contained in the sections in Axcelis Proxy Statement for the Annual
Meeting of Stockholders to be held May  14, 2013 (the ‘‘Proxy Statement’’) captioned:

(cid:127) ‘‘Proposal 1: Election of Directors,’’

(cid:127) ‘‘Corporate Governance,’’ and

(cid:127) ‘‘Other Matters—Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance.’’

The remainder of such information is set forth  under the  heading ‘‘Executive  Officers  of the

Registrant’’ at the end of Item 1 in Part  I of  this report.

Item 11. Executive Compensation.

The information required by Item 11  of  Form 10-K  is incorporated  by reference from  the

information responsive thereto contained in  the sections in the Proxy  Statement captioned:

(cid:127) ‘‘Executive Compensation,’’ and

(cid:127) ‘‘Other Matters—Compensation Committee Interlocks  and Insider Participation.’’

Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners  and  Management and Related Stockholder

Matters.

A portion of the information required by Item 12  of Form  10-K  is incorporated  by  reference from

the information responsive thereto contained in the sections in the Proxy Statement  captioned:

(cid:127) ‘‘Share Ownership of 5% Stockholders,’’

(cid:127) ‘‘Share Ownership of Directors and  Executive Officers,’’ and

37

(cid:127) ‘‘Proposal 3: Approval of Amendment to the 2012  Equity  Incentive Plan—Current Equity

Compensation Plan Information.’’

Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and Director  Independence.

The information required by Item 13  of  Form 10-K  is incorporated  by reference from  the

information responsive thereto contained in  the sections in the Proxy  Statement captioned:

(cid:127) ‘‘Executive Compensation,’’

(cid:127) ‘‘Corporate Governance—Board of Directors Independence and Meetings,’’ and

(cid:127) ‘‘Corporate Governance—Certain Relationships and Related  Transactions.’’

Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and  Services

The information required by Item 14  of  Form 10-K  is incorporated  by reference from  the
information responsive thereto contained in  the section captioned ‘‘Proposal 2:  Ratification of the
Appointment of our Independent Registered Public  Accounting Firm’’ in the Proxy Statement.

38

PART IV

Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statement  Schedules.

(a) The following documents are filed as  part of  this Report:

1) Financial Statements:

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F-1
Consolidated Statements of Operations—For  the years ended December 31,

2012, 2011 and 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F-2

Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive  Income—For  the years ended

December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F-3
Consolidated Balance Sheets—December 31, 2012 and 2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F-4
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity—For the  years  ended

December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F-5

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows—For the  years  ended December 31,

2012, 2011 and 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F-6
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F-7

2) Financial Statement Schedules:

Schedule II—Valuation and Qualifying Accounts for  the years ended  December 31, 2012, 2011
and 2010

All other schedules for which provision  is made in the applicable regulation of  the Securities
and Exchange Commission are not required under the related instructions  or are inapplicable,
and therefore have been omitted.

3) Exhibits

The exhibits filed as part of this Form 10-K  are listed on the Exhibit Index immediately
preceding such Exhibits, which Exhibit Index  is incorporated herein by reference.

39

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting  Firm

The Board of Directors and Stockholders of Axcelis Technologies, Inc.

We  have audited the accompanying consolidated balance  sheets of Axcelis  Technologies, Inc. (the

‘‘Company’’) as of December 31, 2012 and 2011,  and the  related consolidated  statements of operations,
comprehensive income, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in  the period
ended December 31, 2012. Our audits also included  the financial statement schedule listed in the  Index
at Item 15(a). These financial statements  and schedule are the responsibility  of the Company’s
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion  on  these financial  statements  and schedule
based on our audits.

We  conducted our audits in accordance  with the  standards  of  the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States). Those  standards require that we  plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether  the  financial statements are free  of material misstatement.  An
audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures  in the
financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the  accounting  principles used  and significant
estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the  overall financial statement presentation. We
believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for  our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above  present fairly, in all material respects,
the consolidated financial position of  Axcelis Technologies, Inc. at December 31,  2012 and 2011, and
the consolidated results of its operations and its cash flows for each  of  the three  years  in the period
ended December 31, 2012, in conformity with  U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.  Also, in
our  opinion, the related financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the  basic financial
statements taken as a whole, presents fairly  in all material respects to the information set forth  therein.

We  also have audited, in accordance  with the  standards of the Public Company Accounting

Oversight Board (United States), Axcelis  Technologies, Inc.’s internal  control over financial reporting as
of December 31, 2012, based on criteria established in  Internal  Control—Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee  of Sponsoring Organizations of  the Treadway Commission and our report dated
March 1, 2013 expressed an unqualified  opinion  thereon.

Boston, Massachusetts
March 1, 2013

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

F-1

Axcelis Technologies, Inc.
Consolidated Statements of Operations
(In thousands, except per share amounts)

Twelve months ended
December 31,

2012

2011

2010

Revenue

Product . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$174,309
29,076

$287,324
32,092

$242,771
32,441

Total revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

203,385

319,416

275,212

Cost of revenue

Product . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

123,593
21,621

181,241
23,438

168,047
21,327

Total cost of revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

145,214

204,679

189,374

Gross profit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

58,171

114,737

85,838

Operating expenses

Research and development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sales and marketing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
General and administrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Gain on sale of dry strip assets and intellectual property . . . . . . . .
Restructuring charges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

40,401
25,889
26,554
(7,904)
4,169

47,176
29,255
31,174
—
—

Total operating expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

89,109

107,605

39,524
27,549
32,132
—
—

99,205

Income (loss) from operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(30,938)

7,132

(13,367)

Other income (expense)

Interest income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total other income (expense) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

45
(1,495)

(1,450)

Income (loss) before income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(32,388)

Income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1,646

42
297

339

7,471

2,394

96
(3,990)

(3,894)

(17,261)

312

Net income (loss) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ (34,034) $

5,077

$ (17,573)

Net income (loss) per share

Basic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Diluted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$

$

(0.32) $

(0.32) $

0.05

0.05

$

$

(0.17)

(0.17)

Shares used in computing net income (loss) per share

Basic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

107,619

106,234

104,522

Diluted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

107,619

109,098

104,522

See accompanying Notes to these Consolidated  Financial Statements

F-2

Axcelis Technologies, Inc.
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive  Income
(In thousands)

Net income (loss) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other comprehensive income:

Foreign currency translation adjustments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Actuarial net (loss) gain from pension plan, net of  benefit (taxes) of

Twelve months ended December 31,

2012

2011

2010

$(34,034) $ 5,077

$(17,573)

642

(1,465)

1,384

$178, ($4) and $151 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(399)

10

(291)

Comprehensive income (loss) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$(33,791) $ 3,622

$(16,480)

See accompanying Notes to these Consolidated  Financial Statements

F-3

Axcelis Technologies, Inc.
Consolidated Balance Sheets
(In thousands, except per share amounts)

December 31,
2012

December 31,
2011

Current assets

ASSETS

Cash and cash equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accounts receivable, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Inventories, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Restricted cash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Prepaid expenses and other current assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total current assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Property, plant and equipment, net
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Long-term restricted cash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 44,986
24,843
100,234
106
5,056

175,225
34,413
—
12,520

$ 46,877
35,071
120,023
—
10,062

212,033
37,204
104
19,904

Total assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 222,158

$ 269,245

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

Current liabilities

Accounts payable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accrued compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Warranty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other current liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total current liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Long-term deferred revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other long-term liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 10,166
7,283
1,700
278
6,423
3,932

29,782
456
5,844

36,082

$ 19,551
8,437
3,556
495
10,786
4,647

47,472
1,488
5,730

54,690

Commitments and contingencies (Note  16)
Stockholders’ equity

Preferred stock, $0.001 par value, 30,000  shares authorized; none issued  or
outstanding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Common stock, $0.001 par value, 300,000 shares authorized; 108,293

shares issued and 108,173 shares outstanding at  December 31,  2012;
106,809 shares issued and 106,689 shares outstanding at December  31,
2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Additional paid-in capital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Treasury stock, at cost, 120 shares at  December 31,  2012 and 2011 . . . . . .
Accumulated deficit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accumulated other comprehensive income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

—

—

108
504,643
(1,218)
(322,477)
5,020

107
499,332
(1,218)
(288,443)
4,777

Total stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

186,076

214,555

Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 222,158

$ 269,245

See accompanying Notes to these Consolidated Financial Statements

F-4

Axcelis Technologies, Inc.
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’  Equity
(In thousands)

Balance at December 31, 2009 . . . . . . . . . 104,212

$104

$488,321 $(1,218) $(275,947)

$ 5,139

$216,399

Common  Stock

Shares

Amount

Additional
Paid-in
Capital

Accumulated
Other

Total

Treasury Accumulated Comprehensive Stockholders’

Stock

Deficit

Income (Loss)

Equity

— (17,573)
—
—
—
—
—
—

—
1,384
(291)
—

Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Foreign currency translation adjustments . .
Change in pension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Exercise of stock options . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Issuance of shares under Employee Stock

Purchase Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Issuance of restricted common shares . . . .
Issuance of restricted shares in satisfaction
of accrued compensation . . . . . . . . . . .
Stock-based compensation expense . . . . . .

—
—
—
704

280
262

448
—

Balance at December 31, 2010 . . . . . . . . . 105,906
—
Net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
—
Foreign currency translation adjustments . .
—
Change in pension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Exercise of stock options . . . . . . . . . . . . .
372
Issuance of shares under Employee Stock

Purchase Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Issuance of restricted common shares . . . .
Stock-based compensation expense . . . . . .

398
133
—

Balance at December 31, 2011 . . . . . . . . . 106,809
—
Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
—
Foreign currency translation adjustments . .
—
Change in pension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Exercise of stock options . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1,148
Issuance of shares under Employee Stock

Purchase Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Issuance of restricted common shares . . . .
Stock-based compensation expense . . . . . .

306
30
—

—
—
—
1

1
—

—
—

106
—
—
—
—

1
—
—

107
—
—
—
1

—
—
—

—
—
—
552

637
(201)

570
4,088

493,967
—
—
—
288

—
—

—
—

—
—

—
—

(1,218)
—
—
—
—

(293,520)
5,077
—
—
—

502
(112)
4,687

—
—
—

—
—
—

499,332
—
—
—
967

(1,218)

(288,443)
— (34,034)
—
—
—
—
—
—

390
(22)
3,976

—
—
—

—
—
—

—
—

—
—

6,232
—
(1,465)
10
—

—
—
—

4,777
—
642
(399)
—

—
—
—

(17,573)
1,384
(291)
553

638
(201)

570
4,088

205,567
5,077
(1,465)
10
288

503
(112)
4,687

214,555
(34,034)
642
(399)
968

390
(22)
3,976

Balance at December 31, 2012 . . . . . . . . . 108,293

$108

$504,643 $(1,218) $(322,477)

$ 5,020

$186,076

See accompanying Notes to these Consolidated  Financial Statements

F-5

Axcelis Technologies, Inc.
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flow
(In thousands)

Twelve months ended
December 31,

2012

2011

2010

Cash flows from operating activities

Net income (loss) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Adjustments to reconcile net income  (loss)  to  net cash  provided by

$(34,034) $ 5,077

$(17,573)

(used for) operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Gain on sale of dry strip assets and intellectual  property . . . . . . .
Deferred taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Stock-based compensation expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Provision for excess inventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Changes in operating assets & liabilities

Accounts receivable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Inventories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Prepaid expenses and other current assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accounts payable and other current liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other assets and liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6,877
(7,904)
826
186
3,976
14,492

10,478
5,903
4,386
(13,490)
(5,396)
(225)
3,328

8,497
—
585
28
4,687
1,015

22,692
(11,870)
3,049
(17,940)
(4,006)
507
(8,788)

7,045
—
(1,525)
—
4,088
2,015

(38,652)
3,549
(3,469)
32,276
10,601
(1,406)
(2,841)

Net cash (used for) provided by  operating activities . . . . . . .

(10,597)

3,533

(5,892)

Cash flows from investing activities

Proceeds from sale of dry strip assets  and intellectual property . . .
Expenditures for property, plant, and equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(Increase) decrease in restricted cash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Net cash provided by (used for) investing activities . . . . . . . .

Cash flows from financing activities

Financing fees and other expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Proceeds from exercise of stock options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Proceeds from Employee Stock Purchase Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Net cash provided by financing activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

8,716
(591)
(2)

8,123

—
968
331

1,299
(716)

(1,891)
46,877

—
(2,124)
3

(2,121)

—
(1,403)
7,056

5,653

(200)
288
503

591
(869)

(523)
553
569

599
363

1,134
45,743

723
45,020

Cash and cash equivalents at end of  period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 44,986

$ 46,877

$ 45,743

Cash paid for:

Income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$

848

$

515

$ 2,286

Issuance of restricted common stock in  satisfaction of accrued

compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

—

— $

570

See accompanying Notes to these Consolidated  Financial Statements

F-6

Axcelis Technologies, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

Note 1. Nature of Business

Axcelis Technologies, Inc. (‘‘Axcelis’’ or  the ‘‘Company’’)  was  incorporated in  Delaware in  1995,
and is a worldwide producer of ion implantation,  dry strip and other processing equipment used in the
fabrication of semiconductor chips in  the United States, Europe  and Asia. In addition, the Company
provides extensive aftermarket service  and support, including spare parts, equipment upgrades, and
maintenance services to the semiconductor  industry.

In December 2012, the Company sold its  intellectual property rights and certain  assets relating to
the Company’s dry strip product line for  cash proceeds of $8.7 million. As a result  of this  transaction,
the Company will cease the sale of 300  mm dry strip  wafer processing equipment  in 2013. The
Company will be able to continue to sell  dry strip systems for smaller wafers  until December  2015 and
to support its installed base of all dry strip systems indefinitely. See Note 3 for additional information
relating to the accounting for the sale of the dry strip assets  and intellectual property.

Note 2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

The accompanying consolidated financial statements reflect the application of certain significant

accounting policies as described in this  note and elsewhere in  the footnotes.

(a) Basis of Presentation

The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its

wholly-owned, controlled subsidiaries. All  intercompany balances and  transactions have  been eliminated
in consolidation.

Events occurring subsequent to December 31, 2012 have been  evaluated for potential  recognition
or disclosure in the consolidated financial statements. See Note 20 for  additional information relating
to subsequent events.

(b) Use of Estimates

The preparation of these consolidated financial  statements in conformity  with accounting principles

generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure  of contingent
assets and liabilities at the dates of the  financial  statements and the reported amounts  of revenue and
expenses during the reporting periods.  On an ongoing basis, the Company evaluates its estimates and
judgments, including those related to revenue recognition,  the realizable value of  inventories, valuing
share-based compensation instruments  and  valuation allowances for deferred tax assets. Actual amounts
could differ from these estimates. Changes in estimates  are recorded in the period in which they
become  known.

(c) Foreign Currency

The Company has determined the functional currency for substantially  all  operations outside the
United States is the local currency. Financial  statements  for these operations are translated into United
States dollars at year-end rates as to  assets  and liabilities and average exchange rates during the year as
to revenue and expenses. The resulting translation adjustments are recorded in  stockholders’  equity as
an element of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). Foreign currency transaction gains and
losses are included in other income (expense) in the consolidated statements of operations.

F-7

For the year ended December 31, 2012 the Company realized $0.9  million  of  foreign exchange
losses. For the year ended December 31,  2011  the Company realized  $1.2 million of foreign exchange
gains. For the year ended December 31,  2010 the Company  incurred $1.9  million of  foreign exchange
losses.

(d) Cash and Cash Equivalents

Cash and cash equivalents consist of  cash on hand and highly liquid investments with original
maturities of ninety days or less. Cash equivalents  consist primarily  of  money market securities and
certificates of deposit. Cash equivalents  are carried on  the balance  sheet at fair market value.

(e)

Inventories

Inventories are carried at lower of cost, determined  using  the first-in, first-out (‘‘FIFO’’)  method,

or market. The Company periodically reviews its inventories and makes provisions as necessary for
estimated obsolescence or damaged goods to ensure values  approximate  lower of cost or market. The
amount of such markdowns is equal  to  the  difference between cost of inventory  and the  estimated
market value based upon assumptions  about future demands, selling  prices, and market conditions.

The Company records an allowance  for estimated excess inventory. The allowance is determined

using management’s assumptions of materials usage,  based on estimates  of demand and market
conditions. If actual market conditions  become less favorable than those projected by management,
additional inventory write-downs may  be  required.

(f) Property, Plant and Equipment

Property and equipment are stated at cost, less  accumulated  depreciation and  amortization.

Depreciation and amortization are recorded using  the straight-line method over the estimated

useful lives of the related assets as follows:

Asset Classification

Estimated Useful Life

Buildings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Machinery and equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

40 years
3 to 10 years

Repairs and maintenance costs are expensed as incurred. Expenditures  for  renewals and

betterments are capitalized.

(g)

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

The Company records impairment losses  on long-lived assets  when events and  circumstances
indicate that these assets might not be recoverable. Recoverability is measured by a comparison of the
assets’ carrying amount to their expected  future undiscounted net cash flows. If such assets are
considered to be impaired, the impairment is measured based on the amount by which  the carrying
value exceeds its fair value.

The Company completed a test for recoverability due to indicators present at December 31,  2012;

specifically the carrying value of its net assets exceeded its current market capitalization. As of
December 31, 2012, the undiscounted  cash flows  used  in the analysis  significantly  exceeded  the carrying
value of the Company’s assets. As a result  no impairment  was  recorded. The undiscounted cash flows
used in the analysis were derived from the Company’s long-term  strategic plan.

The Company did not record an impairment charge for the  years  ended December  31, 2011, or

2010.

F-8

Future actual performance could be  materially different from our current forecasts, which could
impact future estimates of undiscounted cash  flows and may result  in the impairment of  the carrying
amount of the long-lived assets in the future. This could be caused by  strategic decisions made in
response to economic and competitive  conditions, the impact of the economic environment on our
customer base, or a material adverse  change in the Company’s relationships with  significant customers.
The Company performs an impairment analysis when circumstances or events warrant.

(h) Concentration of Risk and Off-Balance Sheet Risk

Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company  to  concentrations of credit risk  are

principally cash equivalents and accounts  receivable.  The Company’s cash  equivalents are  principally
maintained in an investment grade money-market  fund.

The Company has no significant off-balance-sheet risk such as foreign  exchange contracts, option

contracts or other  foreign hedging arrangements.

The Company exposure to market risk for changes in interest rates relates primarily to cash
equivalents. The primary objective of  the  Company’s investment activities is to preserve principal while
maximizing yields without significantly  increasing risk. This  is accomplished by investing in  marketable
high investment grade securities. The  Company does  not  use derivative  financial  instruments to manage
its  investment portfolio and does not expect operating results or  cash flows to be affected to any
significant degree by any change in market interest rates.

The Company performs ongoing credit  evaluations of its customers’ financial condition and

generally requires no collateral to secure accounts  receivable.  For selected overseas sales, the Company
requires customers to obtain letters of credit before product is  shipped.  The Company  maintains  an
allowance for doubtful accounts based on  its assessment of the collectability  of  accounts receivable. The
Company reviews the allowance for doubtful accounts  monthly. The Company  does not have  any
off-balance sheet credit exposure related  to its customers.

The Company’s customers consist of semiconductor manufacturers located throughout  the world
and net sales to its ten largest customers  accounted for 70.6%,  68.6% and 62.7% of revenue in 2012,
2011 and 2010, respectively.

For the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010,  the  Company had one customer  represent

18.2%, 21.2% and 18.6% of total revenues, respectively, for each of the periods presented.

For the year ended December 31, 2012, the Company had two customers account for 11.9% and

11.5% of consolidated accounts receivable, respectively. For the  year ended December  31, 2011, the
Company had one customer represent 27.2%  of consolidated accounts receivable.

Some of the components and sub-assemblies included in the Company’s products are  obtained
either from a sole source or a limited group of  suppliers.  Disruption to the Company’s supply  source,
resulting either from depressed economic conditions or  other  factors, could affect its ability to deliver
products to its customers.

(i) Revenue Recognition

The Company’s revenue recognition policy involves significant  judgment by management. As
described below, the Company considers  a broad array of facts and  circumstances  in determining when
to recognize revenue, including contractual obligations  to  the customer, the complexity  of the
customer’s post-delivery acceptance provisions, payment  history,  customer creditworthiness  and the
installation process. In the future, if the  post-delivery acceptance provisions and  installation  process
become  more complex or result in a materially lower rate  of acceptance,  the Company may  have to
revise its revenue recognition policy,  which  could delay the timing of  revenue recognition.

F-9

The Company’s system sales transactions are made  up of multiple elements, including  the system
itself and elements that are not delivered simultaneously with the  system. These  undelivered elements
might include a combination of installation services,  extended warranty and support and  spare  parts, all
of which are covered generally by a single sales price.  On January  1, 2011,  the Company adopted the
accounting standards update for multiple  deliverable revenue  arrangements, as  required, using the
prospective method. Accordingly, this guidance is being applied to all system revenue arrangements
entered into or materially modified on  or after January 1, 2011. The  adoption of the amended guidance
did not change the accounting for arrangements  entered into  prior to January 1, 2011. There was  no
material impact on our financial position, results of  operations or cash flows upon adoption.

The impact of adopting this amended guidance on the Company’s results  of operations  has been

limited to transactions involving the sale  of  systems. The update  amended the previous guidance for
multiple-element arrangements. Pursuant to the  amended guidance, the Company’s system revenue
arrangements with multiple elements are divided into  separate units of  accounting if specified criteria
are met, including whether the delivered element has stand-alone value to the customer. If  the criteria
are met, then the consideration received  is allocated  among the separate  units  based on  their  relative
selling price, and the revenue is recognized separately for each of the separate units.

The Company determines selling price  for each unit of accounting (element) using vendor specific

objective evidence (VSOE) or third-party evidence (TPE), if they exist,  otherwise, the Company uses
best estimated selling price (BESP).  The  Company generally  expects that it  will not be able to establish
TPE due to the nature of its products, and, as such,  the Company  typically will determine selling  price
using VSOE or BESP.

Where required, the Company determines  BESP for an individual element based on consideration

of both market and Company-specific  factors, including the selling  price and  profit margin  for similar
products, the cost to produce the deliverable and  the anticipated  margin on that deliverable  and the
characteristics of the varying markets in which the deliverable is sold.

The total consideration to be received  in the transaction is allocated  to  each element in the

arrangement based upon the relative  selling price of each element when compared  to  the consideration
received.

Systems are not sold separately and VSOE  or TPE is  not available for the  systems element.

Therefore the selling price associated  with systems is  based on BESP. The allocated value for
installation in the arrangement includes (a) the  greater of (i) the relative  selling price of the  installation
or (ii) the portion or the sales price that will not be received until  the installation is completed (the
‘‘retention’’). The selling price of installation  is based upon  the fair value of the  service  performed,
including labor, which is based upon  the  estimated  time to complete  the installation at hourly rates,
and material components, both of which  are  sold  separately. The selling price  of  all  other elements
(extended warranty for support, spare parts, and labor) is based upon the price  charged when  these
elements are sold separately, or VSOE.

Product revenue for products which have  demonstrated market acceptance,  generally recognized
upon shipment provided title and risk of loss  has passed to the customer,  evidence of an arrangement
exists, prices are contractually fixed or determinable, collectability  is reasonably assured through
historical collection results and regular credit evaluations, and  there  are  no  uncertainties regarding
customer acceptance. Revenue from installation services is recognized  at  the time  formal  acceptance is
received from the customer or, for certain customers,  when both the formal acceptance  and retention
payment have been received. Revenue for other elements is recognized at the  time products are
shipped or the related services are performed.

The Company generally recognizes revenue for products  which  have demonstrated market
acceptance at the time of shipment because the customer’s  post-delivery acceptance provisions  and

F-10

installation process have been established to be routine, commercially inconsequential and  perfunctory.
The majority of its systems are designed and tailored to meet the customer’s specifications, as outlined
in the contract between the customer and the Company, which may be the Company’s  standard
specification. To ensure that the customer’s specifications  are satisfied, many customers request that
new systems be tested at the Company’s facilities prior to shipment,  normally with the customer
present, under conditions that substantially replicate the  customer’s production  environment and the
customer’s criteria are confirmed to have  been met.  The Company  believes the  risk of  failure to
complete a system installation is remote. Should an installation  not  be  completed successfully, the
contractual provisions do not provide  for forfeiture,  refund or  other purchase price concession  beyond
those prescribed by the provisions of  the  Uniform  Commercial Code  applicable  generally  to  such
transactions.

For initial shipments of systems with new technologies  or in the small number  of  instances where

the Company is unsure of meeting the customer’s  specifications or obtaining customer  acceptance upon
shipment of the system, it will defer the  recognition of systems revenue and  related costs until written
customer acceptance of the system is obtained. This deferral period  is generally within twelve months
of shipment.

Revenue related to maintenance and service contracts  is recognized ratably over  the duration of

the contracts, or based on parts usage,  where appropriate. Revenue related to service hours is
recognized when the services are performed.

Product revenue includes revenue from system sales, sales of spare parts, the spare parts

component of maintenance and service contracts and product upgrades. Service revenue includes the
labor component of maintenance and service contract amounts  charged for  on-site service personnel.

Revenue related to maintenance and service contracts  is recognized ratably over  the duration of

the contracts, or based on parts usage,  where appropriate. Revenue related to service hours is
recognized when the services are performed.

(j) Shipping and Handling Costs

Shipping and handling costs are included in cost of revenue.

(k) Stock-Based Compensation

The Company recognizes compensation expense for  all share-based payments to employees and
directors, including grants of employee  stock options, based  on the grant-date fair value of those  share-
based payments using the Black- Sholes option  pricing  model, adjusted for expected forfeitures. Stock-
based compensation expense is recognized  ratably over the requisite service  period.

See Note 13 for additional information relating to stock-based compensation.

(l)

Income Taxes

The Company records income taxes using  the asset and liability  method. Deferred income tax
assets and liabilities are recognized for  the future  tax consequences attributable  to  differences between
the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets  and liabilities and their respective  income tax
bases, and operating loss and tax credit  carryforwards.

The Company’s consolidated financial statements contain certain deferred tax  assets which  have
arisen primarily as a result of operating  losses,  as well  as other temporary differences between financial
and tax accounting. The Company establishes a valuation allowance if  the  likelihood of realization of
the deferred tax assets is reduced based on an evaluation  of  objective  verifiable evidence.  Significant
management judgment is required in  determining the  Company’s  provision for income taxes, the

F-11

Company’s deferred tax assets and liabilities and any valuation allowance recorded  against those net
deferred tax assets. The Company evaluates the  weight  of all available  evidence to determine  whether it
is more likely than not that some portion  or all of the  net deferred income tax assets will not be
realized.

Income taxes include the largest amount of  tax benefit  for an uncertain tax position that is more
likely than not to be sustained upon audit based on  the technical merits  of the tax position.  Settlements
with tax authorities, the expiration of  statutes  of limitations for particular tax positions, or obtaining
new information on particular tax positions may  cause a  change  to  the effective tax  rate. The  Company
recognizes accrued interest related to unrecognized tax  benefits  as interest expense  and penalties as
operating expense.

(m) Computation of Net Income (Loss) per Share

Basic earnings per share is computed by dividing income available to common stockholders (the

numerator) by the weighted-average  number of  common  shares  outstanding (the denominator) for the
period. The computation of diluted earnings per share  is similar  to  basic earnings per share, except  that
the denominator is increased to include the  number of additional common shares  that  would have been
outstanding if the potentially dilutive  common shares had  been  issued, calculated using  the treasury
stock method.

The Company incurred net losses for years ended December 31,  2012 and December 31, 2010,  and

has excluded 1,563,417 and 3,230,705  incremental shares attributable  to  outstanding stock options,
restricted stock and restricted stock units  from the calculation  of net loss  per  share because  the effect
would have been anti-dilutive.

The components of net income (loss) per share  are as  follows:

Years Ended December 31,

2012

2011

2010

Income (loss) available to common stockholders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Weighted average common shares outstanding used in  computing

(in thousands, except per share data)
$ (34,034) $

$ (17,573)

5,077

basic net income (loss) per share . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Incremental shares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

107,619
—

106,234
2,864

104,522
—

Weighted average common shares outstanding used in  computing

diluted net income (loss) per share . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

107,619

109,098

104,522

Net income (loss) per share

Basic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Diluted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$
$

(0.32) $
(0.32) $

0.05
0.05

$
$

(0.17)
(0.17)

(n) Recent Accounting Guidance

Accounting Standards or Updates Recently Adopted

Effective January 1, 2012 the Company adopted Accounting  Standards Update, or  ASU,

No. 2011-05, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220). This newly issued accounting standard  requires the
Company to report comprehensive income  either in  a single continuous statement or in two  separate
but consecutive financial statements.  The adoption of this standard did impact the presentation of other
comprehensive income, as we have elected to present two separate but consecutive statements, but  did
not have an impact on our financial  position or results of operations.

F-12

Accounting Standards or Updates Not Yet Effective

On February 5, 2013, The Financial Accounting Standards Board (‘‘FASB’’) issued  Accounting

Standards Update No. 2013-02, Reporting of Amounts Reclassified Out of Accumulated Other
Comprehensive Income. The update requires that companies present  either in a single  note or
parenthetically on the face of the financial statements, the effect of  significant amounts reclassified
from each component of accumulated other comprehensive income based  on its source and  the income
statement line items affected by the reclassification. If a  component is not  required to be reclassified to
net income in its entirety, companies  would instead cross reference  to  the related  footnote for
additional information. This update is effective prospectively for annual and interim reporting periods
beginning after December 15, 2012. As this  update only requires enhanced disclosure,  the adoption  of
this  update will not impact our financial position or  results of operations.

Note 3. Gain on Sale of Dry Strip Assets and Intellectual  Property

On December 3, 2012, the Company  entered into a  purchase agreement with Lam Research
Corporation (‘‘Lam’’). As part of the agreement, the Company sold its dry strip system assets and
intellectual property to Lam. The purchase price was  $10.7  million, of  which $2.0 million is  contingent
upon reaching certain milestones. The  $7.9 million gain on sale of  dry strip assets and  intellectual
property is comprised of the $8.7 million proceeds received  for the  sale, offset by approximately
$0.8 million of product and material costs related to the lab system and other components  purchased
by Lam.

The Company determined that the sale would  not  be  accounted  for as a discontinued  operation
due to the continuing involvement it has  as  a result of  the royalty  free license granted to the  Company
and other factors as discussed below.

Lam  granted the Company a worldwide, non-exclusive, non-transferable, royalty free license  to  use

the intellectual property rights sold by  the Company under  the Asset Purchase  Agreement. The
perpetual license allows the Company to make and sell  300  mm dry strip  wafer processing equipment
for semiconductor applications through September  2013, make and sell 200 mm  products through
December 2015 and to support the Company’s installed  base of all dry strip equipment  on a perpetual
basis. As a result of this continuing involvement, the transaction has been recorded in continuing
operations.

The Company will recognize the contingencies as  the milestones are achieved, in accordance with

the accounting guidance for gain contingencies. The Company expects to achieve the transition
milestones over various periods through  the first half of 2014.  As the  milestones are  achieved, the
proceeds will be recorded as part of  the  gain on  sale of  dry strip  assets and intellectual  property.

Note 4. Restricted Cash

The components of restricted cash are as  follows:

Statutory liability deposit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

December 31,

2012

2011

(in thousands)
$104
$106

In addition to the statutory liability deposit, the  Company has surety bonds related to value added

tax claims and refunds in Europe of approximately  $1.8 million at  December  31, 2012 and standby
letters  of credit issued under the credit line of $3.6 million.

F-13

Note 5. Accounts Receivable, net

The components of accounts receivable  are as follows:

Trade receivables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Allowance for doubtful accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$25,148
(305)

$35,482
(411)

December 31,

2012

2011

(in thousands)

Note 6. Inventories, net

The components of inventories are as follows:

$24,843

$35,071

December 31,

2012

2011

(in thousands)

Raw materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Work in process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Finished goods (completed systems) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 72,013
12,253
15,968

$ 85,829
25,639
8,555

$100,234

$120,023

When recorded, inventory reserves are intended to reduce the carrying  value  of  inventories to their

net realizable value. The Company establishes inventory reserves when conditions  exist that indicate
inventory may be in excess of anticipated demand or  is obsolete based upon assumptions about future
demand for the Company’s products or market conditions. The Company regularly evaluates the ability
to realize the value of inventories based  on a combination of factors including the following: forecasted
sales or usage, estimated product end  of life dates, estimated  current and future  market value and new
product  introductions. Purchasing and  usage  alternatives are also explored  to  mitigate  inventory
exposure. As of December 31, 2012 and  2011, inventories  are  stated net of inventory reserves of
$33.6 million and $22.8 million respectively.

In 2012, the Company recorded a $14.5 million increase to  its  excess  inventory reserves.  During

the fourth quarter, as a result of industry consensus indicating that the  semiconductor industry
downturn will continue into 2013, along  with  the Company’s internal projections, the Company
performed a comprehensive review and  analysis of its worldwide inventory levels  based on historic and
projected inventory requirements for all of its products,  components and  parts.  As a  result, the
Company recorded a $13.4 million increase to inventory reserves in the fourth quarter of 2012.

During  2012, the Company recorded a  charge  to  cost of sales of  $2.6 million due to production
levels below normal capacity. There were  no similar  charges recorded  for the year ended  December 31,
2011. During 2010, the Company recorded  a charge to cost  of sales  of $1.0 million due to below
normal production capacity.

F-14

Note 7. Property, Plant and Equipment,  net

The components of property, plant and  equipment are as follows:

December 31,

2012

2011

(in thousands)

Land and buildings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Machinery and equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Construction in process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 78,954
7,118
455

$ 78,985
7,020
541

Total cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accumulated depreciation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

86,527
(52,114)

86,546
(49,342)

Property, plant and equipment, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 34,413

$ 37,204

Depreciation expense was $3.3 million, $3.5  million,  and $3.6 million,  for the  years  ended

December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010,  respectively.

Note 8. Assets Manufactured for Internal Use

The components of assets manufactured  for internal use, included in amounts reported as  other

assets, are as follows:

December 31,

2012

2011

(in thousands)

Internal use assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Construction in progress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 21,904
1,823

$ 27,503
—

Total cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accumulated depreciation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

23,727
(13,948)

27,503
(10,526)

$ 9,779

$ 16,977

These products are used in-house for  research  and  development, training,  and customer
demonstration purposes. Costs are generally  depreciated to expense  over five  years.  Depreciation
expense was $3.4 million, $4.9 million,  and $3.3 million, for  the years ended December 31, 2012,  2011,
and 2010, respectively.

Note 9. Restructuring Charges

The Company initiated reductions in force  throughout 2012 to control  costs and improve the focus

of its operations in order to sustain future profitability and conserve cash. As a  result, the Company
recorded  a total charge to restructuring  expense of approximately $4.2 million, for severance and
related costs including a $0.1 million  non-cash charge for the modification of a share-based  award.  The
Company did not incur restructuring charges for the years ended December 31, 2011  or December  31,
2010. The liability at December 31, 2012 of $0.7 million is expected to be  paid in the  first  quarter  of
2013.

F-15

The Company’s restructuring liability for the years ended December 31, 2012,  2011 and  2010 are

as follows:

Severance

(In thousands)

Balance at December 31, 2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash payments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$

297
(126)

Balance at December 31, 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash payments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Balance at December 31, 2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Severance and related costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash payments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Non-cash items . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

171
—

171
4,169
(3,551)
(130)

Balance at December 31, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$

659

Note 10. Product Warranty

The Company generally offers a one year warranty for all  of its systems, the  terms and conditions

of which vary depending upon the product sold. For all systems sold, the Company accrues a liability
for the estimated cost of standard warranty at the  time of system shipment and defers the portion of
systems revenue attributable to the fair  value of non-standard warranty. Costs for non-standard
warranty are expensed as incurred. Factors  that affect the  Company’s warranty  liability  include the
number of installed units, historical and  anticipated product failure rates, material usage and service
labor costs. The Company periodically assesses the  adequacy of its recorded liability and  adjusts the
amount as necessary.

The changes in the Company’s product warranty liability are as follows:

Balance at January 1 (beginning of year) . . . . . . . . . . .
Warranties issued during the period . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Settlements made  during the period . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Changes in estimate of liability for pre-existing

Years Ended December 31,

2012

2011

2010

$ 3,697
3,042
(3,010)

(in thousands)
$ 2,713
4,772
(5,275)

$

726
3,722
(1,923)

warranties during the period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(1,928)

1,487

188

Balance at December 31 (end of year) . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 1,801

$ 3,697

$ 2,713

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Amount classified as current
Amount classified as long-term . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 1,700
101

$ 3,556
141

$ 2,556
157

Total Warranty Liability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 1,801

$ 3,697

$ 2,713

Note 11. Financing Arrangements

Bank Credit Facility

The Company has a revolving credit  facility with  a bank pursuant  to  an Amended and Restated

Loan and Security Agreement dated April 25, 2011  (the  ‘‘Revolving Credit Facility’’).  The facility
provides for borrowings up to $30 million, based primarily  on accounts  receivable,  and is subject to
certain financial covenants requiring the Company to maintain minimum levels of operating results and

F-16

liquidity. The agreement will terminate  on April 10, 2015. The Company uses  the facility  to  support
letters  of credit and for short term borrowing as needed.

On March 5, 2012, the Company entered into a Second Loan  Modification Agreement  relating to

the Revolving Credit Facility to revise  financial covenants. To facilitate future availability, on
September 10, 2012, the Company further  modified  the Revolving  Credit  Facility by entering into the
Third Loan Modification Agreement (the ‘‘Third  Modification  Agreement’’). The Third  Modification
Agreement revises the covenant setting the Company’s  minimum trailing  six month Adjusted Net
Income (as such capitalized term is defined in the agreement).  All other material terms of the
Revolving Credit Facility are unaffected by the  Third Modification Agreement.

At December 31, 2012, the Company’s  available  borrowing capacity  under the Revolving Credit
Facility was $17.3 million and the Company  was  compliant with all covenants of  the loan agreement.
There were no borrowings against this facility  during year the  ended December 31, 2012.

Note 12. Employee Benefit Plans

(a) Defined Contribution Plan

The Company maintains the Axcelis  Long-Term Investment Plan, a defined  contribution plan.  All

regular employees are eligible to participate and may contribute  up to 35% of their compensation on a
before-tax basis subject to Internal Revenue Service (‘‘IRS’’)  limitations. Highly compensated
employees may contribute up to 16% of  their  compensation on  a before-tax basis subject to IRS
limitations. The Company does not match contributions; therefore, no expense was recorded for this
plan  in 2012, 2011 or 2010.

(b) Other Compensation Plans

The Company operates in foreign jurisdictions that require lump  sum benefits,  payable based  on

statutory regulations, for voluntary or involuntary termination. Where required,  an annual actuarial
valuation of the benefit plans is obtained.

The Company has recorded an unfunded liability of  $4.5 million and $3.7 million at December  31,
2012 and 2011, respectively, for costs associated with  these compensation plans in foreign jurisdictions.
The following table presents the classification of these liabilities in the Consolidated Balance Sheets:

Year Ended
December 31,

2012

2011

(in thousands)

Current:

Accrued compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other current liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$1,475
—

$1,290
199

Total current liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1,475

1,489

Long-term:

Other long-term liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$3,042

$2,243

Total liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$4,517

$3,732

The expense recorded in connection  with these plans was  $0.6 million, $0.7  million  and

$0.6 million during the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

F-17

Note 13. Stock Award Plans and Stock  Based  Compensation

(a) Equity Incentive Plans

The Company maintains the Axcelis  Technologies,  Inc. 2012  Equity Incentive  Plan  (the ‘‘2012
Equity Plan’’), which became effective on May 2,  2012. Our 2000 Stock Plan (the  ‘‘2000 Stock  Plan’’),
expired on May 1,  2012 and no new  grants may be made under that plan after this date.  However,
awards granted under the 2000 Stock Plan prior  to  the expiration remain outstanding and  subject to the
terms of the 2000 Stock Plan.

The 2012 Equity Plan reserves 3.8 million  shares of common stock, $0.001  par value  for grant  and
permits the issuance of options, stock appreciation rights,  restricted  stock, restricted stock units, stock
equivalents, and awards of shares of common stock that are not subject  to  restrictions or  forfeiture  to
selected  employees, directors and consultants  of  the Company.  Shares  that are not issued  under an
award (because such award expires, is  terminated  unexercised  or  is forfeited) that were outstanding
under the 2000 Stock Plan as of the May 2, 2012 will increase the  reserve of  shares available for grant
under the 2012 Equity Plan.

The term of stock options granted under these  plans  is specified  in the award agreements. Unless

a lesser term is otherwise specified by  the  Company’s Compensation  Committee  of  the Board of
Directors, awards under the 2012 Equity  Plan will expire seven years from  the date of  grant. In  general,
all awards issued under the 2000 Stock  Plan expire ten years  from  the date of grant. Under the terms
of these  stock plans, the exercise price of a stock  option may  not be less than the  fair market value of a
share of the Company’s common stock on the date  of grant. Under  the 2012 Equity Plan, fair market
value is defined as the last reported  sale  price of a share of the common stock on a national  securities
exchange as of any applicable date, as  long  as the Company’s shares  are  traded on such exchange.

Stock options granted to employees generally  vest over  a period of four years, while stock  options

granted to non-employee members of  the Company’s Board of Directors generally vest over a period of
6 months and, once vested, are not affected  by the  director’s termination of service to the Company.
Termination of service by an employee will cause options to  cease vesting as of  the date of  termination,
and in most cases, employees will have 90 days  after termination  to  exercise options  that  were vested as
of the termination of employment. In  general, retiring employees will  have one year after  termination
of employment to exercise vested options. The Company  settles stock option exercises with  newly
issued common shares.

Restricted stock units granted to employees during 2012,  2011 and 2010 had both  time-based
vesting provisions and performance-based vesting provisions. Generally, unvested restricted stock unit
awards expire upon termination of service to the Company. The Company settles restricted  stock  units
upon vesting with newly issued common shares.  No restricted stock was granted  under either  stock plan
during the three year period.

As of December 31, 2012, there were  1.5 million of shares  available  for grant under 2012 Equity

Plan. No shares are available for grant  under the 2000 Stock Plan.

As of December 31, 2012, there were  21.3 million options  outstanding under the  2012 Equity Plan
and the 2000 Stock Plan, collectively, and 1.0  million unvested restricted stock units outstanding under
the 2000 Stock Plan.

(b) Employee Stock Purchase Plan

The Employee Stock Purchase Plan (the ‘‘Purchase Plan’’) provides effectively all of  the

Company’s employees the opportunity  to  purchase  common stock of the Company at less than  market
prices. Purchases are made through payroll deductions of up to 10% of the employee’s salary  as elected
by the participant, subject to certain  caps set forth  in the Purchase Plan. Employees may  purchase  its

F-18

common stock at 85% of the market value of the Company’s common  stock  on the  day the stock is
purchased.

The Purchase Plan is considered compensatory and  as such, compensation expense  has been
recognized based on the benefit of the discounted  stock price, amortized  to compensation expense over
each  offering period of six months. Compensation  expense was $0.1 million for each of the years ended
December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010.

As of December 31, 2012, there were  a total of 2.0  million shares reserved for issuance and
available for purchase under the Purchase Plan. There  were  0.3 million, 0.4 million and 0.3 million
shares purchased under the Purchase Plan for the years ended December 31, 2012,  2011, and 2010,
respectively.

(c) Valuation of Employee Stock Options

For the purpose of valuing stock options,  the Company uses  the  Black-Scholes option pricing
model to calculate the grant-date fair  value of an  award. The  fair values of options granted were
calculated using the following estimated weighted-average assumptions:

Years ended December 31,

2012

2011

2010

Weighted-average expected volatility . . . .
Weighted-average expected term . . . . . .
Risk-free interest rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Expected dividend yield . . . . . . . . . . . . .

97.8%

97.8%

97.8%-113.55%
3.8-6.1 years

6.1 years
0.45%-1.37% 1.1%-2.4% 1.5%-2.0%
0%

6.2 years

0%

0%

Expected volatility—The Company is responsible for estimating volatility  and has considered a
number of factors when estimating volatility. The  Company’s method of estimating expected volatility
for all stock options granted relies on  a combination of historical and implied volatility. The Company
believes that this blended volatility results in a more accurate estimate of the grant-date fair value of
employee stock options because it more  appropriately reflects the  market’s current expectations  of
future volatility.

Expected term—The Company calculated  the weighted average expected term for stock options

granted prior to July 1, 2012, using a forward looking  lattice  model of the Company’s stock price
incorporating a suboptimal exercise factor  and a projected  post-vest forfeiture rate. For stock options
granted after July 1, 2012, the Company  used the simplified method for estimating the expected life of
‘‘plain vanilla’’ options. The change in the expected term from 10  years  to 7 years reflects the fact that
options granted after May 1, 2012 were  granted under  the 2012 Equity Incentive Plan, which  limits
option terms to seven years.

Risk-free interest rate—The yield on zero-coupon U.S. Treasury  securities for a period that is

commensurate with the expected term  assumption is used as the risk-free  interest rate.

Expected dividend yield—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.

(d) Summary of Share-Based Compensation Expense

The Company estimates the fair value  of  stock options using the Black-Scholes valuation model.
The fair value of the Company’s restricted  stock and restricted stock units  is calculated based upon the
fair market value of the Company’s stock at  the date of grant.

The Company uses the straight-line attribution method  to  recognize expense  for stock-based
awards such that the expense associated  with  awards is evenly recognized throughout the period.

F-19

The amount of stock-based compensation  recognized is based on the  value  of  the portion of the
awards that are ultimately expected to  vest. The Company  estimates  forfeitures at  the time  of grant and
revises them, if necessary, in subsequent  periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates.  The
term ‘‘forfeitures’’ is distinct from ‘‘cancellations’’  or ‘‘expirations’’  and represents only the  unvested
portion of the surrendered stock-based award. Based on a  historical analysis, a forfeiture rate of 5%
per  year, including executive officer awards, was applied to stock-based  awards for the years ended
December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010.

The Company recognized stock-based compensation expense of  $3.9 million, $4.7 million and
$4.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011  and 2010,  respectively. For  2012, 2011 and
2010, the Company primarily used stock  options in its annual equity compensation program.  During
2012, the Company recognized stock-based compensation expense of $0.1  million related to the
modification of a stock option grant  as a  result of a  restructuring  action taken by the Company.  As this
related to a restructuring activity, the Company  included this expense in the  restructuring line  item in
the Consolidated Statements of Operations.

The benefits of tax deductions in excess of recognized  compensation cost is reported  as a financing

cash flow, rather than as an operating cash flow. Because the Company  does not recognize the  benefit
of tax deductions in excess of recognized  compensation cost due to its  cumulative net  operating loss
position, this had no impact on the Company’s consolidated statement of  cash flows as of and for the
years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 or 2010.

F-20

(e) Stock Option Awards

The following table summarizes the stock option activity  for the years ended December  31, 2012,

2011 and 2010:

Outstanding at December 31, 2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Granted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Exercised . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Canceled . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Expired . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Options

(in thousands)
17,368
5,310
(704)
(333)
(2,693)

Outstanding at December 31, 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . .

18,948

Granted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Exercised . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Canceled . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Expired . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4,662
(372)
(654)
(1,491)

Outstanding at December 31, 2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . .

21,093

Granted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Exercised . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Canceled . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Expired . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Outstanding at December 31, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Exercisable at December 31, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4,077
(1,148)
(1,225)
(1,537)

21,260

11,680

Options Vested or Expected to Vest at

Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Term

Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value

(years)

(in  thousands)

Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price

$ 6.43
1.61
0.79
1.23
18.26

3.70

1.70
0.77
1.43
12.38

2.76

.93
.84
1.43
7.71

$ 2.24

$ 2.99

6.39

5.59

$4,607

$2,591

December 31, 2012(1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

20,558

$ 2.27

6.44

$2,015

(1) In addition to the vested options,  the Company expects a portion of  the  unvested options to vest at
some point in the  future. Options expected to vest is calculated  by applying an estimated forfeiture
rate to the unvested options.

Of the options outstanding at December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, 11.7  million, 10.2  million and
8.4 million, respectively, were vested  and  exercisable  with a weighted average exercise  price of $2.99,
$4.13, and $6.68, respectively. The total  intrinsic value,  which  is defined  as the  difference between the
market price at exercise and the price  paid by the employee  to  exercise the options, for options
exercised during the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011  and 2010 was $0.9  million, $0.7 million  and
$1.2 million, respectively.

The total fair value of stock options  vested during the year ended December 31, 2012  was

$4.1 million. As of December 31, 2012, there was $7.5  million of total forfeiture- adjusted unrecognized
compensation cost related to non-vested stock options granted under the 2012 Equity Incentive Plan
and the 2000 Stock Plan. That cost is expected  to  be  recognized  over a  weighted-average period of
2.5 years.

(f) Restricted Stock and Restricted Stock Units

Restricted stock units (‘‘RSUs’’) represent  the Company’s unfunded and unsecured promise to
issue shares of the common stock at  a future date,  subject to the terms  of  the RSU  Award Agreement

F-21

and either the 2012 Equity Incentive  Plan or the  2000 Stock Plan. The purpose  of  these  awards  is to
assist in attracting and retaining highly competent employees and directors  and to act as  an incentive in
motivating selected employees and directors  to  achieve  long-term  corporate objectives. RSU awards
granted in 2012, 2011 and 2010 included both  time vested awards and performance vested awards for
employees and executive officers. No restricted stock awards  were  granted, or vested, during the period.
The fair value of a restricted stock unit  and restricted stock  awards is  charged to expense ratably over
the applicable service period.

Changes in the Company’s non-vested  restricted stock units for  the years ended  December 31,

2012, 2011, and 2010 are as follows:

Weighted-Average
Grant Date Fair
Value per Share

Shares/units

(in thousands)

Outstanding at December 31, 2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Granted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Vested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Forfeited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Outstanding at December 31, 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Granted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Vested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Forfeited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Outstanding at December 31, 2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Granted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Vested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Forfeited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Outstanding at December 31, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

604
695
(1,052)
(19)

228
121
(196)
(2)

151
864
(47)
(7)

961

$5.90
1.72
3.30
2.94

$5.38
2.50
5.81
6.01

$2.52
1.65
2.82
1.62

$1.73

Some restricted stock units provide for a net  share settlement  program  to offset the personal

income tax obligations of the employee’s  restricted stock unit  vesting. Vesting activity above reflects
shares vested before net share settlement. As of December 31,  2012, there was $0.2  million  of  total
forfeiture adjusted unrecognized compensation cost related to performance  based restricted  stock  units
that did not vest, which is expected to  be  amortized over  a weighted average  amortization  period of
2.2 years.

Note 14. Stockholders’ Equity

Preferred Stock

The Company may issue up to 30 million shares of preferred stock in  one or more series.  The

Board of Directors is authorized to fix the  rights and terms for any series of preferred  stock without
additional shareholder approval. As of  December  31, 2012, 2011,  and 2010, there were no  outstanding
shares of preferred stock.

Note 15. Fair Value Measurements

Fair value is defined as the exchange price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a

liability (an exit price) in the principal or  most  advantageous market for  the asset or  liability  in an
orderly  transaction between market participants  on the measurement date.

F-22

(a) Fair Value Hierarchy

The accounting guidance for fair value measurement  requires an entity  to maximize the  use of

observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring  fair value. The
standard establishes a fair value hierarchy based on the level of  independent, objective evidence
surrounding the inputs used to measure fair value. A financial instrument’s  categorization within  the
fair value hierarchy is based upon the lowest level of  input  that is significant to the fair value
measurement. The fair value hierarchy is  as follows:

Level 1

applies to assets or liabilities for which there are quoted prices  in active markets for

identical assets or liabilities.

Level 2

applies to assets or liabilities for which there are inputs other than  quoted prices  that

are observable for the asset or liability, such  as quoted prices for  similar assets or  liabilities  in
active markets; quoted prices for identical  assets or  liabilities in markets with insufficient volume
or infrequent transactions (less active markets); or model-derived valuations in which significant
inputs are observable or can be derived principally from,  or corroborated by, observable market
data.

Level 3

applies to assets or liabilities for which there are unobservable inputs to the

valuation methodology that are significant  to  the measurement of the fair value  of the assets  or
liabilities.

(b) Assets Measured at Fair Value on a  Recurring  Basis

The Company’s money market funds  are  included  in cash and cash equivalents in  the Consolidated

Balance Sheets, and are considered a level 1  investment as  they  are  valued at quoted market prices  in
active markets.

The following table sets forth Company’s assets which are measured at fair value on  a recurring

basis by level within the fair value hierarchy.

December 31, 2012
Fair Value Measurements

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Total

(in thousands)

Assets
Cash equivalents:

Money market funds

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$29,179

$—

$— $29,179

December 31, 2011
Fair Value Measurements

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Total

(in thousands)

Assets
Cash equivalents:

Money market funds

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$29,927

$—

$— $29,927

(c) Other Financial Instruments

The carrying amounts reflected in the consolidated  balance sheets for cash and  cash equivalents

(which are comprised primarily of deposit and  overnight  sweep accounts), accounts receivable, prepaid
expenses and other current and non-current assets, accounts payable and accrued expenses  approximate
fair value due to their short-term maturities.

F-23

Note 16. Commitments and Contingencies

(a) Lease Commitments

The Company leases manufacturing and  office facilities and certain equipment under operating

leases that expire through 2016. Rental expense was $4.3 million,  $4.6 million,  and $5.2 million  under
operating leases for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011,  and 2010 respectively.

Future minimum lease commitments on non-cancelable operating leases  for the year ended

December 31, 2012 are as follows:

2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Operating
Leases

(in thousands)
$3,057
1,681
1,181
224

$6,143

(b) Purchase Commitments

The Company has non-cancelable contracts and purchase orders for inventory of $14.9  million  at

December 31, 2012.

(c) Litigation

The Company is not presently a party to any litigation  that it  believes  might have a  material
adverse effect on its business operations.  The Company is, from time to time, a party  to  litigation  that
arises in  the normal course of its business operations.

(d)

Indemnifications

The Company’s system sales agreements typically include provisions under  which the Company
agrees to take certain actions, provide  certain remedies and defend its customers  against third-party
claims of intellectual property infringement under specified conditions and to indemnify customers
against any damage and costs awarded  in connection with  such claims. The Company has not incurred
any material costs  as a result of such indemnifications and has not accrued any  liabilities  related to
such obligations in the accompanying  consolidated  financial  statements.

Note 17. Business Segment and Geographic Region Information

The Company operates in one business segment, which  is the manufacture of capital equipment

for the semiconductor manufacturing  industry.  The  principal market for  semiconductor  manufacturing
equipment is semiconductor manufacturers. Substantially all sales are made directly by the Company to
its  customers located in the United States, Europe and Asia Pacific.

The Company’s ion implantation systems  product line includes high current, medium current  and

high energy implanters. Other products include dry strip equipment, curing systems, and  thermal
processing systems. In addition to equipment, the Company provides post-sales  equipment service and
support, including spare parts, equipment  upgrades,  maintenance services and customer training.

F-24

Revenue by product lines is as follows:

Ion implantation systems, services, and  royalties . . .
Other systems and services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$156,090
47,295

(in thousands)
$237,857
81,559

$232,335
42,877

$203,385

$319,416

$275,212

Years ended December 31,

2012

2011

2010

Revenue and long-lived assets by geographic region, based on the physical  location of the

operation recording the sale or the asset, are as follows:

2012
United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Asia Pacific . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2011
United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Asia Pacific . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2010
United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Asia Pacific . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Revenue

Long-Lived
Assets

(in thousands)

$132,159
27,636
43,590

$43,440
—
752

$203,385

$44,192

$234,132
31,505
53,779

$54,472
—
996

$319,416

$55,468

$190,819
33,822
50,571

$50,532
—
442

$275,212

$50,974

Long-lived assets consist of property, plant and  equipment, net  and assets manufactured  for

internal use. Operations in Europe and Asia Pacific consist of sales and  service organizations.

International revenue, including export sales from U.S. manufacturing facilities  to  foreign
customers, sales by foreign subsidiaries and  branches was $142.8 million (70.2% of total revenue) in
2012, $231.0 million (72.3% of total revenue) in 2011, and $208.5 million (75.8% of total revenue) in
2010.

Note 18. Income Taxes

Income (loss) before income taxes are  as follows:

United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Foreign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$(37,682) $2,622
4,849

5,294

$(21,526)
4,265

Income (loss) before income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$(32,388) $7,471

$(17,261)

Years ended December 31,

2012

2011

2010

(in thousands)

F-25

Income taxes (credits) are as follows:

Years ended December 31,

2012

2011

2010

(in thousands)

Current:

United States

Federal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Foreign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ — $ — $ —
309
163
1,528
1,646

82
738

Total current . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

820

1,809

1,837

Deferred:

Foreign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total deferred . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

826

826

585

585

(1,525)

(1,525)

Income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$1,646

$2,394

$

312

Reconciliations of income taxes at the United States Federal statutory rate to the effective  income

tax rate are as follows:

Years ended December 31,

2012

2011

2010

(in thousands)

Income (credit) at the United States  statutory rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
State income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Unrecognized tax benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Effect of change in valuation allowance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Foreign income tax rate differentials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Restoration of foreign deferred tax assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Foreign dividend . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Stock options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deemed distribution from foreign subsidiaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$(11,336) $ 2,615
31
899
(3,160)
(365)

53
(832)
12,662
(788)
—
383
1,298
149
57

$(6,041)
309
842
6,550
(1,490)
— (1,329)
—
—
—
—
2,152
1,533
(681)
841

Income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 1,646

$ 2,394

$

312

F-26

Significant components of current and long-term deferred income taxes  are as  follows:

Federal net operating loss carryforwards . . . . . . . . . . . . .
State net operating loss carryforwards . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Foreign net operating loss carryforwards . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Federal tax credit carryforwards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
State tax credit carryforwards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Unremitted earnings of foreign subsidiaries . . . . . . . . . .
Intangible assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Property, plant and equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accrued compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Inventories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Stock compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Warranty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

As of December 31,

2012

2011

Current

Long Term

Current

Long Term

(in thousands)

$

— $ 88,088
1,181
—
1,853
—
17,814
—
9,051
—
(8,580)
—
661
—
5,925
—
368
352
(215)
22,582
4,378
—
36
612
917
1,820

$

— $ 79,163
2,685
—
1,821
—
15,505
—
—
9,051
(10,370)
—
803
—
5,589
—
—
541
—
22,447
3,970
—
51
1,293
(3,814)
1,243

Deferred taxes, gross . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

25,366

121,477

25,524

104,454

Valuation allowance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(25,062)

(119,605)

(24,160)

(102,814)

Deferred taxes, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$

304

$

1,872

$ 1,364

$

1,640

At December 31, 2012, the Company had $146.8 million of deferred tax assets relating to net
operating loss carryforwards, tax credit  carryforwards and other temporary differences, which are
available to reduce income taxes in future  years.  A valuation allowance must be established  when it is
‘‘more likely than not’’ that all or a portion  of  deferred tax assets will  not  be  realized. A review of all
available positive and negative evidence  needs to be considered, including a company’s  performance,
the market environment in which the company operates, length  of carryback and carryforward  periods,
existing sales backlog, and projections  of  future  operating results. Where there are cumulative losses in
recent years there is a strong presumption that a valuation allowance is needed.  This presumption  can
be overcome in very limited circumstances.

The Company is in a three year cumulative  loss position in the  United States. As a result,  the
Company maintains a 100% valuation allowance for  entities  in those  tax  jurisdictions to reduce the
carrying  value of deferred tax assets to  zero. The  Company will continue to maintain a  full valuation
allowance for those tax assets until sustainable future levels  of profitability  are evident.  Changes in the
valuation allowance in 2012 and 2011 were attributable  to changes  in the  composition  of  temporary
differences and changes in net operating  loss carryforwards.

At December 31, 2012, the Company has federal and state net operating  loss carryforwards of
approximately $89.3 million and foreign net operating  loss carryforwards of approximately $1.9  million
expiring principally between 2013 and 2032.

The Company has research and development and other tax  credit carryforwards of approximately

$21.8 million at December 31, 2012 that can be used to reduce future federal and  state income tax
liabilities. These tax credit carryforwards expire  principally between 2022  and 2028.  In  addition, the
Company has foreign tax credit carryforwards of  approximately $5.0  million  at December 31, 2012  that
are available to reduce future U.S. income tax liabilities subject to certain  limitations. These foreign tax
credit carryforwards expire between 2013 and 2016.

F-27

It  is Company policy to provide taxes for  the total anticipated  tax impact  of the undistributed
earnings of our wholly-owned foreign  subsidiaries’, as such earnings  are  not expected  to  be  reinvested
indefinitely. The Company anticipates that US tax  resulting from remitting such earnings will be off-set
by net operating loss or credit carryforwards to the extent  available. In  addition,  the Company does not
anticipate incurring a foreign withholding tax on  remitting such earnings since it does not intend  to
remit the earnings as dividends.

The Company and its subsidiaries file  income  tax returns in  the U.S. federal jurisdiction and
various states and foreign jurisdictions. The Company and most foreign  subsidiaries are subject to
income tax examinations by tax authorities for all years dating  back to 2001. The  Company’s policy is  to
recognize interest related to unrecognized  tax benefits as interest  expense and penalties as operating
expenses. The Company believes that it  has appropriate support for the income tax  positions  taken and
to be taken on its tax returns and that  its accruals for  tax liabilities are adequate for all open years
based on an assessment of many factors including past experience  and interpretations of tax law applied
to the facts of each matter.

At December 31, 2012, the Company  had unrecognized  tax benefits  of approximately  $7.7 million,

of which approximately $5.1 million reduced the Company’s deferred  tax  assets and the offsetting
valuation allowance and $2.6 million was  recorded in  other  long-term  liabilities. The Company does not
expect any significant changes in unrecognized  tax benefits in  2013.

A reconciliation of the beginning and ending balance  of  unrecognized tax  benefits are as follows:

Balance at beginning of year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Increases in unrecognized tax benefits  as a result of tax positions taken  during a prior
period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Decreases in unrecognized tax benefits  related to settlements with tax authorities . . .
Increases in unrecognized tax benefits  as a result of tax positions taken  during the

2012

2011

(in thousands)

$8,089

$6,965

646
(880)

1,124
—

current period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

663

Reductions to unrecognized tax benefits as a result of a lapse of the applicable

statute of limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(799)

—

—

Balance at end of  year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$7,719

$8,089

Recorded as other long-term liability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Recorded as a decrease in deferred tax assets and offsetting valuation allowance . . . .

$2,646
5,073

$3,244
4,845

$7,719

$8,089

Note 19. Quarterly Results of Operations (unaudited)

Dec. 31,
2012(1)

Sept. 30,
2012(2)

June 30, March 31, Dec. 31,
2011(5)
2012(4)
2012(3)

Sept. 30,
2011

June  30, March  31,

2011

2011

(in thousands, except per share data)

Revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 44,624 $44,640 $59,114 $ 55,007 $60,411 $72,455 $93,380 $93,170
31,081
Gross profit . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net income (loss) . . . . . . . . . .
1,812
Net income (loss) per share

20,536
(471) (10,027)

480
(14,818)

22,623
(2,113)

14,367
(8,718)

26,895
1,151

34,138
4,227

22,788

basic and diluted . . . . . . . . . $

(0.14) $ (0.08) $ (0.00) $

(0.09) $ (0.02) $

0.01 $

0.04 $ 0.02

(1) Gross profit and net loss include a  $13.4  million provision  for excess inventory  related to the

Company’s comprehensive review of its worldwide inventory levels.  Net loss  includes a $7.9  million
gain on sale of the Company’s dry strip assets and intellectual property to Lam Research;

F-28

restructuring charges of $0.6 million; and a $2.1  million  one-time marketing expense associated
with the Company’s evaluation programs.

(2) Net loss includes restructuring charges of $0.6 million.

(3) Net loss includes restructuring charges of $0.1 million and a tax expense  of $0.8 million related  to

an uncertain tax position in a certain foreign jurisdiction.

(4) Net loss includes restructuring charges of $2.9 million.

(5) Net loss includes a tax expense of $0.9 million related to an  uncertain tax position in a  certain

foreign jurisdiction.

Note 20. Subsequent Events

In order to align manufacturing and operating expense levels to changing business conditions, the

Company implemented a headcount reduction in  the first quarter of 2013. The Company anticipates
recording employee termination benefits  and other related costs of approximately $1.1 million during
the first quarter of 2013.

F-29

Pursuant to the requirements of Section  13 or 15(d)  of  the Securities Exchange Act of  1934, the

Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed  on its behalf  by the undersigned,  thereunto duly
authorized.

Signatures

AXCELIS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

By: /s/ MARY G. PUMA

Dated: March 1, 2013

Mary  G. Puma, Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange  Act of 1934, this report has  been signed

below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and  in the  capacities and  on the  date
indicated.

Signature

Title

Date

/s/ MARY G. PUMA

Mary G. Puma

/s/ JAY ZAGER

Jay Zager

/s/ R. JOHN FLETCHER

R. John Fletcher

/s/ STEPHEN R. HARDIS

Stephen R. Hardis

/s/ WILLIAM C. JENNINGS

William C. Jennings

/s/ JOSEPH P. KEITHLEY

Joseph P. Keithley

/s/ PATRICK H. NETTLES

Patrick H. Nettles

/s/ H.  BRIAN THOMPSON

H. Brian Thompson

Director and Principal Executive Officer

March  1, 2013

Principal Accounting and Financial Officer March 1,  2013

Director

Director

Director

Director

Director

Director

March  1, 2013

March  1, 2013

March  1, 2013

March  1, 2013

March  1, 2013

March  1, 2013

Exhibit No.

Exhibit Index

Description

3.1

3.2

4.1

10.1*

10.2*

10.3*

10.4

10.5*

10.6*

10.7*

10.8*

10.9*

Amended and Restated Certificate  of Incorporation  of the registrant, as adopted May 6,
2009. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 of the Company’s Form 8-K filed  with the
Commission on May 11, 2009.

Bylaws of the Company, as  amended  as of August 8,  2007. Incorporated  by  reference to
Exhibit 3.2 of the Company’s Form 10-Q for the quarter  ended June 30,  2007, filed  with
the Commission on August 9, 2007.

Specimen Stock Certificate.  Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1  of the Company’s
Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-36330).

Axcelis Technologies, Inc. 2000 Stock  Plan,  as amended through June 23,  2005.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit  10.2 to the Company’s Current Report on Form  8-K
filed with the Commission on June 28, 2005.

Axcelis Technologies, Inc. 2012 Equity Incentive Plan,  as adopted on  May 2,  2012.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit  99 to the Company’s registration  statement  on
Form S-8 filed with the Commission on June 30, 2012  (SEC File No.  333-181750).

Axcelis Management Incentive  Plan,  as amended and restated by the  Compensation
Committee of the Board of Directors  on February 11,  2010.  Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.2 of the Company’s report on  Form 10-K for the  year ended December  31, 2009
filed with the Commission on March 15,  2010.

Form of Indemnification Agreement approved  by the Board of Directors  of the Company
on February 9, 2012 for use with each of its directors and officers,  together with a  schedule
of each current indemnitee. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 of the Company’s
report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,  2011 filed with the Commission  on
February 29, 2012.

Form of Change in Control  Agreement, as  amended, as approved by the Board  of
Directors on April 27, 2012 between the Company  and each of its executive officers.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit  10.5 of the  Company’s  report  on  Form  10-Q  for the
quarter ended June 30, 2012 filed with the  Commission on August 7, 2012.

Form of Employee non-qualified stock option  grant  under the 2000 Stock Plan, updated as
of April 5, 2002. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the Company’s report on
Form 10-Q filed with the Commission on November 9, 2004.

Form of Non-Employee Director stock non-qualified stock option grant under the 2000
Stock Plan, updated as of July 12, 2004.  Incorporated  by reference  to  Exhibit 10.2 of the
Company’s report on Form 10-Q filed with the  Commission  on November  9, 2004.

Form of Restricted Stock Unit Award Agreement for use  under the 2000  Stock Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit  10.3 to the Company’s Current Report on Form  8-K
filed with the Commission on June 28, 2005.

Form of Employee Non-Qualified Stock  Option Certificate under the  2012 Equity Incentive
Plan, adopted June 18, 2012. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit  10.2 of the Company’s
report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30,  2012 filed with the Commission on
August  7, 2012.

10.10*

Form of Non-Employee Director Non-Qualified Stock Option Certificate under the 2012
Equity Incentive Plan, adopted June  18, 2012. Incorporated by  reference to Exhibit 10.3 of
the Company’s report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2012  filed with the
Commission on August 7, 2012.

Exhibit No.

10.11*

Description

Form of Restricted Stock Unit Award Agreement under  the 2012 Equity Incentive Plan,
adopted June 18, 2012. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit  10.4 of the Company’s report
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended  June 30, 2012 filed with the Commission on August 7,
2012

10.12*

Named Executive Officer Base Compensation at  February 29, 2012. Filed herewith.

10.13*

Non-Employee Director Cash Compensation  at February 29,  2012. Filed  herewith.

10.14*

10.15*

10.16*

Amended and Restated Employment Agreement between  the Company and Mary G. Puma
dated November 6, 2007. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 of the Company’s
report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,  2007 filed with the  Commission
on November 8, 2007.

Letter from Mary G. Puma  to  the Board of Directors dated May 1, 2009,  modifying her
Amended and Restated Employment  Agreement with  the Company.  Incorporated  by
reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the Company’s report on Form 8-K filed  with the Commission
on May  11, 2009.

Letter Agreement with Mary  G. Puma  dated September 22,  2011. Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.14 of the Company’s report on Form 10-K for  the year ended
December 31, 2011 filed with the Commission  on February  29, 2012.

10.17*

Letter Agreement with Mary  G. Puma  dated February 10, 2012.  Filed herewith.

10.18

10.19

10.20

10.21

10.22

10.23

10.24

Second Amended and Restated Loan and Security  Agreement dated as  of  April 25,  2011
between the Company and Axcelis Technologies  CCS Corporation,  as borrowers, and
Silicon Valley Bank. Incorporated by  reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the  Company’s report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March  31, 2011 filed with the  Commission on  May 6,
2011.

First Loan Modification Agreement  dated as of  December 27,  2011 between the  Company
and Axcelis Technologies CCS Corporation, as borrowers, and Silicon Valley Bank with
other Company subsidiaries confirming guaranties. Incorporated  by reference to
Exhibit 10.16 of the Company’s report on  Form 10-K for the  year ended December  31,
2011 filed with the Commission on February 29, 2012.

Second Loan Modification Agreement dated as  of March  5, 2012 between the  Company
and Axcelis Technologies CCS Corporation, as borrowers, and Silicon Valley Bank.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit  10.1 of the  Company’s  report  on  Form  10-Q  for the
quarter ended March 31, 2012 filed with the Commission  on  May 4,  2012.

Third Loan Modification Agreement dated as of September 10,  2012 between the Company
and Axcelis Technologies CCS Corporation, as borrowers, and Silicon Valley Bank.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit  10.1 of the  Company’s  report  on  Form  10-Q  for the
quarter ended September 30, 2012 filed with the Commission on  November 5,  2012.

License Agreement dated as  of March 30,  2009 between the Company  and SEN
Corporation. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the  Company’s Current  Report
on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on April 3,  2009.

Asset Purchase Agreement dated December 3,  2012 between  Axcelis Technologies,  Inc. and
Lam Research Corporation. Incorporated  by  reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the  Company’s
Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the  Commission on December  4, 2012.

Transition Agreement dated December 3, 2012 between Axcelis Technologies,  Inc. and  Lam
Research Corporation. Incorporated by  reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the  Company’s Current
Report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on  December 4,  2012.

Exhibit No.

14.1

21.1

23.1

31.1

31.2

32.1

32.2

101

Description

Ethical Business Conduct at Axcelis,  revised through January 2003.  Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 14.1 of the Company’s report on Form 10-K filed  with the Commission
on March 28, 2003.

Subsidiaries of the Company. Filed herewith.

Consent of Ernst & Young  LLP,  Independent  Registered Public Accounting Firm. Filed
herewith.

Certification of the Principal  Executive  Officer  under Exchange Act
Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) (Section 302 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act), dated February 29,  2012.
Filed herewith.

Certification of the Principal  Financial  Officer under Exchange  Act
Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) (Section 302 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act), dated February 29,  2012.
Filed herewith.

Certification of the Principal  Executive  Officer  pursuant to Section  1350 of Chapter 63 of
title 18 of the United States Code (Section 906  of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act),  dated
February 29, 2012. Filed herewith.

Certification of the Principal  Financial  Officer pursuant  to  Section 1350 of Chapter 63  of
title 18 of the United States Code (Section 906  of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act),  dated
February 29, 2012. Filed herewith.

The following materials from the Company’s Form  10-K  for the year ended December 31,
2012, formatted in eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL): (i) Consolidated
Statements of Operations, (ii) Consolidated Statement  of Comprehensive Income
(iii) Consolidated Balance Sheets, (iv) Consolidated Statements of Equity, (v) Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows, and (vi) Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

*

Indicates a management contract or compensatory plan.

You may obtain a copy of any of these  exhibits free  of charge either on  our  website at
http://www.axcelis.com or by contacting  Investor Relations at Axcelis Technologies, Inc., 108  Cherry Hill
Drive, Beverly, MA 01915-1053.

Schedule II—Valuation and Qualifying  Accounts
Axcelis Technologies, Inc.
(In thousands)

Year Ended December 31, 2012
Allowance for doubtful accounts and returns . .
Reserve for excess and obsolete inventory . . . .

Year Ended December 31, 2011
Allowance for doubtful accounts and returns . .
Reserve for excess and obsolete inventory . . . .

Year Ended December 31, 2010
Allowance for doubtful accounts and returns . .
Reserve for excess and obsolete inventory . . . .

Balance at
Beginning of
Period

Charged to
Costs and
Expenses

Deductions Other(*)

Balance  at
End of
Period

$

411
22,778

$ — $

14,492

(112)
(4,819)

$
6
1,150

$
305
33,601

$ 1,357
27,517

$ (535)
1,015

$

(449)
(5,583)

$

38
(171)

$
411
22,778

$ 2,390
36,980

$ (1,120)
2,015

$
(17)
(11,224)

$ 104
(254)

$ 1,357
27,517

(*) Represents foreign currency translation adjustments.

STOCK PERFORMANCE GRAPH
This graph compares the five-year cumulative total stockholder returns for our common stock to that of the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index and the Nasdaq
Composite Index at each of the last five fiscal year ends. The cumulative returns are based on a $100 investment on December 31, 2007, with all dividends, if
any, being reinvested. The stock performance shown on the graph below is not necessarily indicative of future price performance.

Company/Index Name

December 31 December 31 December 31 December 31 December 30 December 31

Axcelis Technologies Inc.
NASDAQ Composite Index
Philadelphia Semiconductor Index

2007
$100.00
$100.00
$100.00

2008
$11.09
$58.47
$51.77

2009
$30.65
$85.55
$88.20

2010
$75.22
$100.02
$100.93

2011
$28.91
$98.22
$89.31

2012
$30.22
$113.85
$94.12

$120.00$100.00$80.00$60.00$40.00$20.00$0.0012/31/2007 12/31/2008 12/31/2009 12/31/2010 12/30/2011 12/31/2012BOARD OF DIRECTORS

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

R. John Fletcher
Chief Executive Officer, 
Fletcher Spaght, Inc.

Stephen R. Hardis
Lead Director, Axcelis Technologies, Inc.,
Retired Chairman and Chief Executive Officer,
Eaton Corporation

William C. Jennings
Retired Partner, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Mary G. Puma
Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President

Jay Zager
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

John E. Aldeborgh
Executive Vice President, Customer Operations

William Bintz
Executive Vice President, Product Development,
Engineering and Marketing

Joseph P. Keithley
Chairman, Nordson Corporation
Former Chairman and CEO of Keithley Instruments

Kevin J. Brewer
Executive Vice President, Global Operations

Patrick H. Nettles
Executive Chairman of the Board of Directors, 
CIENA Corporation

Lynnette C. Fallon
Executive Vice President, Human Resources and Legal, 
General Counsel and Secretary

Mary G. Puma
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, 
Axcelis Technologies, Inc.

H. Brian Thompson
Executive Chairman, 
Global Telecom & Technology

AUDIT COMMITTEE
William C. Jennings, Chairman
R. John Fletcher
Joseph P. Keithley

COMPENSATION COMMITTEE
H. Brian Thompson, Chairman
R. John Fletcher
Stephen R. Hardis

NOMINATING AND GOVERNANCE 
COMMITTEE
Patrick H. Nettles, Chairman
Stephen R. Hardis
H. Brian Thompson

ANNUAL MEETING DATE & LOCATION
The annual meeting of stockholders will be held at 11:00 a.m. 
on Tuesday, May 14, 2013 at the offices of Edwards Wildman
Palmer LLP, 111 Huntington Ave., Boston, MA 02199

CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
108 Cherry Hill Drive
Beverly, MA 01915-1053
978-787-4000

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
Ernst & Young LLP
200 Clarendon Street
Boston, MA  02116-5072

INVESTOR INFORMATION/SEC FORM 10-K
Information on the Company, as well as the Company’s 2012
Annual Report on SEC Form 10-K and other SEC filings, can be
obtained free of charge either on our website at
http://www.axcelis.com or by contacting Investor Relations 
at Axcelis Technologies, Inc., 108 Cherry Hill Drive, Beverly, MA
01915-1053.  You can also e-mail investor relations at 
investor.relations@axcelis.com.

LEGAL COUNSEL
Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP
111 Huntington Avenue
Boston, MA 02199-7613

STOCK LISTING
The Company's common stock is traded on the NASDAQ Global
Select market under the symbol ACLS.

TRANSFER AGENT & REGISTRAR
For questions regarding misplaced stock certificates, changes
of address, or the consolidation of accounts, please contact the
Company's transfer agent:

Telephone: 1-781-575-2725
Hearing Impaired TDD#: 1-800-952-9245

Website:
http://www.computershare.com/investor

Address:
Computershare Trust Company, N.A. 
P.O. Box 43078
Providence, RI 02940-3078

Private Couriers/Registered Mail:
Computershare Trust Company, N.A. 
250 Royall Street
Canton, MA 02021

WEBSITE
http://www.axcelis.com

SAFE HARBOR STATEMENT
This document contains forward-looking statements under the SEC safe harbor provisions.  These statements are based on management’s current expectations and should be
viewed  with  caution.    They  are  subject  to  various  risks  and  uncertainties,  many  of  which  are  outside  the  control  of  the  company,  including  our  ability  to  implement 
successfully  our  profit  plans,  the  continuing  demand  for  semiconductor  equipment,  relative  market  growth,  continuity  of  business  relationships  with  and  purchases  by 
major  customers,  competitive  pressure  on  sales  and  pricing,  increases  in  material  and  other  production  costs  that  cannot  be  recouped  in  product  pricing  and  global 
economic and financial conditions. These risks and uncertainties are discussed in more detail in our Form 10-K and other SEC Filings, which may be obtained as described
above under “Investor Information/SEC Form 10-K”.