Neenah Annual Report 2004

← All annual reports

FY2004 Annual Report · Neenah

Loading PDF…

H o w d o y ou ma k e a gre a t
first impression ?

N
e
e
n
a
h
P
a
p
e
r
,

n
c
.

2
0
0
4
A
n
n
u
a

R
e
p
o
r
t

3460 Preston Ridge Road
Suite 600
Alpharetta, GA 30005
678.566.6500

2004 Annual Report

Shareholder Information

Corporate Headquarters

Stock Exchange

Neenah Paper, Inc.
3460 Preston Ridge Road
Suite 600
Alpharetta, GA 30005
678.566.6500
www.neenah.com

Annual Meeting of Shareholders

The annual meeting of the shareholders of Neenah Paper,
Inc. will be held Monday, June 20, 2005, at 2:00 p.m.,
Central time (3:00 p.m, Eastern time), at Neenah Paper
Whiting Mill, 3243 Whiting Road, Stevens Point, WI 54481.

Registrar and Transfer Agent

EquiServe Trust Company, N.A.
P.O. Box 43010
Providence, RI 02940
www.equiserve.com
877.498.8847

Investor Information

Inquiries and requests for information, including the
Company’s annual report to the Securities and Exchange
Commission on Form 10-K, may be obtained at no charge
by visiting the Company’s web site at www.neenah.com
or by otherwise contacting the company as follows:

Neenah Paper, Inc.
Attn: Stockholder Services
3460 Preston Ridge Road
Suite 600
Alpharetta, GA 30005
866.548.6569
or via e-mail to investors@neenahpaper.com

Neenah Paper’s common stock is traded on the
New York Stock Exchange under the symbol NP.

Independent Accountants

Deloitte & Touche LLP
191 Peachtree Street
Suite 1500
Atlanta, GA 30303

Business Description

Neenah Paper manufactures and distributes a wide range
of premium and specialty paper grades, with well-known
brands such as CLASSIC®, ENVIRONMENT®, KIMDURA®
and MUNISING LP®. The Company also produces and
sells bleached pulp, primarily for use in the manufacture
of tissue and writing papers. Neenah Paper is based in
Alpharetta, Georgia, and has manufacturing operations in
Wisconsin, Michigan and in the Canadian provinces of
Ontario and Nova Scotia.

Trademarks
The brand names mentioned in this report – CLASSIC CREST, CLASSIC COTTON,
CLASSIC, CLASSIC COLUMNS, NEENAH, UV/ULTRA II, ATLAS, ENVIRONMENT,
EAMES, OLD COUNCIL TREE, KIMDURA, EPIC II, DURAFORM, DURAFLEX,
BUCKSKIN, PREVAIL, TEXOPRINT, MUNISING LP, TECHNI-PRINT, KIMLON,
PHOTO-TRANS, HEIRLOOM – are trademarks of Neenah Paper, Inc.

start with a bla nk sh ee t of pape r

Every new beginning brings with it a

multitude of new possibilities – new

opportunities. Such is the case with

Neenah Paper. We’re a new stand-alone

company created from Kimberly-Clark’s

ﬁne paper, technical paper and pulp

operations. And while our heritage

goes back to the founding of the ﬁrst

Neenah Mill in 1873, our future is now

what we make of it. For us, it’s a blank

sheet of paper – a place to leave an

indelible mark.

2 Share a Strong Vision

4 Letter to Shareholders

8 Empower 2,100 Employees

14 Listen to Our Customers

18 Utilize the Best in All Our Businesses

Invest in Creative Thinking

26 Respect and Protect the Environment

30 Neenah Paper At-a-Glance

34 Board of Directors

Index to Financials

pg. 1

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

pg. 3

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

To our shareholde rs:

“ You don’t create value by
talking about it. Only
execution produces results.”

Sean T. Erwin

Chairman, President and
Chief Executive Ofﬁcer

Right size, right time, right market

Neenah Paper was created from three stand-alone

businesses. Yet today we function as one integrated and

independent company. We’ve taken the strengths and

resources from each business and used them to create

a strong foundation for our future.

A large piece of that foundation is the Neenah Paper brand.

It has tremendous equity in the marketplace. It is synony-

mous with outstanding quality, customer service and support.

Those qualities are being applied equally to all three of our

pulp and paper markets. Our focus now is on growing our

individual paper businesses – ﬁne paper and technical paper.

To facilitate that process and strengthen our structure, we

are making a signiﬁcant investment in an integrated ERP

(Enterprise Resource Planning) system, which will help align

production planning, supply chain management and inven-

tory management with the needs of our customers.

Our spin-off from Kimberly-Clark allows us to explore new

growth opportunities and reinvest in our business in ways

that were not open to us before. The math is in our favor.

pg. 5

We’re an $800 million company now, as opposed to

The power of people

being a small part of a $15 billion company. A $20 to $30

On the morning of December 2, 2004, we celebrated

million sales opportunity in our context is not only reachable;

our spin-off by ringing The Opening BellSM at the New York

it’s signiﬁcant.

A culture of accountability

Neenah Paper may be a new company, but our heritage

extends back more than a half century. Under Kimberly-

Clark, Neenah Paper established a leadership role in ﬁne

paper, technical paper and pulp. We’re not about to let that

go. Our ﬁrst priority is safety. Our responsibility is to create

value for customers and shareholders alike through innova-

tion, service and excellence. It is our employees who will

create this value and drive our success. Together, we are a

team of smart, engaged, results-oriented people who are

committed to making this company a success. For the ﬁrst

time ever, we are in control of our own destiny. The decisions

we make now have more impact on us than they did when

Stock Exchange. It was an exciting occasion for all of us

and the fruition of many months of hard work. The honor

of ringing the bell went to Bill Platt, Operations Manager

for our ﬁne paper mill in Neenah, Wisconsin. During the

spin-off process, we decided to establish a “Ring the Bell”

contest to recognize the employees who were creating and

driving value for the new company – not talking about what

they would do, but making things happen. In all, 45 differ-

ent teams, comprised of employees from all functions and

locations submitted their successes. The winning team then

selected Bill as their representative to ring the bell in New

York. We are keeping the “Ring the Bell” program alive and

using it as a means to capture savings and celebrate creat-

ing real value for our new company.

we were part of Kimberly-Clark. Bottom line, we are

It’s all about execution

accountable for everything we do.

Execution is what drives us forward. But to keep us on

a steady course, we are tracking all of the ﬁnancial and

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Vision:

To be the ﬁrst choice for branded and
customized paper and pulp products.

Mission:

To create value for our customers and
shareholders through innovation, service
and excellence.

It is our employees who will create this
value and drive our success.

non-ﬁnancial metrics that shape our business. Our mission

an investment not only in our future, but in the future

is to provide shareholders with a return that’s greater than

of our customers. By adding value to our customer

the cost of capital as we grow our business. That means

relationships, we demonstrate our strong commitment

we intend to reinvest our capital and cash wisely to

to helping them achieve success.

achieve growth. As a whole, the paper and forest products

industry has not provided attractive returns to sharehold-

ers in recent years. Neenah Paper’s specialty papers

business is different. Strategically, we expect these types

of higher return businesses to become a larger part of the

Neenah Paper portfolio as we continue to grow.

Developing a market for pulp

For Kimberly-Clark, pulp was a cost center. For us, our pulp

operation is an opportunity to become a world-class com-

petitive supplier in this industry. Of course, this will only

happen with a sound strategy and execution. We intend

to bring the same premium performance and value to pulp

Reorganizing R&D – Energizing innovation

that we bring to our ﬁne paper and technical paper busi-

Ours is a customer-centric business. One of the key ways

nesses. That includes enhancing the quality and usability

we help our customers is to provide innovative solutions

of our pulp. Our new, unique wireless bale is an excellent

for their needs. Often, that means we are developmental

example of that.

partners with our customers. Many of our products, espe-

cially our technical papers, are customized for speciﬁc

applications. Naturally, research and development plays

a vital role in that process. For that reason, we have com-

bined our disparate R&D operations under one roof and

We will have a strong market presence in pulp. We have

hired an outstanding sales and marketing team for our pulp

business that brings to the table more than 20 years of expe-

rience and strong relationships with customers and the mills.

are investing to improve our capabilities. We consider it

At both Terrace Bay and Pictou, we stand committed to

managing the natural resources under our protection in

pg. 7

(left to right)

James R. Piedmonte Vice President –
Operations

Bonnie C. Lind Vice President, Chief
Financial Ofﬁcer and Treasurer

Steven S. Heinrichs Vice President,
General Counsel and Secretary

Sean T. Erwin Chairman of the Board,
President and Chief Executive Ofﬁcer

William K. O’Connor Vice President –
Sales and Marketing

a sustainable and productive manner to maximize their

I hope this will be the ﬁrst of a long line of Neenah Paper

long-term viability. We are on track for both pulp mills

annual reports that you will read with interest. Actually, you

to be certiﬁed shortly to the American Forest & Paper

can do more than just read this one; you can experience

Association’s (AF&PA) Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI).

it. It’s printed on a variety of some of our best-selling ﬁne

Strengthening our competitive position in pulp also requires

making some tough decisions. One example is the closing

paper brands. Run your ﬁngers across the page. That’s the

feel of quality paper.

of the No. 1 mill at our Terrace Bay plant in Ontario, Canada.

The business segment and ﬁnancial sections of this report

As the smaller and older of the two mills at Terrace Bay, the

cover the full year’s activities in more detail. However, this

No. 1 mill did not justify the investment necessary to com-

report for 2004 includes only one month as an independent

pete successfully in today’s global pulp market. Also, this

company. Our job is now to get to work, begin executing

move improved the proﬁt-generating ability of the facility

our strategies as a new company, and deliver the results you

and allowed the teams to focus on improving the larger

expect from us.

No. 2 mill and our wood costs, both necessary steps to

achieve long-term viability of the plant.

The ﬁrst of many annual reports

Launching a new company the size of Neenah Paper isn’t

something that we could do by ourselves. It took the com-

bined efforts and support of our employees, customers and

investors to make it happen. For that, and for your contin-

ued support, I extend my deepest thanks.

We have our work ahead of us, but we are both ready and

anxious to get going.

Sean T. Erwin

Chairman, President and

Chief Executive Ofﬁcer

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

pg. 9

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

pg. 15

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

A new image

Meeting the challenge

Working closely with Bank of America’s minority partner,
American Product Distributors, Neenah Paper helped
enhance the look and feel of the bank’s letterhead
and business card – creating a private watermark with
greater recycled content (40 percent). The letterhead
was developed on a 25 percent CLASSIC COTTON®
Papers base sheet, while the business card stock was
developed using CLASSIC CREST® Papers.

In November 2003, the scrapbook industry
was in a virtual panic. Its annual tradeshow was
looming and its main paper supplier had gone
out of business. Although the quantities were
small by Neenah Paper’s standards, we viewed
this as an opportunity to enter one of the fast-
est growing segments of the hobby market.
Neenah’s No. 8 machine ran all of January
2004, changing colors and ﬁnishes 5–6 times
a day. The result: 40 new deep colors for the
tradeshow and several new customers for us.

pg. 17

Keeping up with customer needs

How do you react when a customer calls requesting a paper that matches the color of his
beloved alma mater? Or when a customer is looking for a product with years of longevity, high
strength and a slow cure thermo set coating? If you’re a Neenah Paper Customer Service
Analyst, you immediately recognize an opportunity to solve a customer’s problem. In 2004, Fine
Paper recognized the need for improved freight service to several Midwestern markets and
offered overnight delivery to these customers. Technical Paper found ways to address our cus-
tomers’ needs for lower-cost products by improving production processes and offering a selection
of alternative raw materials. We also set up a new world-class customer service measurement
system called the “perfect order.” This is a more comprehensive and stringent analysis of how we
are striving to exceed all facets of our customers’ service expectations.

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

pg. 19

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Putting quality in place

At Neenah Paper, we see quality in a variety of ways – as
process improvement, as enhancements to customer service,
as exceeding customers’ expectations as well as our own.

formation; a stock screen; and a defect detector.
Collectively, those represent the most signiﬁcant pro-
cess upgrades to the mill in decades.

Right now, process improvement is underway at the
Munising mill, where we produce our technical paper.
Improvements include the installation of a new head-
box, a major piece of equipment used to control sheet

We are sharpening our focus on customer service, too. Our
online Fine Paper Customer Service System is operational,
ensuring that customers receive the right samples at the
right time. And when our ERP system goes online later this
year, it will add efﬁciency and support to everything from
customer service to manufacturing.

pg. 21

Exceeding our customers’ expectations is key to our
success. Our Munising facility saw a 34 percent reduction
in the number of customer complaints. Our Fine Paper
facilities experienced a 41 percent reduction in the cost
of claims.

(from left to right)
Recently installed high-speed defect detector scans rolls
of paper at our Munising mill.

In the process control room at our Pictou mill, where operators
monitor the entire process from one central control station.

Saturated paper machine at the Munising mill.

Safety process inspector watches sheeting operation
at our Whiting mill.

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

pg. 23

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Solving problems the Neenah Paper way

At Neenah Paper, our R&D process is a collaborative one.
A good example of that is the recent development of the
EAMES™ Paper Collection, our new, innovative paper line.
Creating these papers involved a dedicated team of peo-
ple, from R&D, Marketing and Operations and cut across
both our Fine Paper and Technical Paper facilities. The
resultant EAMES Paper Collection, a collaboration with the
Eames Ofﬁce Foundation, represents a new approach to
paper making based on the design and color principles

of renowned designers Charles and Ray Eames. The
EAMES Paper Collection also represents something else:
how Neenah Paper’s previous stand-alone businesses
are now working together to produce results.

The major focus of our R&D activity is developing solutions
that meet our customers’ needs – both current and pro-
spective customers. In one case, a prospective Technical
Paper customer encountered a costly manufacturing glitch
in developing a new product. Fixing the problem would

pg. 25

have required a sizeable investment in new equipment
and an expensive change to their production processes.
Neenah Paper’s R&D team came to the rescue and
developed a more cost-effective solution, one that
involved only the addition of a simple step. Consequently,
this prospective customer became a new customer for
Neenah Paper!

(from left to right)
Mike Lindquist at our Munising mill: his innovative
solution to a customer’s problem helped us keep
the business.

A battery of quality tests, like this one for internal
strength, ensures a quality sheet.

Dave Winger at our Neenah mill: one of the team
members who developed our new EAMES™ Brand
of papers.

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

pg. 27

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Doing our part

As part of Neenah Paper’s stewardship program, many
unique areas have been permanently protected, including
old growth forests, seabird sanctuaries, and areas of geolo-
gical, cultural and historic signiﬁcance. These areas were
identiﬁed through collaboration with government agencies
and conservation groups such as the Nature Conservancy
of Canada. In addition, Neenah Paper has made available
thousands of acres of company owned and leased lands
for public enjoyment through the creation of over 30 parks
and wilderness areas in Ontario and Nova Scotia.

The Pictou woodlands facilities encompass approximately
1.2 million acres of combined owned and licensed or man-
aged land in Nova Scotia. As part of this operation, we
own and operate a tree nursery which produces and ships
8.5 million seedlings annually that are used in the refores-
tation of lands harvested by Neenah Paper as well as other
designated areas.

Neenah Paper is a leader in the manufacturing of environ-
mentally friendly papers. As part of our sustainability
program, we use post-consumer and recycled ﬁber as well
as alternate ﬁbers, like sugar cane bagasse. Since its debut

Neenah Paper’s forest tree nursery in Nova Scotia supplies millions of softwood seedlings for
the company’s extensive reforestation programs. The seedlings are also playing an important
role in helping children at the IWK Hospital for Children in Halifax. In a unique partnership with
students at Prince Andrew High School over the past three years, more than 60,000 seedlings
have been distributed to city residents in return for donations to the hospital. The result: over
$40,000 raised for the kids and a greener city!

pg. 29

in 1990, the ENVIRONMENT® Brand of premium papers
from Neenah Paper has led the industry in this category and
has been one of our fastest-growing brands. Two colors
of ENVIRONMENT Brand – White and Ultra Bright White –
have received certiﬁcation from SmartWood, a representative
of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), an international
non-proﬁt organization devoted to encouraging the respon-
sible management and sustainability of the world’s forests.

In another important step in our history of managing our
forestlands responsibly, we are in the process of having

our woodlands operations in Ontario and Nova Scotia
third-party certiﬁed by the standards of the Sustainable
Forestry Initiative (SFI). Similar to ISO 14001, SFI is a com-
prehensive system of principles and performance measures
that provides a means of assuring the public, our custom-
ers and our employees that we are following environmentally
sound forestry practices. While our woodlands currently
operate in a manner designed to ensure stakeholder involve-
ment and considerations for all forest values, obtaining
certiﬁcation to the strict standards of SFI provides yet another
level of assurance.

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Neenah Paper At-a-Glance

Neenah Paper is recognized as a world-class manufacturer
of ﬁne paper, technical paper and pulp.

Our Fine Paper division produces premium writing, text,
cover, specialty and private watermark papers that are
used in corporate annual reports, corporate identity
packages, invitations, personal stationery and high-end
packaging. Our premium paper brands are some of the
most recognized and preferred in the industry, including
CLASSIC®, CLASSIC CREST®, ENVIRONMENT®, NEENAH®
and UV/ULTRA® II Papers.

Our Technical Paper division is regarded as an industry
leader in research, technology and problem solving,
focused on durable, saturated and coated base papers

for a variety of end uses. For more than half a century, our
innovative paper products have replaced those made from
wood, plastic, cloth and leather. Our technical papers are
used in a wide array of applications – from labels and tape
to heat transfer and medical packaging – and our customers
are located in 39 countries around the world.

Our pulp business consists of mills in Pictou, Nova Scotia
and Terrace Bay, Ontario, together with related timberlands.
These mills produce northern softwood kraft pulp and
northern hardwood kraft pulp, which are used in the manu-
facture of tissue, publication, premium writing, printing
and other specialty papers.

pg. 31

Fine Paper
In 2004, our Fine Paper business
achieved four consecutive quarters
of year-on-year volume growth.

Change in Volume 2003 vs. 2004

03
04

Our Brands

2004 Highlights

• CLASSIC CREST®

• ATLAS™ Bond

• Total volumes grew 7 percent, driving 5 percent growth

• CLASSIC COTTON®

• ENVIRONMENT®

in net sales.

Papers

• Operating income grew 6 percent, with operating margins

• EAMES™ Paper

Collection

• OLD COUNCIL

TREE® Bond

• CLASSIC® Linen

• CLASSIC® Laid

• CLASSIC COLUMNS®

• NEENAH® Bond

• UV/ULTRA® II

Market Opportunities

Today, Neenah Paper participates in the
premium text and cover market segment which
represents only 3 percent of the total uncoated
printing and writing market. The opportunity to
move more customers up to using premium
papers to enhance their message is enormous.
As a stand-alone company and market leader,
Neenah Paper now has the opportunity to drive
growth in this segment, as well as explore new
distribution channels, products and geographies.

maintained over 30 percent.

• Our ENVIRONMENT® Papers gradeline was revised to meet

evolving customer needs and continues as our fastest-growing
Fine Paper brand.

• Fine Paper branded print advertising campaign rated number
one in awareness and believability in several graphic design
industry publications.

• Fine Paper assets successfully qualiﬁed and began manu-
facturing base paper for Technical Paper to meet demand
in this segment.

Key Strengths

Neenah Paper’s strong brands and focus on customer service and
quality, coupled with the newest and most efﬁcient asset base in the
premium papers segment, have led paper distributors, printers and
designers to specify Neenah Paper for their premium paper needs.

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Technical Paper
Our innovative technical papers provide
performance and value to a wide variety
of customers and end uses.

Premask

Label

Specialities

Tape

Abrasive

2004 Net Sales

Our Brands

2004 Highlights

KIMDURA®

EPIC II®

MUNISING LP®

TECHNI-PRINT®

DURAFORM®

KIMLON®

PHOTO-TRANS®

HEIRLOOM®

NEENAH™

DURAFLEX®

BUCKSKIN®

PREVAIL®

TEXOPRINT®

Key Strengths

• Volume grew 7 percent, with contributions across 15
product segments and in U.S., European, Asian and
Latin American markets.

• Net sales and operating income increased 9 and

32 percent, respectively.

• The Munising Mill celebrated 100 years of operation.

• Successful launch of EPIC II® Graphic Materials line
of text book covers complemented our Decorative
Component product line.

Our years of experience and signiﬁcant intellectual
capital in the production of specialty substrate materials
– combining ﬁbers, a variety of synthetic lattices and
multiple coating materials – make many products in
Neenah Paper’s Technical Paper division unique. This
expertise is combined with a R&D group that is passion-
ate in their work in driving innovation and working
closely with customers in ﬁnding new and improved uses
and products.

Market Opportunities

Technical Paper is positioned to further grow both
in the U.S. and overseas. The additional focus and
resources in R&D are also expected to result in
additional growth opportunities with new and
improved products.

pg. 33

Pictou Softwood

Pictou Hardwood

Terrace Bay Softwood

2004 Production (metric tons)

Terrace Bay Hardwood

• The Terrace Bay mill began producing
“wireless bales” for its hardwood pulp
production.

• Neenah Paper’s Pictou mill set the highest
productivity level in its 58-year-old history,
with over 264,000 metric tons.

Pulp
The Terrace Bay and Pictou mills
produce more than 700,000 metric
tons of pulp annually. The majority
of Neenah Paper’s pulp production
goes into Kimberly-Clark products.

2004 Highlights

• Neenah Paper’s net sales grew 11 percent

in 2004.

• Terrace Bay was again named the safest
paper mill in Canada by Pulp and Paper
Canada magazine.

Key Strengths

Market Opportunities

Both the hardwood and softwood pulp produced
at the mills have been noted for their many impor-
tant quality and product characteristics. Neenah
Paper’s background as a paper company and as
part of Kimberly-Clark’s tissue operations also give
us unique insights into what characteristics are
important to our customers.

As a new entry to the market pulp industry, Neenah Paper
has many opportunities to develop new customers. Pictou’s
location in Nova Scotia makes it an ideal shipping point for
delivery to Europe.

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Board of Directors

Sean T. Erwin
Chairman of the Board, Presi-
dent and Chief Executive Ofﬁcer
Neenah Paper, Inc.

Mary Ann Leeper, Ph.D.
President and
Chief Operating Ofﬁcer
Female Health Company

Timothy S. Lucas, CPA
Independent Consultant
Lucas Financial Reporting

Philip C. Moore
Partner
McCarthy Tétrault, L.L.P.

Stephen M. Wood, Ph.D.
Former Chief Executive Ofﬁcer
Kraton Polymers LLC

James G. Grosklaus
Retired Executive Vice President
Kimberly-Clark Corporation

Edward Grzedzinski
Former Chief Executive Ofﬁcer
NOVA Information Systems

pg. 35

Financials

36 Management’s Discussion and Analysis of

Financial Condition and Results of Operations

50 Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

51 Consolidated and Combined Statements of Operations

52 Consolidated and Combined Balance Sheets

53 Consolidated and Combined Statements of Changes

in Stockholders’ and Invested Equity

54 Consolidated and Combined Statements of Cash Flows

55 Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

The following discussion and analysis presents the factors that had

OV ERV I EW O F B U S I N ES S

a material effect on our results of operations during the years ended

December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002. Also discussed is our ﬁ nancial

position as of the end of those periods. You should read this discussion

in conjunction with our consolidated and combined ﬁ nancial state-

ments and the notes to those consolidated and combined ﬁ nancial

statements included elsewhere in this Annual Report. This Manage-

ment’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results

of Operations contains forward-looking statements. See “Forward-

Looking Statements” for a discussion of the uncertainties, risks and

assumptions associated with these statements.

I N T RO D U C T I O N

As more fully described in the “Business Outlook” section

of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial

Condition and Results of Operations, the results of opera-

tions of our business after the Spin-Off are and will continue

to be signiﬁ cantly different than the results of operations of

our business prior to the Spin-Off. This difference results

from, among other things, the prices at which we sell pulp to

Kimberly-Clark after the Spin-Off, which are signiﬁ cantly

different than the prices reﬂ ected in transfers of pulp to other

Kimberly-Clark operations prior to the Spin-Off, interest

expense of new long-term debt and incremental selling, gen-

eral and administrative expenses related primarily to reduced

economies of scale as a result of operating on a stand-alone

basis. To understand how the terms of our pulp supply agree-

ment with Kimberly-Clark would have affected our historical

results, you should see the “Business Outlook” section.

This Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial

Condition and Results of Operations is intended to provide

investors with an understanding of the historical performance

of our business, its ﬁ nancial condition and its prospects. We

will discuss and provide our analysis of the following:

(cid:127) Overview of Business;

(cid:127) Business Segments;

(cid:127) Separation from Kimberly-Clark;

(cid:127) Results of Operations and Related Information;

(cid:127) Liquidity and Capital Resources;

(cid:127) Critical Accounting Policies and Use of Estimates; and

(cid:127) Business Outlook.

We are a leading North American producer of premium ﬁ ne

papers and technical papers. We also produce bleached kraft

market pulp in Canada, where we own approximately one

million acres of timberlands and have non-exclusive rights

to harvest wood from approximately 4.8 million acres of other

timberlands. We have three primary operations: our ﬁ ne paper

business, our technical paper business and our pulp business.

In managing this diverse pulp and paper business, man-

agement believes that achieving and maintaining a leadership

position for its ﬁ ne paper and technical paper businesses,

responding effectively to competitive challenges, employing

capital optimally, controlling costs and managing currency and

commodity risks are important to the long-term success of the

business. The pulp cycle and general economic conditions also

impact our results. In this discussion and analysis, we will refer

to these factors.
Market Leadership. Achieving and maintaining leader-
ship for our ﬁ ne paper and technical paper businesses have

been an important part of our past performance. We have long

been recognized as a leading manufacturer of world-class pre-

mium writing, text and cover papers used in corporate annual

reports, corporate identity packages, invitations, personal statio-

nery and high-end packaging. Maintaining our leadership is

important to our results, particularly in light of the competi-

tive environment in which we operate.

Competitive Environment. Our past results have been

and future prospects will be signiﬁ cantly affected by the com-

petitive environment in which we operate. We experience

intense competition for sales of our principal products in our

major markets. Our paper business competes directly with

well-known competitors, some of which are larger and more

diversiﬁ ed in most of our markets. In our pulp business, we

have experienced, and will continue to experience, intense

competition from suppliers of softwood pulps and southern

hemisphere suppliers of hardwood pulps. We expect our com-

petitors to continue to be aggressive in the future.

Cost Control. To improve and maintain our competitive

position, we must control our raw material, manufacturing,

distribution and other costs. A major share of our investments

in capital improvements are intended to achieve cost savings

and improvements in productivity.

pg. 37

Cyclical Nature of the Pulp Industry. Revenues in the

pulp industry and our pulp business tend to be cyclical, with

Foreign Currency and Commodity Risk. Sales of pulp
by our Canadian manufacturing facilities are invoiced in U.S.

periods of shortage and rapidly rising market prices, leading

dollars in accordance with industry practice; therefore, no cur-

to increased production and increased industry investment

rency effects are presented in our analysis of the change in

until supply exceeds demand. Those periods are then typically

net sales for our pulp operations. However, we are exposed to

followed by periods of reduced market prices and excess and

changes in foreign currency exchange rates because most of

idled capacity until the cycle is repeated.

the costs relating to our pulp business are incurred in Canadian

General Economic Conditions. The markets for all of our
products are affected to a signiﬁ cant degree by general economic

dollars. These risks could have a material impact on our results

of operations if not effectively managed. The following charts

conditions. Downturns and improvements in the U.S. economy

illustrate changes in currency and pulp prices that occurred

or in our export markets affect the demand for our products.

during the periods covered by this Management’s Discussion

and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations:

Pulp Price History: Average Quarterly Prices U.S. dollars per metric ton

$700

$600

$500

$400

Northern bleached softwood kraft pulp
Northern bleached hardwood kraft pulp

2001

2002

2003

2004

Exchange Rate History: Average Quarterly Exchange Rates Canadian dollar per U.S. dollar

$0.85

$0.80

$0.75

$0.70

$0.65

$0.60

2001

2002

2003

2004

Source: Resource Information Systems, Inc.

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

B U S I N ES S S E G M EN T S

4.6 million acres of land owned by the Province of Ontario.

Our ﬁ ne paper business is a leading producer of premium

writing, text, cover and specialty papers used in corporate

annual reports, corporate identity packages, invitations, per-

sonal stationery and high-end packaging. Our products include

some of the most recognized and preferred papers in North

America, where we enjoy leading market positions in many

of our product categories. We sell our products primarily to

authorized paper distributors, converters and specialty busi-

nesses, with sales to distributors and distributor-owned paper

stores accounting for approximately 85% of our sales. We

believe that our ﬁ ne paper manufacturing facilities located

in Neenah and Whiting, Wisconsin are among the most efﬁ cient

in their markets and make us one of the lowest cost producers.

Our technical paper business is a leading producer of

durable, saturated and coated base papers for a variety of end

uses. We sell our technical paper globally into 15 product cat-

egories, and we focus on nine categories where we believe

we are a market leader, which include, among others, the tape,

label, abrasive, medical packaging and heat transfer techni-

cal paper markets. We are also a global supplier of materials

used to create customer-speciﬁ c components for furniture,

book covers and original equipment manufacturers’ products.

Our customers are located in 39 countries and include

3M Company, Perfecseal, Avery Dennison Corporation and

Saint-Gobain Group. Our technical paper manufacturing

facility is located in Munising, Michigan.

Our pulp business consists of two mills located in Pictou,

Nova Scotia and Terrace Bay, Ontario, together with related

timberlands. The Pictou mill is comprised of a single-line pulp

facility which produces primarily softwood pulp, as well as

timberlands encompassing approximately one million acres

of owned and 200,000 acres of licensed or managed land in

Nova Scotia. In 2004, the Pictou mill produced approximately

260,000 metric tons of bleached kraft pulp. The Terrace Bay

mill is comprised of two single-line pulp facilities which pro-

duce both softwood and hardwood pulp and a timberlands

operation. Terrace Bay holds non-exclusive rights under a sus-

tainable forest license to harvest wood from approximately

In 2004, the Terrace Bay mill produced approximately

450,000 metric tons of pulp. As described in “Business

Outlook – Recent Developments” below, on March 1, 2005,

we announced our intention to close one of the two single-

line pulp facilities at Terrace Bay in early May 2005.

SEPARAT I ON F ROM KIMBERLY-C LARK

Neenah Paper, Inc. was incorporated under the laws of the

state of Delaware in April 2004, as a wholly owned subsidiary

of Kimberly-Clark. We had no material assets or activities

until the transfer to us by Kimberly-Clark of the businesses

described in this Annual Report, which occurred immediately

prior to the Spin-Off. Prior to the Spin-Off, Kimberly-Clark

had conducted such businesses through various divisions and

subsidiaries. Following the Spin-Off, we became an indepen-

dent, public company, and Kimberly-Clark has no continuing

ownership interest in us.

Prior to the Spin-Off, we entered into several agree-

ments with Kimberly-Clark in connection with the separation

of our business from Kimberly-Clark’s businesses. These

agreements included a distribution agreement, a pulp supply

agreement, a corporate services agreement, an employee mat-

ters agreement and a tax-sharing agreement. The distribution

agreement provided for the transfer to us of the assets relating

to Kimberly-Clark’s Canadian pulp business and its ﬁ ne paper

and technical paper business in the United States, and the

assumption by us of the liabilities relating to these businesses.

The pulp supply agreement supports our transition from

a captive pulp producer to a market supplier of pulp. The cor-

porate services agreement facilitates an orderly transition from

being a part of a larger company to a stand-alone company.

The employee matters agreement allocates responsibilities relat-

ing to employee compensation and beneﬁ t plans and programs

and other related matters. The tax-sharing agreement governs

tax obligations arising out of our business both before and

after the Spin-Off.

pg. 39

RESULTS OF OP ERAT ION S AND RELATED

Commentary:

INFOR MAT ION

Year 2004 versus 2003

In this section, we discuss and analyze our net sales, income

before interest and income taxes (which we refer to as “operat-

ing income” in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis

of Financial Condition and Results of Operations) and other

information relevant to an understanding of our results of oper-

ations for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002.

Analysis of Net Sales – Years Ended December 31,

2004, 2003 and 2002

The following table presents net sales by segment, expressed as

a percentage of total net sales before intersegment eliminations:

Year Ended December 31,

2004

2003

2002

Fine Paper
Technical Paper
Pulp
Total

28%
16
56
100%

29%
16
55
100%

31%
17
52
100%

Percent Change in Net Sales Versus Prior Year

Total

Change Volume

Change Due to
Net
Price

Product

Mix Currency

Combined
Fine paper
Technical
paper
Pulp(a)

9
5

9
11

2
7

7
(2)

7
–

–
13

–
(2)

1
–

–
–

1
–

(a) Sales of pulp by our Canadian manufacturing facilities are invoiced in
U.S. dollars in accordance with industry practice; therefore, no currency
effects are presented in our analysis of the change in net sales for our
pulp operations.

Total net sales increased $61.8 million, or 8.7%, in 2004 com-

pared with 2003 primarily due to higher average market prices

for softwood and hardwood pulp and unit volume growth in

the ﬁ ne and technical paper businesses.

Our ﬁ ne paper business net sales increased $10.4 million,

The following table presents our net sales by segment for the

or 4.9%, primarily due to 7% growth in unit volumes. Unit

periods indicated:

Year Ended December 31,(a)

2004

2003

2002

(in millions)
Fine Paper
Technical Paper
Pulp
Eliminations
Total

$ 220.8
132.3
448.6
(29.6)
$ 772.1

$ 210.4
121.6
405.1
(26.8)
$ 710.3

$ 224.7
120.7
380.0
(23.4)
$ 702.0

(a) The above amounts of Net sales for the years ended December 31, 2003
and 2002 have been increased from the amounts previously reported by
$44.5 million and $44.0 million, respectively, to be in conformity with
EITF 00-10, which prohibits the netting of shipping and handling
costs against revenues.

volumes increased due to a strengthening U.S. economy that

boosted market demand for premium papers, new product

introductions and higher promotional spending. Product mix

was unfavorable as sales volumes shifted to a higher propor-

tion of lower-priced grades.

Our technical paper business net sales increased

$10.7 million, or 8.8%, primarily due to 7% growth in unit

volumes. The volume growth reﬂ ected increased market

demand as a result of an improving global economy and new

product introductions. Product mix was favorable as sales vol-

umes shifted to a higher proportion of higher-priced grades.

Our pulp business net sales increased $43.5 million, or

10.7%, primarily due to higher softwood pulp prices. Average

market prices for softwood and hardwood pulp increased 15%

and 2%, respectively. The higher prices in 2004, particularly

for softwood pulp, reﬂ ected increased global demand. Net sales

subsequent to the Spin-Off (in December 2004) were reduced

by $12.9 million or 3.2% lower compared to total 2003 pulp

revenues, reﬂ ecting the one-time effect resulting from the new

pulp supply agreement with Kimberly-Clark which transfers

title at product delivery rather than shipment date.

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

Year 2003 versus 2002

of net sales for the periods indicated and is intended to provide

Percent Change in Net Sales Versus Prior Year

a perspective of trends in our historical results:

Total

Change Volume

Change Due to
Net
Price

Product
Mix

Combined
Fine paper
Technical paper
Pulp(a)

1
(6)
1
7

(5)
(6)
(2)
(5)

6
1
1
12

–
(1)
2
–

Total net sales increased $8.3 million, or 1.2%, in 2003

compared with 2002.

Our ﬁ ne paper business net sales decreased $14.3 mil-

lion, or 6.4%, primarily due to 6% lower sales volumes.

Weakness in the U.S. economy and trends toward increased

use of lower-priced papers reduced demand for premium

papers. Slightly higher net selling prices due to a May 2003

price increase were offset by additional discounts and a less

favorable product mix, as sales volumes shifted to a higher

proportion of lower-priced grades.

Our technical paper business net sales increased $0.9 mil-

lion, or 0.7%. Unit sales volumes in total were ﬂ at while selling

prices were slightly higher, following a 1.8% average price

increase in the second quarter of 2003.

Our pulp business net sales increased $25.1 million, or

6.6%, primarily due to price increases. Average market prices

Year Ended December 31,

2004

2003

2002

Net sales
Cost of products sold
Gross proﬁ t
Selling, general and
administrative expenses
Asset impairment loss
Other (income) and
expense – net
Operating income (loss)
Interest expense
Income (loss) before

income taxes
Provision (beneﬁ t)
for income taxes
Net income (loss)

100.0 %
83.9
16.1

100.0 %
84.8
15.2

100.0 %
81.3
18.7

5.9
14.6

0.7
(5.1)
0.2

(5.3)

4.9
–

1.4
8.9
–

8.9

4.8
–

(0.2)
14.1
–

14.1

(1.9)
(3.4) %

3.4
5.5 %

5.2
8.9 %

Analysis of Operating Income (Loss) –

Years Ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002

The following table sets forth our pre-tax income (loss) by

segment for the periods indicated:

Year Ended December 31,
(in millions)
Fine Paper
Technical Paper
Pulp
Corporate costs
Total

2004

2003

2002

$ 67.0
21.9
(120.5)
(8.3)
$ (39.9)

$ 63.2
16.6
(16.5)
–
$ 63.3

$ 77.2
18.4
3.7
–
$ 99.3

for softwood and hardwood pulp increased 13% and 18%,

Asset Impairment Loss

respectively. These improvements were tempered by a 5%

Our Terrace Bay, Ontario pulp mill incurred operating losses

decline in volume primarily due to unusually high sales in 2002,

in 2002, 2003 and 2004. We anticipate that the facility will

as Kimberly-Clark increased consumption of hardwood pulp in

continue to incur operating losses in 2005, 2006 and 2007.

order to reduce hardwood pulp inventory levels. Hardwood

The principal causes of these projected losses are:

pulp inventories increased in 2001 as Kimberly-Clark substi-

(cid:127) continued high operating costs at this facility;

tuted softwood pulp consumption for hardwood pulp and also

(cid:127) prices for pulp sold to Kimberly-Clark under the new

due to reduced hardwood pulp sales to external customers.

pulp supply agreement, which will be at substantially

The following table sets forth line items from our consoli-

higher discounts than those at which pulp was transferred

dated and combined statements of operations as a percentage

to Kimberly-Clark prior to the Spin-Off;

(cid:127) anticipated lower market prices for pulp in the second

half of 2005 and forward as a result of an expected

downturn in the pulp cycle; and

(cid:127) continued strength of the Canadian dollar relative to

the U.S. dollar.

pg. 41

Because projected extended periods of operating losses

products. Kimberly-Clark’s management concluded that the

are indicators of impairment under Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) 144, Accounting for the
Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets (“SFAS 144”),
we performed an asset impairment test on the facility under

facility was not impaired prior to the Spin-Off because, as

used by Kimberly-Clark, it was an integrated part of Kimberly-

Clark’s tissue and other businesses and the estimated

undiscounted future cash ﬂ ows of the businesses consuming

the guidance of SFAS 144, which indicated that the carrying

such pulp were sufﬁ cient to recover the carrying amounts of

amount of the Terrace Bay facility would not be recoverable

their long-lived assets, including the Terrace Bay facility.

from estimated future cash ﬂ ows. Accordingly, in December

2004, we recorded a pre-tax, non-cash impairment loss of

approximately $110.0 million to reduce the carrying amount

of the Terrace Bay facility. In addition, in December 2004, in

recognition of the probability that the No. 1 mill would be

closed (see “Business Outlook–Recent Developments” below),

we recorded an additional impairment loss of approximately

$2.8 million related to the long-lived assets of the Terrace Bay

facility. A deferred tax beneﬁ t of approximately $40.8 million

was also recorded as a result of the impairment losses, resulting

in a net after-tax charge of approximately $72.0 million.

In determining the impairment losses, the estimated

Commentary:

Year 2004 versus 2003

Percent Change in Operating Income Versus Prior Year

Change Due to
Fiber/
Net Wood
Change Volume Price Mix Currency Other(b)

Total

Combined(c)
Fine paper
Technical
paper
Pulp(a)(c)

–
6

32
–

–
9

12
–

–
(2)

(3)
–

–
(3)

(12)
–

–
–

9
–

–
2

26
–

(a) The operating loss for our pulp business in 2004 includes an impair-

fair value of the Terrace Bay facility was based on probability-

ment loss of $112.8 million for our Terrace Bay facility.

weighted pre-tax cash ﬂ ows from operating the facility,

(b) Includes distribution, pension, energy and other costs.

discounted at a risk-free interest rate. The signiﬁ cant assump-

tions used to determine fair value of the facility included

our long-term projections of the market price of pulp, the

projected cost structure of the facility and the long-term rela-

tionship of the Canadian dollar and the U.S. dollar. We also

considered our plans to improve the cost structure at Terrace

Bay, primarily through future capital projects and a plan for a

cogeneration arrangement that would lower the cost of elec-

tricity, when determining the fair value of the facility used to

determine the impairment losses. This estimate of the fair

value of the Terrace Bay facility reﬂ ects these assumed

improvements to the facility’s cost structure.

Prior to the Spin-Off, Kimberly-Clark’s management

also performed an impairment test of the Terrace Bay facility

under the guidance of SFAS 144. The purpose of that analy-

sis was to determine if the Terrace Bay facility was impaired

when held by Kimberly-Clark prior to the Spin-Off. As oper-

ated by Kimberly-Clark, the Terrace Bay facility supplied more

than 90% of the pulp it produced to other Kimberly-Clark

businesses where it was used to produce tissue and other

(c) Percentage changes from prior period have been omitted from this table
for Combined and Pulp because percentage changes are not meaningful
when there is operating income in one period and an operating loss in
the other.

Overall operating income decreased $103.2 million

and we incurred an operating loss of $39.9 million in 2004

primarily due to the impairment loss for Terrace Bay

($112.8 million pre-tax).

Our ﬁ ne paper business operating income increased

$3.8 million primarily due to the higher sales volumes and

improved manufacturing operations and the beneﬁ ts of cost

reduction programs. These gains were partially offset by

higher costs for ﬁ ber, energy and other materials and a less

proﬁ table product mix. In addition, results in 2003 included

charges of $1.1 million for a workforce reduction and

$1.3 million for a write-off of a paper machine.

Our technical paper business operating income

increased $5.3 million, or 31.9% due to improved manu-

facturing operations, higher sales volumes and favorable

foreign currency effects. The improved manufacturing

costs were due to increased productivity, reduced waste

and the beneﬁ ts of cost reduction programs.

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

Our pulp business operating loss increased

Our technical paper business operating income

$104.0 million in 2004 and we incurred an operating

decreased $1.8 million, as increased costs for ﬁ ber and

loss of $120.5 million primarily due to the impairment

manufacturing labor more than offset slightly higher-selling

loss for Terrace Bay. Higher selling prices of 15% and 2%

for softwood and hardwood pulp, respectively, were partially

prices. Included in 2002 was $1.3 million received as a
settlement for the synthetic label and specialties contract

offset by unfavorable currency effects and increased manufac-

that was terminated in 2001.

turing costs. The higher costs resulted from a 7% decrease in

Our pulp business operating income decreased

the average exchange rate for the U.S. dollar relative to the

$20.2 million and the business incurred an operating loss

Canadian dollar as well as higher ﬁ ber and maintenance costs.

of $16.5 million in 2003. Higher-selling prices of 13% and

We incurred $8.3 million of corporate expenses in 2004,

18% for softwood and hardwood pulp, respectively, were

including approximately $4.5 million of one-time start-up

off set by increased manufacturing costs. These higher costs

costs relating to our becoming an independent, public com-

were a result of an average 12.0% weakening of the U.S. dollar

pany and other post-Spin-Off costs to operate as a stand-alone

relative to the Canadian dollar as well as higher wood and

company. There were no comparable costs in 2003.

energy costs and lower mill efﬁ ciencies. Foreign currency

Year 2003 versus 2002

Percent Change in Operating Income Versus Prior Year

Change Due to
Fiber/
Net Wood
Change Volume Price Mix Currency Other(a)

Total

Combined
Fine paper
Technical
paper
Pulp (b)

(36)
(18)

(10)
–

(8)
(8)

(4)
–

9
2

3
–

(10)
(4)

(12)
–

(4)
–

3
–

(15)
(8)

(8)
–

(a) Includes distribution, pension, energy and other costs.

(b) Percentage changes from prior period have been omitted from this table
for Pulp because percentage changes are not meaningful when there is
pre-tax income in one period and a pre-tax loss in the other.

Overall operating income decreased $36.0 million, or 36.3%,

in 2003 compared with 2002.

Our ﬁ ne paper business operating income declined

$14.0 million primarily due to the lower sales volumes and

higher manufacturing costs. Manufacturing costs increased

due to higher costs for ﬁ ber, energy and other materials and

higher pension expense, as well as lower efﬁ ciencies resulting

from the volume declines. These increases were partly offset

by cost reduction programs that reduced certain raw material

transac tional losses in 2003 were $10.5 million, versus a gain

in 2002 of $0.2 million.

Additional Statement of Operations Commentary:

Selling, general and administrative expenses were $45.8 mil-

lion, $34.6 million and $33.6 million for the years ended

2004, 2003 and 2002. The increase in 2004 is primarily due

to $4.5 million of one-time, start-up costs related to our

becoming an independent, public company and other post

Spin-Off costs to operate as a stand-alone company.

We incurred $1.4 million of interest expense on our

$225 million of senior notes for the month of December

(following the Spin-Off ).

The effective tax rate was 36.1%, 38.5% and 37.3% for

the years 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The decrease in

the rates between 2004 and 2003 was primarily due to lower

state and local income taxes. The increase in the rates between

2002 and 2003 was primarily due to the phase out of a Nova

Scotia tax credit related to capital spending that ended in

2002 (see Note 4 of Notes to the Consolidated and Combined

Finan cial Statements included elsewhere in this Annual

Report for a reconciliation of the annual effective tax rates).

LIQ U I D I T Y A N D CA P I TA L RES O U RC ES

costs and improved labor efﬁ ciencies, as well as lower spend-

(in millions)

ing for advertising and general expenses. In addition, 2003

Year Ended December 31,

2004

2003

2002

included the previously mentioned charges of $1.1 million for

the workforce reduction and $1.3 million for the write-off of

a paper machine.

Net cash ﬂ ow provided
by (used in):
Operating activities
Investment activities
Financing activities
Capital expenditures

$ 76.0
(19.1)
(37.8)
19.1

$ 73.6
(23.6)
(50.0)
24.4

$ 111.8
(16.0)
(95.8)
18.4

pg. 43

Operating Cash Flow Commentary

$118.4 million. As a percentage of net sales, year-end working

Cash provided by operations of $76.0 million for the year

capital ranged between 14.0% and 15.3% during the period

ended December 31, 2004 increased $2.4 million from 2003.

2002 through 2004.

This increase was the result of increased earnings (after adjust-

For periods subsequent to the Spin-Off, cash provided

ing for the non-cash Terrace Bay impairment loss and related

by operations will be adversely impacted by sales of pulp to

deferred tax beneﬁ ts), partially offset by a smaller decrease in

Kimberly-Clark at higher discounts than those used to price

operating working capital than 2003, as discussed below. Cash

transfers of pulp to Kimberly-Clark operations in the past.

provided by operations decreased $38.2 million or 34.2% in 2003

See “Business Outlook” contained in this “Management’s

compared with 2002 primarily due to lower net income.

Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results

During 2004, higher average selling prices for pulp resulted

of Operations” for a discussion of how our historical results

in signiﬁ cantly higher accounts receivable and increased our

would have been different if the higher discounts had been

investment in working capital at December 31, 2004 to

in effect.

Contractual Obligations

The following table presents the total contractual obligations for which cash ﬂ ows are ﬁ xed or determinable as of December 31, 2004:

(in millions)

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Unconditional purchase obligations $ 39.5
Long-term debt payments
–
Interest payments on long-term debt 16.6
Other postretirement beneﬁ t
obligations
Operating leases
Open purchase orders
Contributions to pension trusts
Transition services payments

1.6
2.7
20.1
18.1

$ 26.0
–
16.6

$ 25.8
–
16.6

1.8
2.7
–
–

2.0
1.7
–
–

2.2
1.7
–
–

2.5
1.7
–
–

to Kimberly-Clark

Total contractual obligations

7.5
$ 106.1

–
$ 47.1

–
$ 46.1

–
$ 46.3

–
$ 46.6

Beyond
2009

$ 37.2
225.0
81.6

17.0
15.1
–
–

–
$ 375.9

Total

$ 180.1
225.0
164.6

27.1
25.6
20.1
18.1

7.5
$ 668.1

The unconditional purchase obligations are for the

We entered into a corporate services agreement with

purchase of raw materials, primarily wood chips, and utilities,

Kimberly-Clark pursuant to which Kimberly-Clark will pro-

principally electricity. Although the business is primarily liable

vide a variety of administrative services for a period of time

for payments on the above operating leases and unconditional

following the Spin-Off. Kimberly-Clark provides to us certain

purchase obligations, based on historic operating performance

employee beneﬁ ts administration and payroll, management

and forecasted future cash ﬂ ows, management believes the

information, transportation, environment and energy, purchas-

business’ exposure to losses, if any, under these arrangements

ing and certain accounting functions. Each service is made

is not material.

available to us on an as-needed basis through December 31,

The open purchase orders displayed in the table represent

2005, or such shorter or longer periods as may be provided in

amounts the business anticipates will become payable within

the corporate services agreement. We paid $0.6 million for

the next year for goods and services the business has negotiated

these services in the fourth quarter of 2004 and estimate these

for delivery.

fees will be $7.5 million in 2005 (included in the table above).

The above table includes future payments that we will

make for postretirement beneﬁ ts other than pensions. Those

amounts are estimated using actuarial assumptions, including

expected future service, to project the future obligations.

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

Investing Commentary:

We will incur signiﬁ cant interest expense obligations

Capital spending in all years was below annual depreciation

under the senior notes and our revolving credit facility.

amounts of $35.8, $35.3 million and $34.3 million in 2004,

Management believes that the ability to generate

2003 and 2002, respectively. Over the three years ended

cash from operations and our borrowing capacity under our

December 31, 2004, approximately 40% of cumulative capital

revolving credit facility are adequate to fund working capital,

spending related to projects to maintain current levels of

capital spending and other cash needs in the foreseeable

operations by replacing or maintaining existing equipment.

future. Our ability to generate adequate cash from operations

An additional one-third of cumulative expenditures were for

in the future, however, will depend on, among other things,

programs to enhance operating performance by increasing

our ability to successfully implement our business strategies

productivity or reducing operating costs, with the balance for

and cost-cutting initiatives, and to manage the impact of

environmental and other projects.

changes in pulp prices and currencies. We can give no assurance

We anticipate that total capital expenditures for 2005 and

that we will be able to successfully implement those strategies

2006 will be substantially higher than they have been on aver-

and cost-cutting initiatives, or successfully manage our pulp

age for historical periods. We have planned capital expenditure

pricing and currency exposures.

programs for which we anticipate incurring approximately

Our ability to issue additional stock will be constrained

$37 million in 2005 and approximately $42 million in 2006.

because such an issuance of additional stock may cause

These amounts include approximately $4 million in 2005 and

the Spin-Off to be taxable to Kimberly-Clark under Section

approximately $14 million in 2006 for planned capital expendi-

355(e) of the Internal Revenue Code, and under the tax

tures relating to protection of the environment. Including the

sharing agreement, we would be required to indemnify

amounts identiﬁ ed in the preceding sentence, planned expendi-

Kimberly-Clark against that tax. See “Risk Factors – Risks

tures for major environmental projects during the period 2005

Related to the Spin-Off and Our Separation from Kimberly-

through 2009 include approximately $20 million for an efﬂ uent

Clark” for a more detailed discussion of Section 355(e).

discharge pipeline and a new outfall at the Pictou mill and

between approximately $15 million and $25 million for equip-

ment and engineering to abate total reduced sulphur emissions

and for other environmental matters at the Pictou and Terrace

Bay mills, to remove and replace transformers containing poly-

chlorinated biphenyls at the Terrace Bay mill, to improve stream

crossings in the timberlands licensed from the Province of

Ontario and for an air scrubber for the Munising mill’s coal-

ﬁ red boiler. These capital expenditures are not expected to have

a material adverse effect on the Company’s ﬁ nancial condition,

results of operations or liquidity.

Financing Commentary:

Prior to the Spin-Off, our ﬁ nancing (net of cash transfers to

Kimberly-Clark) was provided by Kimberly-Clark. After the

Spin-Off, ﬁ nancing is expected to come from cash generated

from operations and long-term borrowing.

Prior to the Spin-Off, we incurred $225 million of long-

term debt through the issuance of the initial senior notes.

Proceeds from the note offering were used to pay a one-time

Spin-Off payment of $213 million to Kimberly-Clark.

C RI T I CAL ACCO UN T I N G PO LIC IES

A N D U S E O F ES T IM AT ES

The preparation of ﬁ nancial statements in conformity with

accounting principles generally accepted in the United States

requires estimates and assumptions that affect the reported

amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the ﬁ nancial

statements and the reported amounts of net sales and expenses

during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from

these estimates, and changes in these estimates are recorded

when known. The critical accounting policies used in the

preparation of the combined ﬁ nancial statements are those

that are important both to the presentation of ﬁ nancial

condition and results of operations and require signiﬁ cant

judgments with regard to estimates used. These critical judg-

ments relate to the timing of recognizing sales revenue, the

recoverability of deferred income tax assets, pension beneﬁ ts

and future cash ﬂ ows associated with impairment testing of

long-lived assets.

pg. 45

Revenue Recognition

period income tax receivables or payables related to our

We recognize sales revenue when all of the following have

operations, which were ﬁ led on a consolidated basis with

occurred: (1) delivery has occurred, (2) persuasive evidence

Kimberly-Clark. For all periods, the income tax provisions

of an agreement exists, (3) pricing is ﬁ xed or determinable,

have been determined as if we were a separate taxpayer.

and (4) collection is reasonably assured. Delivery is not con-

sidered to have occurred until the customer takes title and

assumes the risks and rewards of ownership. The timing of

revenue recognition is largely dependent on shipping terms.

Revenue is recorded at the time of shipment for terms des-

ignated free on board (“FOB”) shipping point. For sales

transactions designated FOB destination, revenue is recorded

when the product is delivered to the customer’s delivery site.

With the exception of pulp sales to Kimberly-Clark and cer-

tain other customers, our sales terms are FOB shipping point

and revenue is recognized at the time of shipment. For pulp

sales to Kimberly-Clark and other customers that are desig-

nated FOB destination, revenue is recognized when the

product is delivered to the customer’s delivery site. Sales are

reported net of allowable discounts and estimated returns.

Reserves for cash discounts, trade allowances, credit losses

and sales returns are estimated using historical experience.

Deferred Income Tax Assets

Pension Benefits

Prior to the Spin-Off, the employees of our business partici-

pated in Kimberly-Clark’s deﬁ ned beneﬁ t pension plans and

deﬁ ned contribution retirement plans, which cover substan-

tially all regular employees. In connection with the Spin-Off,

Kimberly-Clark retained the obligations for former employees

of the U.S. paper operations.

In connection with the Spin-Off, and as set forth in the

employee matters agreement, obligations related to former and

active employees of the Canadian pulp operations and active

employees of the U.S. paper operations became our responsi-

bility. A share of pension assets related to active employees

of the U.S. paper operations were transferred from Kimberly-

Clark’s pension plan to a new pension plan established by us.

This new plan provides substantially similar beneﬁ ts and cred-

its our employees for service earned with Kimberly-Clark.

With respect to Canadian employees, we assumed the existing

pension assets and obligations of the related Kimberly-Clark

As of December 31, 2004, we have recorded deferred income

pension plans.

tax assets totaling $30.5 million related to temporary differ-

Kimberly-Clark’s funding policy for the qualiﬁ ed, deﬁ ned

ences, and we have established no valuation allowances against

beneﬁ t plans that became our responsibility was to contribute

these deferred income tax assets. As of December 31, 2003,

assets to fully fund the accumulated beneﬁ t obligation. Subject

our net deferred income tax assets were $22.8 million. In

to regulatory and tax deductibility limits, any funding short-

determining the need for valuation allowances, we consider

fall was to be eliminated over a reasonable number of years.

many factors, including the speciﬁ c taxing jurisdiction, income

Nonqualiﬁ ed plans providing pension beneﬁ ts in excess of

tax strategies and forecasted earnings for the entities in each

limitations imposed by the taxing authorities were not funded.

jurisdiction. A valuation allowance would be recognized if,

Consolidated and combined pension expense for deﬁ ned

based on the weight of available evidence, we conclude that

beneﬁ t pension plans was $10.7 million, $13.4 million and

it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the

$4.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and

deferred income tax asset will not be realized.

2002, respectively. Pension expense is calculated based upon a

Our operations have been included in the consolidated

number of actuarial assumptions applied to each of the deﬁ ned

income tax returns of Kimberly-Clark. Kimberly-Clark will

beneﬁ t plans. The weighted-average, expected long-term rate

indemnify us for all income tax liabilities and retain rights to

of return on pension fund assets used to calculate pension

all tax refunds for periods through the date of the Spin-Off.

expense in percents was 8.50, 8.50 and 9.31 for the years

Accordingly, the consolidated and combined balance sheet for

ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The

periods prior to the Spin-Off does not include current or prior

expected long-term rate of return on pension fund assets held

by the Company (and prior to the Spin-Off, Kimberly-Clark),

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

pension trusts was determined based on several factors,

The discount (or settlement) rate that is utilized for

including input from pension investment consultants and

determining the present value of future pension obligations

projected long-term returns of broad equity and bond indices.

generally has been based in the U.S. on the yield reported for

Also considered were the plans’ historical 10-year and 15-year

the long-term, AA-rated corporate bond indexes, converted

compounded annual returns. Kimberly-Clark anticipated that

to an equivalent one-year compound basis. This practice

on average the investment managers for each of the plans will

was validated at December 31, 2002. The weighted average

generate annual long-term rates of return of at least 8.50%.

discount in percent was 5.75 and 6.20 for the years ended

Kimberly-Clark’s expected long-term rate of return on the

December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

assets in the plans was based on an asset allocation assumption

Our consolidated and combined pension expense

of about 70% with equity managers, with expected long-term

was $10.7 million for 2004. This is based on an expected

rates of return of approximately 10%, and 30% with ﬁ xed

weighted-average, long-term rate of return on assets in our

income managers, with an expected long-term rate of return

plans of 8.50%, a weighted-average discount rate for our

of about 6%. The actual asset allocation was regularly reviewed

plans of 6.21% and various other assumptions. Pension

and periodically rebalanced to the targeted allocation when

expense beyond 2004 will depend on future investment per-

considered appropriate. Also, when deemed appropriate, hedg-

formance, our contributions to the pension trusts, changes in

ing strategies were executed using index options and futures to

discount rates and various other factors related to the covered

limit the downside exposure of certain investments by trading

employees in the plans.

off upside potential above an acceptable level. Such hedging

The fair value of the assets in our deﬁ ned beneﬁ t plans

strategies were executed in 2004, 2003 and 2002. Following

increased to approximately $329 million at December 31, 2004

the Spin-Off, we are following a similar methodology for

from about $275 million at December 31, 2003, primarily

determining our long-term rate of return on pension assets

due to investment gains, currency exchange effects and plan

and investment strategy and also plan to continue to evaluate

contributions exceeding payments for pension beneﬁ ts and

our long-term rate of return assumptions.

plan expenses. Lower discount rates have caused the projected

Pension expense was determined based on the fair value

beneﬁ ts obligations of the deﬁ ned beneﬁ t plans to exceed

of assets rather than a calculated value that averages gains and

the fair value of plan assets by approximately $58 million at

losses (“Calculated Value”) over a period of years. Investment

December 31, 2004, compared with approximately $53 million

gains or losses represent the difference between the expected

at December 31, 2003. The fair value of plan assets exceeded

return calculated using the fair value of the assets and the

the accumulated beneﬁ t obligation by about $6.5 million at

actual return based on the fair value of assets. The variance

the end of 2004. At the end of 2003, the fair value of the

between the actual and the expected gains and losses on pen-

planned assets exceeded the accumulated beneﬁ t obligation

sion assets is recognized in pension expense more rapidly than

by about $0.2 million. The Company and Kimberly-Clark

it would be if a Calculated Value for plan assets was used. As

contributed about $16.6 million to pension trusts related to

of December 31, 2004, our plans had cumulative unrecognized

plans for which we assumed responsibility in 2004 compared

investment losses and other actuarial losses of approximately

with $16.2 million in 2003. In addition, we made direct ben-

$128.3 million. These unrecognized net losses may increase

eﬁ t payments of approximately $0.1 million in each of 2004,

our future pension expense if not offset by (i) actual invest-

2003 and 2002 for unfunded supplemental retirement beneﬁ ts.

ment returns that exceed the assumed investment returns, (ii)

The discount rate used for our pension obligation is iden-

other factors, including reduced pension liabilities arising from

tical to the discount rate used for our other postretirement

higher discount rates used to calculate our pension obligations

obligation. The discount rates displayed for the two types of

or (iii) other actuarial gains, including whether such accumu-

obligations may appear different due to the weighting used in

lated actuarial losses at each measurement date exceed the
“corridor” determined under SFAS 87, Employers’ Accounting
for Pensions.

the calculation of the two weighted-average discount rates.

Impairment

Property, plant and equipment are tested for impairment in
accordance with SFAS 144, Accounting for the Impairment or
Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, whenever events or changes in
circumstances indicate that the carrying amounts of such long-

lived assets may not be recoverable from future net pre-tax

cash ﬂ ows. Impairment testing requires signiﬁ cant manage-

ment judgment including estimating the future success of

product lines, future sales volumes, growth rates for selling

prices and costs, alternative uses for the assets and estimated

proceeds from disposal of the assets. Impairment testing is

conducted at the lowest level where cash ﬂ ows can be mea-

sured and are independent of cash ﬂ ows of other assets. An

asset impairment would be indicated if the sum of the

expected future net pre-tax cash ﬂ ows from the use of the asset

(undiscounted and without interest charges) is less than the

carrying amount of the asset. An impairment loss would be

measured based on the difference between the fair value of the

asset and its carrying amount. We determine fair value based

on an expected present value technique in which multiple cash

ﬂ ow scenarios that reﬂ ect a range of possible outcomes and a

risk-free rate of interest are used to estimate fair value.

The estimates and assumptions used in the impairment

analysis are consistent with the business plans and estimates

we use to manage our business operations. The use of different

assumptions would increase or decrease the estimated fair

value of the asset and would increase or decrease the impair-

ment charge. Actual outcomes may differ from the estimates.

See “Results of Operations and Related Information –

Analysis of Pre-tax Income (Loss) – Asset Impairment Loss”

for a summary of our asset impairment test on the Terrace Bay

pulp facility, which resulted in a net after-tax impairment loss

of approximately $72.0 million in December 2004.

pg. 47

B U S I N ES S O U T LO OK

Recent Developments

On March 1, 2005, we announced the planned closure of the

smaller of our two single-line pulp mills at the Terrace Bay

facility (the “No. 1 Mill”). The No. 1 Mill was originally con-

structed in 1948 and has annual capacity of approximately

125,000 tons of bleached kraft pulp. In conjunction with the

closing, we will offer early retirement and severance packages

to approximately 130 employees. The closing was authorized

by our Chief Executive Ofﬁ cer on February 28, 2005, pursuant

to a resolution of the Board of Directors, and is expected to

occur in early May 2005.

We expect to incur approximately $6.0 million of exit

costs in connection with the closure, including one-time ter-

mination beneﬁ ts related to early retirement, severance and

deﬁ ned-beneﬁ t pension plans of approximately $5.5 million

and other associated exit costs of $0.5 million. In addition, we

expect to incur approximately $1.0 million of general expenses

related to training of employees. Approximately $6.3 million

of the estimated costs of $7.0 million will result in future cash

expenditures during 2005 and 2006.

In addition, in March 2005, we will record a pre-tax, non-

cash impairment loss of approximately $0.9 million related to

the remaining value of the long-lived assets of the No. 1 Mill

at Terrace Bay (See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis

of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Results of

Operations and Related Information – Asset Impairment Loss”).

As a result of closing the No. 1 Mill, we notiﬁ ed

Kimberly-Clark of our intention to terminate a part of our

commitment to supply and their requirement to purchase

northern bleached hardwood kraft pulp pursuant to the terms

of our pulp supply agreement. Under the pulp supply agree-

ment, we were obligated to provide 40,000, 30,000, 20,000

and 10,000 tons of northern bleached hardwood kraft pulp

produced at the Terrace Bay mill annually in 2005, 2006,

2007 and 2008, respectively. Our commitment to supply and

Kimberly-Clark’s requirement to purchase northern bleached

hardwood kraft pulp pursuant to the terms of the pulp supply

agreement from the Pictou mill (in annual quantities which

are identical to those shown above) is unchanged.

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

We believe that the remaining productive capacity

at our Terrace Bay and Pictou mills and the availability of

Sales of Pulp to Kimberly-Clark after the Spin-Off.
Pulp sales to Kimberly-Clark following the Spin-Off are

market pulp are sufﬁ cient to supply our internal and external

made pursuant to a new pulp supply agreement. The prices

pulp requirements.

Pulp Operations
Transfers of Pulp within Kimberly-Clark prior to the Spin-
Off. Historically, our pulp operations have been operated as a
captive pulp producer for Kimberly-Clark’s tissue and other

businesses. Prior to the Spin-Off, intra-company transfers of

pulp by our business to Kimberly-Clark were made pursuant

to an advance transfer pricing agreement negotiated among

Kimberly-Clark and certain taxing authorities. Under the

advance transfer pricing agreement, pulp was transferred

to Kimberly-Clark at a transfer price equal to a published

industry index price less a discount agreed to among

Kimberly-Clark and the taxing authorities. Kimberly-Clark

believes that those negotiated and agreed discounts reﬂ ected

the then current market conditions for pulp without the exis-

tence of a long-term, take or pay supply agreement.

at which we will sell pulp to Kimberly-Clark under the new

pulp supply agreement are based on published industry index

prices (subject to minimum and maximum prices for northern

bleached softwood kraft pulp shipped to North America prior

to December 31, 2007) less agreed discounts. Those discounts

will be substantially higher than the discounts contained in

the advance transfer pricing agreement. We believe that the

discounts and the other terms reﬂ ected in the new pulp supply

agreement are comparable to those which Kimberly-Clark

currently could obtain from an unafﬁ liated third party, consid-

ering the magnitude of Kimberly-Clark’s purchases, the term

of the pulp supply agreement and the other terms reﬂ ected in

the agreement.

If the new pulp supply agreement had been in place

for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002,

we estimate that our historical combined net sales and gross

proﬁ t would have declined approximately as shown below:

(in millions)

Year
2004
2003(a)
2002(a)

Net Sales

New Pulp
Agreement

Historical

Decrease

Historical

Gross Profit

New Pulp
Agreement

$ 772.1
710.3
702.0

$ 746.5
685.8
684.5

$ 25.6
24.5
17.5

$ 124.2
107.9
131.6

$ 98.6
83.4
114.1

Decrease

$ 25.6
24.5
17.5

(a) The above amounts of Net sales for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002 have been increased from the amounts previously reported by $44.5 million
and $44.0 million, respectively, to be in conformity with EITF 00-10, which prohibits the netting of shipping and handling costs against revenues.

pg. 49

If the new pulp supply agreement had been in place for the

that the historical net sales and gross proﬁ t (loss) of our pulp

years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, we estimate

business would have decreased approximately as shown below:

(in millions)

Year
2004
2003(b)
2002(b)

Net Sales

New Pulp
Agreement

Historical

Gross Profit (Loss)

Decrease

Historical

New Pulp
Agreement

Decrease

$ 448.6
405.1
380.0

$ 423.0
380.6
362.5

$ 25.6
24.5
17.5

7.0
3.4
10.8

$ (18.6)
(21.1)
(6.7)

$ 25.6
24.5
17.5

(b) The above amounts of Net sales for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002 have been increased from the amounts previously reported by $38.6 million

and $38.0 million, respectively, to be in conformity with EITF 00-10.

Other Items

that beginning in 2005, we will incur ongoing, full-year

As noted elsewhere in this Annual Report, our historical

incremental selling, general and administrative expenses of

ﬁ nancial results will not be indicative of our future perfor-

approximately $14 million related primarily to reduced econo-

mance, nor do they reﬂ ect what our ﬁ nancial position and

mies of scale as a result of operating on a stand-alone basis.

results of operations would have been had we operated as

In addition, we expect to pay Kimberly-Clark approximately

a separate, independent company during the periods pre-

$7.5 million pursuant to transition services agreements in 2005.

sented. Among other things, our management anticipates

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of Neenah Paper, Inc.:

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of Neenah Paper, Inc. and subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of

December 31, 2004 and the combined balance sheet of the Pulp and Paper Business of Kimberly-Clark Corporation (“Pulp and

Paper Business”), consisting of the Fine Paper and Technical Paper divisions and the Canadian pulp operations, as of December 31,

2003, and the related consolidated and combined statements of operations, cash ﬂ ows and changes in stockholders’ equity and in

invested equity for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2004. These consolidated and combined ﬁ nancial

statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these ﬁ nancial state-

ments 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 ﬁ nancial

statements are free of material misstatement. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of

its internal control over ﬁ nancial reporting. An audit includes consideration of internal control over ﬁ nancial reporting as a basis

for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the

effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over ﬁ nancial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also

includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the ﬁ nancial statements, assessing the

accounting principles used and signiﬁ cant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall ﬁ nancial statement

presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

The accompanying combined ﬁ nancial statements were prepared to present the assets and liabilities and related results of

operations and cash ﬂ ows of the Pulp and Paper Business, which was spun off to Kimberly-Clark Corporation’s stockholders as

described in Note 1 to the consolidated and combined ﬁ nancial statements, and may not necessarily be indicative of the conditions

that would have existed or the results of operations and cash ﬂ ows if the Pulp and Paper Business had operated as a stand-alone

company during the periods presented.

In our opinion, such consolidated and combined ﬁ nancial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the ﬁ nancial posi-

tion of the Company at December 31, 2004 and the Pulp and Paper Business at December 31, 2003, and the results of its operations

and its cash ﬂ ows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2004, in conformity with accounting principles gen-

erally accepted in the United States of America.

DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Atlanta, Georgia

March 30, 2005

Consolidated and Combined Statements of Operations

pg. 51

(in millions, except share and per share data)

Year Ended December 31,

2004

2003

2002

Net Sales

Cost of products sold

Gross Proﬁ t

Selling, general and administrative expenses

Asset impairment loss (Note 12)

Other (income) and expense – net

Operating Income (Loss)

Interest expense

Income (Loss) Before Income Taxes

Provision (beneﬁ t) for income taxes

Net Income (Loss)

Earnings (Loss) Per Common Share

Basic

Diluted

Weighted Average Common Shares Outstanding (in thousands)

Basic

Diluted

See Notes to Consolidated and Combined Financial Statements

$ 772.1

$ 710.3

$ 702.0

647.9

124.2

45.8

112.8

5.5

(39.9)

1.4

(41.3)

(14.9)

(26.4)

602.4

107.9

34.6

–

10.0

63.3

–

63.3

24.4

38.9

(1.79)

2.64

570.4

131.6

33.6

–

(1.3)

99.3

–

99.3

37.0

62.3

4.23

14,738

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Consolidated and Combined Balance Sheets

(in millions, except share data)

A S S E T S

Current Assets

Cash and cash equivalents

Accounts receivable, net

Inventories

Deferred income taxes

Prepaid and other current assets

Total Current Assets

Property, Plant and Equipment – net

Timberlands

Deferred Income Taxes

Prepaid and Intangible Pension Costs

Other Assets

Total Assets

LI A B I LI T I ES A N D S TO C K H O L D ER S ’ A N D I N V ES T ED E Q U I T Y

Current Liabilities

Trade accounts payable

Other payables

Accrued expenses

Total Current Liabilities

Long-term Debt

Noncurrent Employee Beneﬁ ts and Other Obligations

Deferred Income Taxes

Total Liabilities

Commitments and Contingencies (Notes 9 and 10)

Stockholders’ and Invested Equity

Common stock, par value $0.01 – authorized: 100,000,000 shares;

issued and outstanding: 14,763,319 shares

Additional paid-in capital

Kimberly-Clark’s net investment

Retained deﬁ cit

Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)

Unearned compensation on restricted stock

Total Stockholders’ and Invested Equity

December 31,

2004

2003

19.1

92.4

88.7

3.2

2.2

205.6

257.6

5.2

27.3

72.9

18.0

–

77.1

85.7

3.7

4.9

171.4

368.1

5.2

19.1

24.2

4.0

$ 586.6

$ 592.0

43.8

32.7

6.8

36.6

87.2

225.0

48.0

8.4

368.6

0.1

239.2

–

(70.7)

51.6

(2.2)

218.0

6.6

30.4

69.7

–

54.1

34.5

158.3

–

436.8

–

(3.1)

–

433.7

Total Liabilities and Stockholders’ and Invested Equity

$ 586.6

$ 592.0

See Notes to Consolidated and Combined Financial Statements

Consolidated and Combined Statements of Changes in Stockholders’ and Invested Equity

pg. 53

(in millions, shares in thousands)

Amount

Common Stock

Additional
Paid-In
Capital

Kimberly-
Clark’s Net
Investment

Retained
Deficit

Accumulated
Other

Unearned
Compensation
Comprehensive On Restricted
Income (Loss)

Stock

$ 479.5

Balance, December 31, 2001

Net income

Other comprehensive income

Unrealized foreign currency

translation

Minimum pension liability

Other

Net cash transfers to Kimberly-Clark

Non-cash transfers from
Kimberly-Clark

Balance, December 31, 2002

Net income

Other comprehensive income

Unrealized foreign currency

translation

Minimum pension liability.

Other

Net cash transfers to Kimberly-Clark

Non-cash transfers from
Kimberly-Clark

Balance, December 31, 2003

Net income (loss)

Other comprehensive income

Unrealized foreign currency

translation

Minimum pension liability

Other

Net cash transfers to Kimberly-Clark

Adjustment to deferred taxes at
Spin-Off

Other non-cash transfers to
Kimberly-Clark

Spin-Off payment to Kimberly-Clark

Transfer to additional paid-in capital

–

Issuance of common stock

14,738

0.1

–

236.9

–

Restricted stock awards,
less amortization

–

2.3

Balance, December 31, 2004

14,763

$ 0.1

$ 239.2

See Notes to Consolidated and Combined Financial Statements

62.3

–

(95.8)

0.5

446.5

38.9

–

(50.0)

1.4

436.8

44.3

–

(37.6)

8.2

(1.8)

(213.0)

(236.9)

–

(70.7)

–

(29.4)

–

2.5

(26.5)

0.6

–

(52.8)

–

59.7

(9.4)

(0.6)

–

(3.1)

–

24.8

30.0

(0.1)

–

(70.7)

51.6

–

(2.2)

Comprehensive
Income

62.3

2.5

(26.5)

0.6

38.9

59.7

(9.4)

(0.6)

88.6

(26.4)

24.8

30.0

(0.1)

28.3

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Consolidated and Combined Statements of Cash Flows

(in millions)

Year Ended December 31,

2004

2003

2002

Operating Activities

Net income (loss)

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities

(26.4)

38.9

62.3

Depreciation and amortization

Asset impairment loss

Deferred income tax beneﬁ t

Loss on asset dispositions

Net cash provided by (used in) changes in operating working capital

Accounts receivable

Inventories

Prepaid and other current assets

Trade accounts payable

Other payables

Accrued expenses

Foreign currency effects on working capital

Pension and other postretirement beneﬁ ts

Other

Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities

Investing Activities

Capital expenditures

Proceeds from dispositions of property

Other

Net Cash Used in Investing Activities

Financing Activities

Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt

Debt issuance costs

Short-term borrowings

Repayments of short-term borrowings

Spin-Off payment to Kimberly-Clark

Net transfers to Kimberly-Clark

Net Cash Used in Financing Activities

Net Increase in Cash and Cash Equivalents

Cash and Cash Equivalents, Beginning of Year

Cash and Cash Equivalents, End of Year

Supplemental Disclosure of Cash Flow Information:

Cash paid during year for interest

Cash paid during year for income taxes

Non-cash transfers from Kimberly-Clark

See Notes to Consolidated and Combined Financial Statements

36.0

112.8

(43.6)

3.1

(14.1)

(9.4)

2.4

11.1

0.2

5.6

5.7

(7.4)

–

76.0

(19.1)

0.1

(0.1)

(19.1)

225.0

(12.2)

10.0

(10.0)

(213.0)

(37.6)

(37.8)

19.1

–

19.1

–

6.4

35.3

–

(8.2)

0.1

(3.6)

(5.8)

0.5

6.1

(4.0)

3.6

13.5

(1.3)

(1.5)

73.6

(24.4)

1.9

(1.1)

(23.6)

–

34.3

–

(1.7)

3.1

2.3

21.4

(0.6)

(0.8)

(5.4)

(2.3)

0.7

(1.3)

(0.2)

111.8

(18.4)

1.7

0.7

(16.0)

–

(50.0)

(95.8)

–

1.4

–

0.5

pg. 55

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
(dollars in millions, except as noted)

N O T E 1. BACKGROUND AND BASIS

OF PRES EN TAT I ON

Background

Neenah Paper, Inc. (“Neenah” or the “Company”), a Delaware

corporation, was incorporated in April 2004 in contemplation

of the spin-off by Kimberly-Clark Corporation (“Kimberly-

Clark”) of its Canadian pulp business and its ﬁ ne paper and

technical paper businesses in the United States (collectively,

the “Pulp and Paper Business”). The Canadian pulp business

consists of the Terrace Bay, Ontario, pulp mill and the Pictou,

Paper Business which were operated as part of Kimberly-Clark

prior to the Spin-Off. The combined ﬁ nancial statements for

periods through November 30, 2004 have been derived from

the consolidated ﬁ nancial statements and accounting records

of Kimberly-Clark using the historical results of operations

and the historical basis of assets and liabilities of the Pulp

and Paper Business. Management believes the assumptions

underlying the combined ﬁ nancial statements for these periods

are reasonable. However, the combined ﬁ nancial statements

included herein for periods through November 30, 2004 do

not reﬂ ect the Pulp and Paper Business’ results of operations,

Nova Scotia, pulp mill and related timberlands. The ﬁ ne paper

ﬁ nancial position and cash ﬂ ows in the future or what its

business is a leading producer of premium writing, text, cover

and specialty papers. The technical paper business is a leading

producer of durable, saturated and coated base papers for a

results of operations, ﬁ nancial position and cash ﬂ ows would

have been had the Pulp and Paper Business been a stand-alone

company during the periods presented. See Note 11 for transac-

variety of end uses.

tions with Kimberly-Clark.

On November 30, 2004, Kimberly-Clark completed the

distribution of all of the shares of Neenah’s common stock

to the stockholders of Kimberly-Clark (the “Spin-Off ”).

Kimberly-Clark’s investment in the Pulp and Paper

Business is shown as “Kimberly-Clark’s net investment” in

the combined ﬁ nancial statements through November 30,

Kimberly-Clark stockholders received a dividend of one share

2004, because no direct ownership relationship existed among

of Neenah’s common stock for every 33 shares of Kimberly-

Clark common stock held. Based on a private letter ruling

received by Kimberly-Clark from the Internal Revenue Service,

receipt of the Neenah shares in the Spin-Off was tax-free for

U.S. federal income tax purposes. As a result of the Spin-Off,

Kimberly-Clark transferred all of the assets and liabilities

of the Pulp and Paper Business to Neenah. In addition,

Kimberly-Clark transferred certain assets and liabilities of

Kimberly-Clark sponsored employee beneﬁ t plans to the

the entities that comprised the Pulp and Paper Business.

Inter-company accounts between the Pulp and Paper Business

and Kimberly-Clark are combined with “Kimberly-Clark’s net

investment.” As of November 30, 2004, the balance reﬂ ected

in the “Kimberly-Clark’s net investment” was transferred to

“Additional paid-in capital” of Neenah. “Retained deﬁ cit”

reﬂ ected in the consolidated ﬁ nancial statements represents

net losses beginning December 1, 2004.

Basic earnings (loss) per share were computed by dividing

Company. Following the Spin-Off, Neenah is an independent

net loss by the number of weighted average shares of common

public company and Kimberly-Clark has no continuing

stock ownership.

Basis of Consolidation and Presentation

The consolidated and combined ﬁ nancial statements include

the ﬁ nancial statements of the Company, and its wholly owned

and majority owned subsidiaries. All signiﬁ cant inter-company

balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

The consolidated and combined ﬁ nancial statements

reﬂ ect the consolidated operations of Neenah and its subsidiar-

ies as a separate, stand-alone entity subsequent to November 30,

2004, combined with the historical operations of the Pulp and

stock outstanding during the 2004 reporting period. Diluted

earnings (loss) per share were calculated to give effect to all

potentially dilutive common shares. In 2004, approximately

875,000 potentially dilutive options that were “out-of-the-

money” were excluded from the computation of dilutive

common shares. In addition, as a result of the net loss in 2004,

the assumed incremental 60,683 shares resulting from the

exercises of “in-the-money” stock options and the vesting of

restricted stock and restricted stock units were excluded from

the diluted earnings per share calculation, as the effect would

have been anti-dilutive.

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

For 2003 and 2002, basic and diluted earnings per

Income Taxes

share were computed using the number of shares of Neenah

For periods prior to November 30, 2004, income tax provisions

common stock outstanding on November 30, 2004, the

and related deferred tax assets and liabilities of the Pulp and

date on which Neenah common stock was distributed to

Paper Business were calculated on a separate tax return basis.

the stockholders of Kimberly-Clark.

However, Kimberly-Clark managed its tax position for the ben-

Prior to the Spin-Off, certain corporate, general and

eﬁ t of its entire portfolio of businesses, and its tax strategies are

administrative expenses of Kimberly-Clark were allocated

not necessarily reﬂ ective of the tax strategies that the Pulp and

to the Pulp and Paper Business, using a three factor formula

Paper Business would have followed as a stand-alone entity.

comprised of net sales, total assets and employee head count.

In the opinion of management, such an allocation is reason-

able. However, such expenses are not indicative of, nor is it

practical or meaningful for management to estimate for all

historical periods presented, the actual level of expenses that

might have been incurred had the Pulp and Paper Business

been operating as an independent company. General corporate

overhead primarily includes information technology, account-

ing, cash management, legal, tax, insurance and public relations.

These expenses amounted to $0.5 million, $0.7 million and

$0.8 million in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Subsequent

to November 30, 2004, the Company performed these functions

using its own resources or purchased services, some of which

were provided by Kimberly-Clark pursuant to a Corporate

Services Agreement (See Note 11).

Kimberly-Clark used a centralized approach to cash man-

agement and the ﬁ nancing of its operations. Cash deposits

from the Pulp and Paper Business prior to the Spin-Off were

transferred to Kimberly-Clark on a regular basis and were

netted against Kimberly-Clark’s net investment account.

N O T E 2. S U M M A RY O F S I G N I F I CA N T

ACCO UN T I NG POLICIES

Use of Estimates

The preparation of ﬁ nancial statements in conformity with

accounting principles generally accepted in the United States

requires management to make estimates and assumptions

that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the

date of the ﬁ nancial statements and the reported amounts of

net sales and expenses during the reporting periods. Actual

results could differ from these estimates, and changes in

these estimates are recorded when known. Signiﬁ cant manage-

ment judgment is required in determining the accounting for,

among other things, pension and postretirement beneﬁ ts,

retained insurable risks, allowances for doubtful accounts,

useful lives for depreciation and amortization, future cash

ﬂ ows associated with impairment testing for long-lived assets,

income taxes and contingencies.

Consequently, none of Kimberly-Clark’s cash, cash equivalents

Revenue Recognition

or debt was allocated to the Pulp and Paper Business in

The Company recognizes sales revenue when all of the follow-

the combined ﬁ nancial statements for periods through

ing have occurred: (1) delivery has occurred, (2) persuasive

November 30, 2004.

evidence of an agreement exists, (3) pricing is ﬁ xed or deter-

Changes in Kimberly-Clark’s net investment represent

minable, and (4) collection is reasonably assured. Delivery is

any funding from Kimberly-Clark for working capital and

not considered to have occurred until the customer takes title

capital expenditures after giving effect to the Pulp and

and assumes the risks and rewards of ownership. The timing of

Paper Business’ transfers to Kimberly-Clark of its cash

revenue recognition is largely dependent on shipping terms.

ﬂ ows from operations.

Cash Payment to Kimberly-Clark

On November 30, 2004, the Company paid a Spin-Off pay-

ment of $213 million to a Kimberly-Clark subsidiary primarily

from the proceeds of a $225 million principal amount senior

note offering (See Note 5).

Revenue is recorded at the time of shipment for terms

designated free on board (“FOB”) shipping point. For sales

transactions designated FOB destination, revenue is recorded

when the product is delivered to the customer’s delivery site.

With the exception of pulp sales to Kimberly-Clark and certain

other customers, the Company’s sales terms are FOB shipping

pg. 57

point and revenue is recognized at the time of shipment. For

labor, materials and production overhead. Inventories of the

pulp sales to Kimberly-Clark and other customers that are

Canadian pulp operations include both roundwood (logs) and

designated FOB destination, revenue is recognized when the

wood chips. These inventories are located both at the pulp

product is delivered to the customer’s delivery site. Sales are

mills and at various timberlands locations. In accordance with

reported net of allowable discounts and estimated returns.

industry practice, physical inventory counts utilize “scaling”

Reserves for cash discounts, trade allowances, credit losses

techniques to estimate quantities of roundwood, as well as

and sales returns are estimated using historical experience.

various electronic devices to calculate wood chip inventory

Pursuant to the new pulp supply agreement, sales terms to

amounts. These techniques historically have provided reason-

Kimberly-Clark subsequent to the Spin-Off were changed to

able estimates of such inventories.

FOB destination rather than FOB shipping point. As a result,

net sales in December 2004 were reduced by $12.9 million,

reﬂ ecting the one-time effect of this change in terms.

Shipping and Handling Costs

Foreign Currency

Balance sheet accounts of the Canadian pulp operations are

translated from Canadian dollars into U.S. dollars at period-

end exchange rates, and income and expense are translated at

All amounts billed to customers in a sales transaction related

average exchange rates during the period. Translation gains or

to shipping and handling are recorded as revenue, and costs

losses related to net assets located in Canada are shown as a

incurred by the Company for shipping and handling are

component of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)

recorded as costs of products sold.

in stockholders’ and invested equity. Gains and losses resulting

Certain prior years’ amounts of shipping and handling

from foreign currency transactions (transactions denominated

costs have been adjusted in the combined statements of opera-
tions to be in conformity with EITF 00-10, Accounting for
Shipping and Handling Fees and Costs, which became effec-
tive in 2000 and which prohibits the netting of such costs

in a currency other than the entity’s functional currency) are

included in other (income) and expense – net in the combined

statements of operations. Net foreign currency transaction

gains (losses) for 2004, 2003 and 2002 were $(5.1) million,

against revenues. Accordingly, amounts reﬂ ected for 2003

$(10.0) million and $0.6 million, respectively.

and 2002 for “Net sales” and “Cost of products sold” in the

combined statements of operations have been increased

from the amounts previously reported by $44.5 million and

$44.0 million, respectively. This adjustment had no effect on

the amount of “Gross proﬁ t” or any other captioned amounts

in the combined statements of operations.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

Property and Depreciation

Property, plant and equipment is stated at cost, less accumu-

lated depreciation. Certain costs of software developed or

obtained for internal use are capitalized. When property,

plant and equipment is sold or retired, the costs and the related

accumulated depreciation are removed from the accounts,

and the gains or losses are recorded in other (income) and

Cash and cash equivalents include all cash balances and highly

expense – net. For ﬁ nancial reporting purposes, depreciation

liquid investments with an initial maturity of three months or

is principally computed on the straight-line method over the

less. The Company places its temporary cash investments with

estimated useful asset lives. Weighted-average useful lives

high-credit, quality ﬁ nancial institutions.

are approximately 40 years for buildings, 10 years for land

Inventories

U.S. inventories are valued at the lower of cost, using the

Last-In, First-Out (LIFO) method for ﬁ nancial reporting

purposes, or market. Canadian inventories are valued at the

lower of cost, using either the First-In, First-Out (FIFO) or

a weighted-average cost method, or market. Cost includes

improvements and 18 years for machinery and equipment. The

cost of permanent and secondary logging roads is capitalized

and amortized over the estimated useful lives of the roads,

primarily 20 years. The cost of tertiary roads (which are not

permanent) is expensed as incurred. For income tax purposes,

accelerated methods of depreciation are used.

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

Estimated useful lives are periodically reviewed and, when

merchantable timber. Costs of merchantable timber are

warranted, changes are made to them. Long-lived assets are

currently depletable, whereas costs of pre-merchantable tim-

reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in cir-

ber are not yet depletable. Timberland depletion rates for

cumstances indicate that their cost may not be recoverable.

owned timberlands are calculated periodically, based on capi-

An impairment loss would be recognized when estimated

talized costs and the total estimated volume of timber that

undiscounted future pre-tax cash ﬂ ows from the use of the

is mature enough to be harvested and processed. Timber

asset are less than its carrying amount. Measurement of an

inventory volume is determined by adding an estimate of cur-

impairment loss would be based on the excess of the carrying

rent-year growth to the prior-year ending balance, less the

amount of the asset over its fair value. Fair value is generally

current-year harvest. The volume and growth estimates are

measured using discounted cash ﬂ ows. See Note 12 for discus-

tested periodically using statistical sampling techniques. The

sion of asset impairment losses recorded in December 2004

depletion rate calculated at the end of the year is used to cal-

related to Terrace Bay’s long-lived assets.

culate the cost of timber harvested in the subsequent year.

The costs of major rebuilds and replacements of plant

and equipment are capitalized, and the cost of maintenance

performed on manufacturing facilities, composed of labor,

materials and other incremental costs, is charged to operations

as incurred. Start-up costs for new or expanded facilities are

expensed as incurred.

Timberlands

Timberlands are stated at cost, less the accumulated cost of

timber previously harvested. The Company’s owned timber-

lands have long-rotation and growing cycles averaging over

40 years. Capitalized costs for these timberlands include site

preparation, initial planting and seeding. The costs of fertili-

zation, control of competition (brush control) and seedling

protection activities (principally herbicide and insecticide

applications) during the stand establishment period also are

Research Expense

Research and development costs are charged to expense as

incurred and are recorded in “Selling, general and administra-

tive expenses” on the Consolidated and Combined Statement

of Operations.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

The carrying amounts reﬂ ected in the Consolidated and

Combined Balance Sheets for cash and cash equivalents,

accounts receivable and accounts payable approximate fair

value due to their short maturities. The fair value of long-term

debt is estimated using discounted cash ﬂ ow analyses, based

on the Company’s incremental borrowing rates for similar

types of arrangements. The fair value of the Company’s long-

term debt at December 31, 2004 was $228.4 million compared

to the carrying value of $225.0 million.

capitalized. The Company charges capitalized costs, excluding

Other Comprehensive Income

land, to operations at the time the wood is harvested, based

Comprehensive income includes, in addition to net income,

on periodically determined depletion rates.

unrealized gains and losses recorded directly into a separate

Fertilization, control of competition and seedling protec-

section of stockholders’ equity on the consolidated and com-

tion activities following the stand establishment period are

bined balance sheet. These unrealized gains and losses are

expensed as incurred. The Company pays stumpage fees for

referred to as other comprehensive income items. The accu-

wood harvested under long-term licenses and charges such

mulated other comprehensive income (loss) shown on the

costs to operations as incurred. Costs of administration, insur-

consolidated and combined balance sheets consists primarily

ance, property taxes, and interest are expensed as incurred.

of foreign currency translation and minimum pension liability

The Company distinguishes between costs associated

adjustments. The foreign currency translation adjustments are

with pre-merchantable timber and costs associated with

not adjusted for income taxes since they relate to indeﬁ nite

investments in the Canadian pulp operations.

The changes in the components of other comprehensive

income (loss) are as follows:

pg. 59

Year Ended December 31,

2004

Tax
Effect

Pre-tax
Amount

Net
Amount

Pre-tax
Amount

2003

Tax
Effect

Net
Amount

Pre-tax
Amount

2002

Tax
Effect

Net
Amount

Unrealized foreign
currency translation
$ 24.8
Minimum pension liability 46.3
Other
(0.2)
Other comprehensive

–
(16.3)
0.1

$ 24.8
30.0
(0.1)

$ 59.7
(14.5)
(0.9)

–
5.1
0.3

59.7
(9.4)
(0.6)

$ 2.5
(41.1)
0.9

$
–
14.6
(0.3)

$ 2.5
(26.5)
0.6

income (loss)

$ 70.9

$ (16.2)

$ 54.7

$ 44.3

$ 5.4

49.7

$ (37.7) $ 14.3

$ (23.4)

Accumulated balances of other comprehensive income (loss),

net of applicable income taxes are as follows:

(dollars in millions, except per share)
Year Ended December 31,

2004

2003(a)

2002(a)

December 31,

2004

2003

Unrealized foreign currency
translation
Minimum pension liability
(net of income taxes beneﬁ ts
of $3.6 and $19.9)
Other
Accumulated other
comprehensive income (loss)

$ 57.9

$ 33.1

(6.3)
–

(36.3)
0.1

$ 51.6

(3.1)

Stock Based Employee Compensation

The Company’s stock based employee compensation plan is

described in Note 7. As permitted by Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation (“SFAS 123”), the Company continues to use
the intrinsic value method permitted by Accounting Principles
Board Opinion 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees
(“APB 25”), and related interpretations to account for stock

Reported net income (loss)
Pro forma compensation
expense, net of tax
Pro forma net income (loss)
Reported net income (loss)
per share:
Basic
Diluted(b)
Pro forma net income (loss)
per share:
Basic
Diluted(b)

$ (26.4)

$ 38.9

$ 62.3

(1.2)
$ (27.6)

–
$ 38.9

–
$ 62.3

$ (1.79)
$ (1.79)

$ 2.64
$ 2.64

$ 4.23
$ 4.23

$ (1.87)
$ (1.87)

$ 2.64
$ 2.64

$ 4.23
$ 4.23

(a) The pro forma effect of stock options on net income is only presented for
periods after November 30, 2004, the date on which Neenah common
stock was distributed to stockholders of Kimberly-Clark.

(b) As a result of the net loss in 2004, the assumed incremental 60,683 shares
resulting from the exercises of stock options and the vesting of restricted
stock and restricted stock units were excluded for the diluted earnings per
share calculation, as the effect would have been anti-dilutive.

option grants. No employee compensation has been charged

The weighted-average fair value at date of grant for

to earnings because the exercise prices of all stock options

options granted after the Spin-Off and for Kimberly-Clark

granted have been equal to the market value of the Company

options converted on November 30, 2004 was $11.71 per share

or Kimberly-Clark’s common stock at the date of grant. Had

and was estimated using the Black-Scholes option valuation

compensation expense been recorded under the provisions of

model with the following weighted-average assumptions (See

SFAS 123, the impact on the Company’s net income (loss)

Note 7 for a discussion of the 2004 option grants at a

and income (loss) per share would have been:

weighted-average exercise price $31.81):

Expected life in years
Interest rate
Volatility
Dividend yield

2004

4.7
3.6 %
36.3 %
1.2 %

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS 123 (revised

in prior periods, the effect would have approximated the

2004), Share-Based Payment (“SFAS 123R”), which revises
SFAS 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. SFAS
123R also supersedes APB 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to
Employees, and amends SFAS 95, Statement of Cash Flows.
(See Accounting Standards Changes below for a discussion of

SFAS 123 pro forma net income and earnings per share

disclosures shown.

SFAS 123R also requires the beneﬁ ts of tax deductions

in excess of recognized compensation cost to be reported as

a ﬁ nancing cash ﬂ ow, rather than as an operating cash ﬂ ow

other standards.) In general, the accounting required by SFAS

as currently required, thereby reducing net operating cash

123R is similar to that of SFAS 123. However, SFAS 123 gave

ﬂ ows and increasing net ﬁ nancing cash ﬂ ows in periods

companies a choice to either recognize the fair value of stock

after adoption. Such amounts cannot be estimated for future

options in their income statements or to disclose the pro forma

periods because they depend on, among other things, when

income statement effect of the fair value of stock options in

employees will exercise the stock options and the market price

the notes to the ﬁ nancial statements. SFAS 123R eliminates

of the Company’s stock at the time of exercise.

that choice and requires the fair value of all share-based pay-

ments to employees, including the fair value of grants of

employee stock options, be recognized in the income state-

ment, generally over the option vesting period. SFAS 123R

must be adopted no later than July 1, 2005. Early adoption

is permitted.

SFAS 123R permits adoption of its requirements using

one of two transition methods:

(1) A modiﬁ ed prospective transition (“MPT”) method

in which compensation cost is recognized beginning with the

effective date (a) for all share-based payments granted after the

effective date and (b) for all awards granted to employees prior

to the effective date that remain unvested on the effective date.

(2) A modiﬁ ed retrospective transition (“MRT”) method

which includes the requirements of the MPT method described

above, but also permits restatement of ﬁ nancial statements based

on the amounts previously disclosed under SFAS 123’s pro

forma disclosure requirements either for (a) all prior periods

presented or (b) prior interim periods of the year of adoption.

The Company is currently evaluating the timing and

manner in which it will adopt SFAS 123R.

The Company currently accounts for share-based pay-

ments to employees using APB 25’s intrinsic value method

and, as such, has recognized no compensation cost for employee

stock options. Accordingly, adoption of SFAS 123R’s fair value

method will have an effect on results of operations, although it

will have no impact on overall ﬁ nancial position. The impact

of adoption of SFAS 123R cannot be predicted at this time

because it will depend on levels of share-based payments

granted in the future. However, had SFAS 123R been adopted

Accounting Standards Changes
In May 2003, SFAS 150, Accounting for Certain Financial
Instruments with Characteristics of Both Liabilities and
Equity, was issued. SFAS 150 requires that certain instruments
classiﬁ ed as part of stockholders’ equity or between stockholders’

equity and liabilities be classiﬁ ed as liabilities. The Company

has no instruments that were affected by SFAS 150.

In December 2003, FIN 46 (Revised December 2003),
Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities, an Interpretation of
ARB 51, (“FIN 46R”) was issued effective for the ﬁ rst interim
or annual period ending after December 31, 2003. FIN 46R

requires consolidation of entities in which the Company is

the primary beneﬁ ciary, despite not having voting control.

Likewise, it does not permit consolidation of entities in which

Neenah has voting control but is not the primary beneﬁ ciary.

The Company currently has no interests in any variable inter-

est entities. Accordingly, adoption of FIN 46R had no effect

on the consolidated and combined ﬁ nancial statements.

In December 2003, SFAS 132 (revised 2003), Employers’
Disclosures about Pensions and Other Postretirement Beneﬁ ts,
(“SFAS 132R”) was issued. SFAS 132R revises the disclosures

for pension plans and other postretirement beneﬁ t plans.

The Company has adopted the annual and interim disclosure

requirements of SFAS 132R.

In May 2004, FASB Staff Position 106-2 (“FSP 106-2”),

Accounting and Disclosure Requirements Related to Medicare
Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003,
was issued. See Note 6 where implementation is discussed.

pg. 61

In November 2004, SFAS 151, Inventory Costs – an
amendment of ARB No. 43, Chapter 4, (“SFAS 151”), was
issued. SFAS 151 clariﬁ es the accounting for abnormal

records all derivative instruments as assets or liabilities on the

balance sheet at fair value. Changes in the fair value of deriva-

tives are either recorded in income or other comprehensive

amounts of facility expenses, freight, handling costs, and

income, as appropriate. The gain or loss on derivatives desig-

spoilage. It also requires that allocation of ﬁ xed production

nated as cash ﬂ ow hedges is included in other comprehensive

overheads to inventory be based on the normal capacity of

income in the period that changes in fair value occur and is

production facilities. SFAS 151 is effective for inventory costs

reclassiﬁ ed to income in the same period that the hedged item

incurred during ﬁ scal years beginning after June 15, 2005.

affects income. The gain or loss on derivatives that have not

Adoption of SFAS 151 is not expected to have a material

been designated as hedging instruments is included in current

effect on the Company’s ﬁ nancial position, results of opera-

income in the period that changes in fair value occur.

tions or cash ﬂ ows.

In December 2004, SFAS 153, Exchange of Nonmonetary
Assets – an amendment of APB Opinion No. 29, (“SFAS 153”),
was issued. SFAS 151 amends Opinion 29 to eliminate the

exception for nonmonetary exchanges of similar productive

assets and replaces it with a general exception for exchanges of

nonmonetary assets that do not have commercial substance. A

nonmonetary exchange has commercial substance if the future

cash ﬂ ows of the entity are expected to change signiﬁ cantly as

a result of the exchange. SFAS 153 is effective for

nonmonetary exchanges occurring in ﬁ scal periods beginning

after June 15, 2005. Adoption of SFAS 153 is not expected to

have a material effect on the Company’s ﬁ nancial position,

results of operations or cash ﬂ ows.

N O T E 3. RI SK MANAGEMEN T

The Company is exposed to risks such as changes in foreign

currency exchange rates and pulp prices. A variety of practices

are employed to manage these risks, including operating and

ﬁ nancing activities and, where deemed appropriate, the use

of derivative instruments. Derivative instruments are used

only for risk management purposes and not for speculation

or trading. All foreign currency derivative instruments are

either exchange traded or entered into with major ﬁ nancial

institutions. Credit risk with respect to the counterparties

is considered minimal in view of the ﬁ nancial strength of

the counterparties.

In accordance with SFAS 133, Accounting for Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities, as amended, the Company

Pulp Price and Foreign Currency Risk

The operating results, cash ﬂ ows and ﬁ nancial condition of

the Company are subject to pulp price risk. Pulp prices, which

are set in U.S. dollars, are determined by industry supply

and demand. The average published industry index price of

a metric ton of northern softwood kraft pulp in U.S. dollars

was $565 in 2001, $487 in 2002, $553 in 2003 and $637

in 2004. The year-over-year decrease of $78 per ton in the

average published industry index price in 2002 resulted in a

decline in gross sales of approximately $44 million, whereas

the year-over-year increases of $66 per ton and $84 per ton in

the average published industry index price in 2003 and 2004,

respectively, resulted in an increase in gross sales of approxi-

mately $36 million and $46 million, respectively.

Because the price of pulp is set in U.S. dollars and the

Company’s cost of producing pulp is incurred principally

in Canadian dollars, the proﬁ tability of the Company’s pulp

operations is subject to foreign currency risk. The foreign cur-

rency and pulp price risks are managed from time-to-time

by the use of foreign currency forward and pulp futures con-

tracts. The use of these instruments allows management

of this transactional exposure to exchange rate and pulp

price ﬂ uctuations because the gains or losses incurred on the

derivative instruments are intended to offset, in whole or in

part, losses or gains on the underlying transactional exposure.

Translation exposure is not hedged.

In addition, the Company is subject to price risk for

utilities which are used in its manufacturing operations.

Derivative instruments are used to hedge this risk when it

is deemed prudent to do so.

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

Cash Flow Hedges

The following table presents the U.S. and Canadian

The Company‘s cash ﬂ ow hedges were effective in 2004,

components of income before income taxes and the

2003 and 2002 and consequently resulted in no net income

provisio n for income taxes:

effect. During the same period in which the hedged fore -

casted transactions affected earnings, the Company reclassiﬁ ed

$0.6 million, $(0.5) million and $(0.8) million of after-tax

(gains) losses from accumulated other comprehensive income

to earnings in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. At December

31, 2004, the Company expects to reclassify less than $0.1 mil-

lion of after-tax gains from accumulated other comprehensive

income to earnings during the next twelve months. In

December 2004, the Company’s Canadian subsidiary entered

into a foreign currency forward exchange contract, designated

as a cash ﬂ ow hedge of U.S. dollar denominated pulp sales, in

a notional principal amount of $25 million Canadian dollars

and having a fair market value of $0.4 million at December 31,

2004. The contract matures ratably during the ﬁ rst quarter of

2005. In addition, the Company has a ﬁ xed price forward pur-

chase contract to hedge ﬂ uctuations in the price of electricity

at the Terrace Bay mill. The contract has a notional value of

approximately $8.6 million and the fair market liability value

of the contract was less than $0.1 million at December 31, 2004.

N O T E 4. I N COM E TAX ES

Income tax expense in the Company’s consolidated and com-

bined ﬁ nancial statements has been calculated on a separate

tax return basis. The following table presents the principal rea-

sons for the difference between the effective tax rate and the

U.S. federal statutory income tax rate:

Year Ended December 31,

2004

2003

2002

U.S. federal statutory
income tax rate
State and local income
taxes, net of federal income
tax effect
Canadian investment tax
credits
Other differences – net
Effective income tax rate

35.0 %

2.4

4.2

4.1

–
(1.3)
36.1 %

–
(0.7)
38.5 %

(1.7)
(0.1)
37.3 %

Year Ended December 31,

2004

2003

2002

Income before income taxes:
U.S.
Canada
Total
Provisions for income taxes:
Current:
Federal
State and local
Canadian
Subtotal
Deferred:
Federal
State and local
Canadian
Subtotal
Total

$ 79.2
(120.5)
(41.3)

$ 81.5
(18.2)
63.3

$ 100.0
(0.7)
99.3

26.6
2.1
–
28.7

(0.2)
–
(43.4)
(43.6)
$ (14.9)

28.5
4.5
(0.4)
32.6

(2.1)
(0.5)
(5.6)
(8.2)
$ 24.4

23.2
6.6
8.9
38.7

9.0
(0.3)
(10.4)
(1.7)
$ 37.0

The asset and liability approach is used to recognize deferred

tax assets and liabilities for the expected future tax conse-

quences of temporary differences between the carrying amounts

and the tax bases of assets and liabilities. The components of

deferred tax assets and liabilities at December 31, 2004 and

2003 are as follows:

December 31,

Net current deferred income tax assets:
Accrued liabilities
Other
Net current deferred income tax assets
Net noncurrent deferred income
tax assets:
Canadian timberlands
Employee beneﬁ ts
Accumulated depreciation
Other
Net noncurrent deferred income
tax assets
Net noncurrent deferred income
tax liabilities:
Accumulated depreciation
Other
Net noncurrent deferred income
tax liabilities

2004

2003

4.4
(1.2)
3.2

$ 5.3
(1.6)
$ 3.7

$ 72.3
16.1
(58.4)
(2.7)

$ 33.9
10.7
(26.0)
0.5

$ 27.3

$ 19.1

8.4
–

$ 33.3
1.2

8.4

$ 34.5

pg. 63

No valuation allowance has been provided on deferred

income tax assets. In determining the need for valuation allow-

ances, the Company considers many factors, including the

speciﬁ c taxing jurisdiction, income tax strategies and forecasted

earnings for the entities in each jurisdiction. A valuation

allowance would be recognized if, based on the weight of

available evidence, the Company concludes that it is more

likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred income

tax asset will not be realized.

As part of the Spin-Off transaction, the Company paid

a one-time Spin-Off payment of $213 million to Kimberly-

Clark to fund the purchase of the Canadian pulp assets

and related timberlands. In accordance with EITF 94-10,
Accounting by a Company for the Income Tax Effects of
Transactions among or with Its Shareholders under FASB
Statement No. 109, the tax effects of the resulting change
in the tax bases of the assets and liabilities were reﬂ ected

in stockholders’ and invested equity. The Company recorded

a net charge to noncurrent deferred income taxes of

approximately $8.2 million and an offsetting credit to

“Kimberly-Clark’s net investment” on the consolidated

and combined balance sheet and statement of changes in

stockholders’ and invested equity.

All of the operations of the Pulp and Paper Business were

included in the consolidated income tax returns of Kimberly-

Clark. Kimberly-Clark agreed to indemnify the Company for

all income tax liabilities and retain rights to all tax refunds

relating to the Pulp and Paper Business in its consolidated

income tax returns for periods through the date of the Spin-

N O T E 5. D EBT

The following debt was incurred either as a result of or since

the Spin-Off. The Company did not have debt prior to

November 30, 2004. At December 31, 2004, the Company

had no required debt payments during the next ﬁ ve years.

Senior Unsecured Notes

On November 30, 2004, the Company completed an under-

written offering of ten-year, senior unsecured notes (the

“Senior Notes”) at face amount of $225 million. The Senior

Notes bear interest at a rate of 7.375%, payable May 15 and

November 15 of each year, commencing on May 15, 2005,

and maturing on November 15, 2014. The proceeds from this

offering were used to pay a special payment of $213 million

to Kimberly-Clark at the Spin-Off. The Senior Notes are

fully and unconditionally guaranteed by substantially all of

the Company’s subsidiaries. The Company expects to ﬁ le a

registration statement with the Securities and Exchange

Commission to exchange the unregistered Senior Notes for

registered notes with similar terms in the second quarter of

2005. If the Company does not complete the exchange of

the Senior Notes within 270 days from the original issuance

of the notes (a “Registration Default”), the Company will be

obligated to pay additional interest (“Special Interest”) on the

Senior Notes. Special Interest will accrue at a rate of 0.25%

per annum during the 90-day period following a Registration

Default and will increase by 0.25% per annum for each subse-

quent 90-day period to a maximum Special Interest rate of

1.00% per annum. Special Interest is the exclusive remedy for

Off. Accordingly, the consolidated and combined balance

a Registration Default.

sheets do not include current or prior period income tax receiv-

ables or payables related to the Pulp and Paper Business.

The Company’s stock was distributed in a tax-free Spin-

Off. Under terms of the tax sharing agreement between the

Company and Kimberly-Clark, the Company could be liable

for any income taxes if it commits a tainting event that

destroys the tax-free nature of the Spin-Off.

Secured Revolving Credit Facility

On November 30, 2004, the Company entered into a Credit

Agreement by and among Neenah, certain of its subsidiaries,

the lenders listed in the Credit Agreement and JP Morgan

Chase Bank, N.A. as agent for the lenders. Under the Credit

Agreement, the Company has a secured revolving credit

facility (“the Revolver”) that provides for borrowings of up

to $150 million. As of December 31, 2004, the Company

had no amounts outstanding under the Revolver.

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

Under the Revolver, up to $20 million is available for

The Company’s ability to pay cash dividends on its

the issuance of letters of credit (“LOCs”) on the Company’s

Common Stock is limited under the terms of both the

behalf. Borrowing availability under the Revolver is reduced

Credit Agreement and the Senior Notes. Pursuant to the

by outstanding LOCs. At December 31, 2004, the Company

terms of these agreements, the Company’s ability to pay

had approximately $6.1 million of LOCs outstanding and

cash dividends on its common stock is limited to the lesser

$143.9 million of borrowing availability under the Revolver.

of 50% of Consolidated Net Income (as deﬁ ned) or a total

Amounts outstanding under the Revolver may be repaid, in

of $10.0 million in a 12-month period.

whole or in part, at any time without premium or penalty except

for speciﬁ ed make-whole payments on LIBOR-based loans.

The Revolver is secured by substantially all of the

Company’s assets, including the capital stock of our subsidiar-

ies and is guaranteed by Neenah Paper Company of Canada,

a wholly-owned subsidiary. The Revolver will terminate

on November 30, 2008. Availability under the Revolver will

ﬂ uctuate over time depending on the value of inventory,

receivables and various capital assets.

The interest rate applicable to borrowings under the

Revolver will be either (1) the applicable base rate plus 0.25%

to 0.75% or (2) a LIBOR-based rate ranging from LIBOR plus

1.75% to LIBOR plus 2.25%. Interest is computed based on

actual days elapsed in a 360-day year, payable monthly in arrears

for base rate loans, or for LIBOR loans, payable monthly in

arrears and at the end of the applicable interest period. The

commitment is subject to an annual facility fee of 0.375% on

the average daily unused amount of the commitment.

The Senior Notes and the Revolver contain, among other

provisions, covenants with which the Company must comply

during the term of the agreements. Such covenants restrict

the Company’s ability to, among other things, incur certain

additional debt, make speciﬁ ed restricted payments and capi-

tal expenditures, authorize or issue capital stock, enter into

transactions with afﬁ liates, consolidate or merge with or acquire

another business, sell certain of its assets or liquidate, dissolve

or wind-up the Company. In addition, the terms of the Revolver

require the Company to achieve and maintain certain speciﬁ ed

ﬁ nancial ratios. At December 31, 2004, the Company was in

administrative default under the Credit Agreement for failure

to provide ﬁ nancial statements in a timely manner. On January

31, 2005, the Credit Agreement was amended to waive the

event of default. As of December 31, 2004, the Company was

in compliance with all other such covenants.

N O T E 6. P O S T RE T I REMEN T A N D

O T H ER B EN EF I T S

Pension Plans

Substantially all active employees of the Pulp and Paper

Business participated in Kimberly-Clark’s deﬁ ned-beneﬁ t

pension plans and deﬁ ned contribution retirement plans.

On November 30, 2004, the Company assumed responsibility

for pension and postretirement beneﬁ t obligations for active em-

ployees of the Pulp and Paper Business and former employees

of the Canadian pulp operations. Pension and postretirement

beneﬁ t obligations related to former employees of the U.S.

paper operations were retained by Kimberly-Clark.

Pension assets related to active employees of the U.S. paper

operations for which the Company assumed responsibility were

transferred from a Kimberly-Clark pension trust to a new trust

for a pension plan established by the Company. The new pension

plan provides for substantially similar beneﬁ ts and credits such

employees for service earned with Kimberly-Clark.

The Company’s funding policy for its qualiﬁ ed deﬁ ned

beneﬁ t plans is to contribute assets to fully fund the accumu-

lated beneﬁ t obligation (“ABO”). Subject to regulatory and tax

deductibility limits, any funding shortfall is to be eliminated

over a reasonable number of years. Nonqualiﬁ ed plans providing

pension beneﬁ ts in excess of limitations imposed by the taxing

authorities are not funded.

The Company uses the fair value of pension plan assets

to determine pension expense, rather than averaging gains

and losses over a period of years. Investment gains or losses

represent the difference between the expected return calculated

using the fair value of the assets and the actual return based on

the fair value of assets. As of December 31, 2004, the Company’s

plans had cumulative unrecognized investment losses and

other actuarial losses of approximately $128.3 million.

pg. 65

A minimum pension liability for underfunded plans

beneﬁ t under Medicare (Medicare Part D) and a federal

representing the excess of the unfunded ABO over previously

subsidy to sponsors of retiree healthcare beneﬁ t plans that

recorded net pension liabilities has been reﬂ ected on the con-

provide a prescription drug beneﬁ t that is at least actuarially

solidated and combined balance sheet. The minimum pension

liability is included in noncurrent employee beneﬁ ts and other

obligations on the consolidated and combined balance sheets.

An offsetting amount is included as an intangible asset to the

extent of unrecognized prior service cost, and the balance is

equivalent to Medicare Part D. On April 1, 2004, FASB
Staff Position 106-2 (“FSP 106-2”), Accounting and
Disclosure Requirements Related to Medicare Prescription
Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003, was
adopted. Adoption of FSP 106-2 reduced the Company’s

included in accumulated other comprehensive income. In 2004,

accumulated postretirement beneﬁ t obligation by approxi-

the accrual for the additional minimum pension liability

mately $6.8 million and resulted in an unrecognized actuarial

decreased as the effect of a decrease in the discount rate used

gain of a similar amount. Adoption resulted in a $0.3 million

to estimate the ABO was more than offset by an increase in

reduction in postretirement beneﬁ ts cost for the year ended

the fair value of pension plan assets. A decrease in 2003 in the

December 31, 2004.

discount rate used to estimate the ABO was the principal

Prior to 2004, the U.S. plans limited Kimberly-Clark’s

cause of the 2003 increase in the accrual for the additional

future annual per capita retiree medical beneﬁ ts to no more

minimum pension liability.

than 200% of the 1992 annual per capita cost. These plans

The following is a summary of amounts related to the mini-

reached this limitation (the “Cap”) and were amended during

mum pension liability recorded in other comprehensive income:

2003. Among other things, the amendments index the Cap by

December 31,

Minimum pension liability
Less intangible asset
Accumulated other comprehensive
income

2004

2003

$ 12.0
2.1

$ 62.6
6.4

9.9

$ 56.2

Other
Postretirement
Benefits

$ 1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
2.5
17.0

6%. The actual asset allocation is regularly reviewed and peri-

Healthcare Cost Trends

odically rebalanced to the targeted allocation when considered

Assumed healthcare cost trend rates affect the amounts

appropriate. Also, when deemed appropriate, hedging strate-

reported for postretirement healthcare beneﬁ t plans. A one-

gies are executed using index options and futures to limit the

percentage-point change in assumed healthcare cost trend

downside exposure of certain investments by trading off upside

rates would have the following effects:

potential above an acceptable level. Such hedging strategies

were executed in 2003 and 2002. Following the Spin-Off, the

Company is following a similar methodology for determining

its long-term rate of return on pension assets and investment

strategy and is continuing to evaluate its long-term rate of

return assumptions.

Plan Assets

Pension plan asset allocations are as follows:

Effect on total of service
and interest cost components
Effect on post-retirement
beneﬁ t obligation

One-Percentage-Point

Increase Decrease

$ 0.5

$ 0.4

6.8

5.3

Defined Contribution Retirement Plans

Contributions to the deﬁ ned contribution retirement plans

are primarily based on the age and compensation of covered

Percentage of Plan Assets
at December 31,

2004

2003

2002

employees. These contributions, all of which were charged to

Asset Category
Equity securities
Debt securities
Real estate
Cash and money-market funds
Total

66%
24%
3%
7%
100%

70%
28%
2%
–%
100%

68%
30%
2%
–%
100%

Plan assets were not invested in Neenah securities for periods

subsequent to the Spin-Off or Kimberly-Clark securities prior

to the Spin-Off.

expense, were $0.5 million in each of 2004, 2003 and 2002.

In connection with the Spin-Off, Kimberly-Clark transferred

the related assets and liabilities of these plans to trusts estab-

lished by the Company. In December 2004, the Company

established deﬁ ned contribution retirement plans that provide

substantially similar beneﬁ ts.

Investment Plans

Voluntary contribution investment plans are provided to sub-

stantially all employees. Under the plans, Kimberly-Clark

matched a portion of employee contributions. Costs charged

to expense under the plans were $1.0 million, $1.2 million and

pg. 69

$1.2 million in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. In connection

terms and expiration dates were also preserved. The number

with the Spin-Off, Kimberly-Clark transferred the related

of shares and new exercise prices were established using a ratio

assets and liabilities to trusts established by the Company. In

conversion methodology approved under FASB Interpretation

December 2004, the Company established investment plans

No. 44 based on the fair market value of the Company’s com-

that provide substantially similar beneﬁ ts.

mon stock on the date of grant.

The Kimberly-Clark stock options awarded to employees

N O T E 7. STO CK COMP EN SAT I ON P LA NS

of the Pulp and Paper Business prior to the Spin-Off were

granted with an exercise price equal to the market value of

During 2003, 2002 and in prior years, certain employees of the

a share of common stock on the date of grant and were

Pulp and Paper Business were granted stock options, restricted

accounted for using APB 25. No employee compensation was

stock and (prior to 1999) participation shares under Kimberly-

charged to earnings in the combined statements of operations

Clark’s stock compensation plans.

for periods prior to the Spin-Off because the exercise prices

On August 31, 2004, Kimberly-Clark, acting as the sole

of all stock options granted was equal to the market value of

shareholder of the Company, approved the Neenah Paper,

Kimberly-Clark’s common stock on the date of grant.

Inc. 2004 Omnibus Stock and Incentive Plan (the “Omnibus

On December 15, 2004, an award of nonqualiﬁ ed

Plan”). The Company then adopted and established the

Omnibus Plan under unanimous written consent of the

Neenah Board of Directors on December 1, 2004. With

this approval, the Company reserved 3,500,000 shares of

stock options to purchase 442,540 shares of Common Stock

(the “Fresh Start Options”) was made to the management

team and directors of the Company. The exercise price of

the Fresh Start Options was equal to the market value of

the Common Stock for issuance under the Omnibus Plan.

the Company’s stock on the date of grant. The Fresh Start

Pursuant to the terms of the Omnibus Plan, the compensation

Options expire in 10 years and vest 30% on the ﬁ rst anniver-

committee of the Company’s Board of Directors may grant

sary of the date of grant, 30% on the second anniversary and

awards of various type of equity-based compensation, including

40% on the third anniversary.

incentive and nonqualiﬁ ed stock options, stock appreciation

rights, restricted stock, restricted stock units, performance

shares and performance units, in addition to certain cash-

based awards. All grants and awards under the plan will be

made at fair market value and no grant or award may be

repriced after its grant. In general, the options expire 10 years

from the date of grant and vest over a three-year service period.

At December 31, 2004, a total of 2,263,401 shares of Common

Stock were reserved for future issuance under the Omnibus Plan.

Stock Options

In connection with the Spin-Off, options to acquire 390,508

shares of Kimberly-Clark common stock that were outstand-

ing immediately prior to the Spin-Off were converted into

724,449 substitute options to purchase the Company’s

Common Stock under the Omnibus Plan. The awards con-

verted were adjusted to maintain both the pre-conversion

aggregate intrinsic value of each award and the ratio of the

per share exercise price to the market value per share. Vesting

Data concerning stock option activity follows(a):

2004

Weighted
Average
Number of Exercise

Options

Price

724,449
442,540
–
–
1,166,989
532,554

$ 31.32
32.60
–
–
$ 31.81
$ 32.84

Conversion of
Kimberly-Clark options
Fresh Start Options granted
Exercised
Expired or cancelled
Outstanding – End of year
Exercisable – End of year

(a) Information with respect to the stock option awards to acquire the
Company’s Common Stock is presented for periods subsequent to
November 30, 2004, the date on which Neenah common stock was
distributed to the stockholders of Kimberly-Clark.

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

Data concerning options at December 31, 2004 follows:

$24.01 – $26.04
$26.95 – $30.15
$32.60 – $37.59

Options Outstanding

Options Exercisable

Number
of Options

209,490
82,335
875,164
1,166,989

Weighted-
Average Exercise
Price

Weighted-Average
Remaining
Contractual Life (Years)

$ 24.23
$ 28.97
$ 33.89
$ 31.81

7.7
3.9
8.9
8.3

Number Weighted-Average

of Options

Price

84,932
82,335
365,287
532,554

$ 24.55
$ 28.97
$ 35.64
$ 32.84

Restricted Stock Awards

On December 15, 2004, Neenah awarded 40,800 and

A number of employees of the Pulp and Paper Business were

3,450 Restricted Stock Units (“RSUs”) to members of the

granted Kimberly-Clark restricted stock awards in previous

management team and Board of Directors of the Company,

years. These awards generally vested and became unrestricted

respectively. The RSUs carry a promise to pay out in Com-

shares in three to ﬁ ve years from the date of grant. At the time

mon Stock at a future date. In general, the RSUs awarded to

of the Spin-Off, the vesting schedule of restricted stock awards

members of the management team vest over a ﬁ ve-year period,

for employees of the Pulp and Paper Business were adjusted so

with one-third vesting on the third anniversary of the date

that the awards vested on a prorated basis determined by the

of grant, one-third vesting on the fourth anniversary, and the

number of full years of employment with Kimberly-Clark dur-

balance vesting on the ﬁ fth anniversary. The RSUs awarded

ing the restriction period. Unvested restricted shares of

to members of the Board of Directors vest on the ﬁ rst anniver-

Kimberly-Clark common stock were forfeited.

sary of the date of grant. Holders of RSUs are entitled to

On December 1, 2004, the Company awarded 25,360

dividends but are not permitted to vote such awarded shares

replacement restricted shares to employees whose restricted

and the sale or transfer of such shares is limited during the

shares of Kimberly-Clark common stock were forfeited.

restricted period.

The number of restricted shares was calculated using a ratio

conversion methodology approved under FASB Interpretation

No. 44 based on the fair market value of the Company’s com-

mon stock on the date of grant. The shares retained the

Kimberly-Clark vesting schedule with 2,489 shares, 3,681

shares, 2,025 shares, 16,591 shares and 574 shares vesting in

2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009, respectively. Holders of

Kimberly-Clark restricted stock are entitled to dividends

and are permitted to vote such awarded shares, but the sale or

transfer of such shares is limited during the restricted period.

The price of Kimberly-Clark’s common stock at the date

of grant determined the value of the restricted stock, and such

value was recorded at the date of the grant as unearned com-

pensation. This unearned compensation is amortized to

expense over the periods of restriction. Amounts expensed in

the Consolidated and Combined Statements of Operations

related to stock-based employee compensation (consisting

solely of restricted stock in 2004) were $0.6 million, $0.5 mil-

lion and $0.4 million in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.

Participation Shares

Prior to 1999, Kimberly-Clark awarded key employees par-

ticipation shares that were payable in cash at the end of the

vesting period. The amount of cash paid to participants was

based on the increase in the book value of Kimberly-Clark’s

common stock during the award period. Participants did not

receive dividends on the participation shares, but their accounts

were credited with dividend shares payable in cash at the matu-

rity of the award. Neither participation nor dividend shares

were shares of Kimberly-Clark common stock. Amounts

expensed in the Consolidated and Combined Statements of

Operations related to participation shares were $0.4 million

and $0.6 million in 2003 and 2002, respectively. The plan was

terminated in 2003 and payment was made by Kimberly-Clark

in February 2004 for all remaining vested awards.

pg. 71

N O T E 8. S TO C K H O L D ERS ’ E Q U I T Y

Common Stock

The Company has authorized 100 million shares of $0.01

par value common stock (“Common Stock”). Holders of

the Company’s Common Stock are entitled to one vote per

share. In conjunction with the Spin-Off, 14,737,959 share of

Common Stock were issued to the stockholders of Kimberly-

Purchase Commitments

The Company has entered into long-term contracts for

the purchase of sawmill wood chips and utilities, principally

electricity. The minimum purchase commitments extend

beyond 2009. Commitments under these contracts are

approximately $39.5 million in 2005, $26.0 million in

2006, $25.8 million in 2007, $25.8 million in 2008 and

$25.8 million in 2009. Total commitments beyond 2009

Clark as a dividend in the ratio of one share of the Company’s

are $37.2 million.

Common Stock for every 33 shares of Kimberly-Clark com-

Although the Company is primarily liable for payments

mon stock outstanding.

Preferred Stock

The Company has authorized 20 million shares of $0.01 par

value preferred stock. The preferred stock may be issued in one

or more series and with such designations and preferences for

each series as shall be stated in the resolutions providing for

the designation and issue of each such series adopted by the

Board of Directors of the Company. The Board of Directors

is authorized by the Company’s articles of incorporation to

determine the voting, dividend, redemption and liquidation

preferences pertaining to each such series. No shares of pre-

ferred stock have been issued by the Company.

N O T E 9. COM MI T MEN TS

Leases

The future minimum obligations under operating leases hav-

ing a noncancelable term in excess of one year as of December

31, 2004, are as follows:

Year Ending December 31:

2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Thereafter
Future minimum obligations

$ 2.7
2.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
15.1
$ 25.6

Rental expense under operating leases was $3.9 million, $2.7

million and $2.4 million in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.

on the above-mentioned leases and purchase commitments,

management believes exposure to losses, if any, under these

arrangements is not material.

N O T E 10. CO N T I N G EN C I ES A N D

LE GA L MAT TERS

Litigation

A subsidiary of Kimberly-Clark is a co-defendant in a vehi-

cle accident lawsuit pending in Ontario (Canada) Superior

Court of Justice since August 1998. The plaintiffs in this law-

suit include the driver of one of the vehicles involved in the

accident and his passengers. The driver sustained severe inju-

ries, including paralysis, as a result of the accident on a bush

road located within a forest where the subsidiary conducts

logging operations. The plaintiffs claim that Kimberly-Clark

was responsible for maintaining the bush road on which

the accident occurred. In particular, the plaintiffs claim that

Kimberly-Clark should have cut the trees and other growth

on the sides of the bush road and the alleged failure to do so

caused or contributed to the cause of the accident. The plaintiffs

are seeking signiﬁ cant money damages, plus costs and attorneys’

fees. Kimberly-Clark has denied liability and has raised

numerous defenses in this lawsuit. Pursuant to the Distribu-

tion Agreement, the Company will indemnify Kimberly-Clark

for liabilities and costs, including attorneys’ fees and other

costs of defense, arising out of this lawsuit, net of any insur-

ance recovery by Kimberly-Clark. The Company expects this

matter to be set for trial in 2006.

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

The Company is involved in certain other legal actions

not currently named as a party in any judicial or administrative

and claims arising in the ordinary course of business. While

proceeding relating to environmental, health and safety matters.

the outcome of these legal actions and claims cannot be pre-

While the Company has incurred in the past several

dicted with certainty, it is the opinion of management that the

years, and will continue to incur, capital and operating expen-

outcome of any claim which is pending or threatened, either

ditures in order to comply with environmental, health and

individually or on a combined basis, will not have a material

safety laws, regulations and ordinances, management believes

adverse effect on the consolidated ﬁ nancial condition, results

that its future cost of compliance with environmental, health

of operations or liquidity of the Company.

and safety laws, regulations and ordinances, and its exposure to

Indemnifications

Pursuant to the Distribution Agreement, the Pulp Supply

Agreement, the Employee Matters Agreement and the Tax

Sharing Agreement, the Company has agreed to indemnify

Kimberly-Clark for certain liabilities or risks related to the

Spin-Off (See Note 11). Many of the potential indemniﬁ ca-

tion liabilities under these agreements are unknown, remote

or highly contingent, and most are unlikely to ever require an

indemnity payment. Furthermore, even in the event that an

indemniﬁ cation claim is asserted, liability for indemniﬁ cation

is subject to determination under the terms of the applicable

agreement. For these reasons, the Company is unable to esti-

mate the maximum potential amount of the potential future

liability under the indemnity provisions of these agreements.

However, the Company accrues for any potentially indem-

niﬁ able liability or risk under these agreements for which it

believes a future payment is probable and a range of loss can

be reasonably estimated. As of December 31, 2004, we believe

liability for environmental, health and safety claims will not

have a material adverse effect on its ﬁ nancial condition, results

of operations or liquidity. However, future events, such as

changes in existing laws and regulations or contamination

of sites owned, operated or used for waste disposal by the

Company (including currently unknown contamination and

contamination caused by prior owners and operators of such

sites or other waste generators), may give rise to additional

costs which could have a material adverse effect on the Com-

pany’s ﬁ nancial condition, results of operations or liquidity.

Neenah incurs capital expenditures necessary to meet

legal requirements and otherwise relating to the protection

of the environment at its facilities in the United States and

Canada. For these purposes, the Company has planned capi-

tal expenditure programs for which it anticipates incurring

approximately $4 million in 2005 and approximately

$14 million in 2006, of which no material amount is the

result of environmental ﬁ nes or settlements.

our liability under such indemniﬁ cation obligations was

Employees and Labor Relations

not material.

Environmental, Health and Safety Matters

Neenah is subject to federal, state, provincial and local laws,

regulations and ordinances relating to various environmental,

health and safety matters. The Company is in compliance

with, or is taking actions designed to ensure compliance with,

these laws, regulations and ordinances. However, the nature of

the Company’s business exposes it to the risk of claims with

respect to environmental, health and safety matters, and there

can be no assurance that material costs or liabilities will not

be incurred in connection with such claims. Except for certain

orders issued by environmental, health and safety regulatory

agencies, with which management believes the Company is in

compliance and which management believes are immaterial to

the results of operations of the Company’s business, Neenah is

At December 31, 2004, the Company had 2,060 regular, full-

time employees. Contracts covering approximately 625 and

501 domestic and Canadian employees, respectively, are

scheduled for renegotiation in 2005. Such contracts include

approximately 241 employees at the Pictou mill and 184

employees at the Whiting mill who are working under the

terms of contracts that expired on June 1, 2004 and February

1, 2005, respectively. By operation of Nova Scotia labor law,

the terms of the expired collective bargaining agreement at the

Pictou mill will remain in effect until completion of the collec-

tive bargaining process. The Company and its unions generally

have good working relationships and management believes its

labor agreements contain wage and fringe beneﬁ t programs

that are competitive within the applicable industry segment

and geographic region. Although the Company believes that

pg. 73

it has satisfactory relations with its employees, there can be

the Company, and ﬁ nancial responsibility for the obligations

no assurance that the Company will not have labor disputes

and liabilities of Kimberly-Clark’s retained businesses with

in the future.

Kimberly-Clark, except as may otherwise be provided in the

N O T E 11. T RA N S AC T I O N S W I T H

KIMBERLY-CLARK

During all periods presented, the Company transferred soft-

wood and hardwood pulp to Kimberly-Clark. For periods

prior to the Spin-Off, such intra-company transfers were made

pursuant to an advance transfer pricing agreement negotiated

among Kimberly-Clark and certain taxing authorities. Under

the advance transfer pricing agreement, pulp was transferred

to Kimberly-Clark at a transfer price equal to a published

industry index price less a discount. Net sales revenue for

the pulp transferred to Kimberly-Clark were $351.0 million,

$305.1 million and $262.1 million for the years ended

December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Settlement

of such pulp transfers was effected through Kimberly-Clark’s

net investment account. In connection with the Spin-Off,

the Company and Kimberly-Clark entered into a new Pulp

Supply Agreement as described below.

In connection with the Spin-Off, the Company and

Kimberly-Clark executed and delivered the Distribution

Agreement (the “Distribution Agreement”), and certain

related agreements, which are summarized below.

Distribution Agreement

Distribution Agreement.

Pulp Supply Agreement

The Company and Kimberly-Clark have entered into a Pulp

Supply Agreement pursuant to which the Company agreed

to supply and Kimberly-Clark agreed to purchase northern

bleached softwood kraft pulp and northern bleached hard-

wood kraft pulp. Under the Pulp Supply Agreement, the

Company must supply and Kimberly-Clark must purchase

annually declining speciﬁ ed minimum tonnages of pulp. For

each of 2005 and 2006, the minimum commitment for north-

ern bleached softwood kraft pulp is 440,000 air-dried metric

tons; for 2007 the minimum commitment is 395,000 air-dried

metric tons and for 2008 and any subsequent years the mini-

mum commitment is 345,000 air-dried metric tons. The

amounts of those minimum commitments represent approxi-

mately 80%, 71%, and 62%, respectively, of the Company’s

total production of northern bleached softwood kraft pulp in

2004. The minimum commitment for northern bleached hard-

wood kraft pulp for 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008 is 80,000,

60,000, 40,000 and 20,000 air-dried metric tons, respectively.

The amounts of those minimum commitments represent

approximately 52%, 39%, 26% and 13%, respectively, of the

Company’s total production of northern bleached hardwood

kraft pulp in 2004. In March 2005, the Company notiﬁ ed

The Distribution Agreement provided for, among other

Kimberly-Clark of its intention to terminate the Pulp Supply

things, the principal corporate transactions required to effect

Agreement with respect to northern bleached hardwood kraft

the separation of the Pulp and Paper Business from Kimberly-

pulp produced at the Terrace Bay mill (See Note 15).

Clark, the distribution of the Company’s common stock to

Under the Pulp Supply Agreement, the prices for north-

the holders of record of Kimberly-Clark common stock and

ern bleached softwood kraft pulp and northern bleached

other agreements governing the Company’s relationship with

hardwood kraft pulp will be based on published industry index

Kimberly-Clark after the Spin-Off. Pursuant to the Distribu-

prices for the pulp (subject to minimum and maximum prices

tion Agreement, Kimberly-Clark transferred to the Company

for northern bleached kraft softwood pulp shipped to North

assets used primarily in the Company’s business and in general

America prior to December 31, 2007), less agreed upon dis-

the Company assumed and agreed to perform and fulﬁ ll all

counts. The commitments are structured as supply-or-pay

of the liabilities arising out of the ownership or use of the

and take-or-pay arrangements. Accordingly, if the Company

transferred assets or the operation of the transferred business.

does not supply the speciﬁ ed minimums, the Company must

The Distribution Agreement provides for cross-indemnities

pay Kimberly-Clark for the shortfall based on the difference

principally designed to place ﬁ nancial responsibility for the

between the contract price and any higher price that

obligations and liabilities of the Pulp and Paper Business with

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

Kimberly-Clark pays to purchase the pulp, plus 10% of that

Corporate Services Agreement

difference. If Kimberly-Clark does not purchase the speciﬁ ed

The Company and Kimberly-Clark have entered into a

minimums, Kimberly-Clark must pay for the shortfall based

Corporate Services Agreement whereby Kimberly-Clark

on the difference between the contract price and any lower

will provide to the Company, on an interim, transitional basis,

price the Company obtains for the pulp, plus 10% of the dif-

various corporate support services, including: certain employee

ference. The Company will incur the cost of freight to delivery

beneﬁ ts administration and payroll, management information,

points speciﬁ ed in the agreement.

transportation, environment and energy, purchasing, treasury,

Either party can elect a two-year, phase-down period for

accounting and other services, as well as transitional ofﬁ ce

the agreement, to begin no earlier than January 1, 2009, under

space for the Company’s research team. Each service will be

which the minimum commitments for northern bleached

made available to the Company on an as-needed basis through

softwood kraft pulp in the ﬁ rst and second years of the phase-

December 31, 2005, or such shorter or longer periods as may

down period would be 277,500 and 185,000 air-dried metric

be provided in the Corporate Services Agreement. The fees

tons, respectively. In addition, the Company has the right

charged for the services will generally be based upon the

at any time to terminate its obligation to supply northern

costs of providing the services. The Company may terminate

bleached hardwood kraft pulp upon three months notice to

the provision of a particular service upon 30 days’ notice

Kimberly-Clark. Either the Company or Kimberly-Clark

to Kimberly-Clark except where longer notice periods are

may terminate the pulp supply agreement for certain events

speciﬁ ed in the Corporate Services Agreement. In addition,

speciﬁ ed in the agreement, including a material breach of the

either the Company or Kimberly-Clark may terminate the

agreement by the other party that is not cured after 30 days’

Corporate Services Agreement for cause or upon certain

notice, insolvency or bankruptcy of the other party, or a funda-

changes of ownership relating to the other party as set forth

mental change in the nature of the business of the other party

in the Corporate Services Agreement.

that may substantially affect its ability to sell or to purchase or

utilize pulp under the agreement. In addition, Kimberly-Clark

may terminate the agreement if the ownership or control of

the Company or any of its pulp production facilities becomes

vested in or is made subject to the control or direction of,

any direct competitor of Kimberly-Clark or any governmental

or regulatory authority or any other third party, who in

Kimberly-Clark’s reasonable judgment may not be able to reli-

ably perform the Company’s obligations under the agreement.

Kimberly-Clark may also terminate the agreement upon one

year’s notice if, as a result of the Company’s forestry activities,

continued use of the Company’s pulp by Kimberly-Clark does

or, in Kimberly-Clark’s reasonable judgment is likely to, result

in a substantial loss of sales of Kimberly-Clark’s products or

to otherwise materially and adversely affect the reputation

of Kimberly-Clark or its products. Kimberly-Clark may

also terminate the agreement upon 180 days notice that the

Company’s failure to comply with U.S. customs requirements

jeopardizes Kimberly-Clark customs certiﬁ cation.

Employee Matters Agreement

The Company and Kimberly-Clark have entered into an

Employee Matters Agreement which provides for their respec-

tive obligations to employees and former employees who are

or were associated with the Pulp and Paper Business and for

other employment and employee beneﬁ ts matters.

Pursuant to the Employee Matters Agreement, the

Company agreed to employ or offer to employ all employees

of Kimberly-Clark with employment duties principally related

to the Pulp and Paper Business on terms and conditions sub-

stantially similar to the current terms and conditions of their

employment with Kimberly-Clark. The Company agreed that,

subject to applicable laws, to maintain labor agreements with

substantially the same terms and conditions that existed with

Kimberly-Clark.

The Company also assumed, and indemniﬁ ed Kimberly-

Clark against, certain liabilities related to employees of the

Pulp and Paper Business who are employed by the Company

and retired Canadian employees. The Company assumed

responsibility for the Kimberly-Clark retirement plans in

which employees of the Pulp and Paper Business participated.

pg. 75

The Company granted credit for service recognized under

if such acquisitions or issuances result in the Spin-Off failing

the Kimberly-Clark plans for all purposes under its plans.

to meet the requirements of a tax-free distribution pursuant

Kimberly-Clark transferred the assets and liabilities of the

to Section 355(e) of the Code.

Kimberly-Clark retirement plans attributable to transferring

active employees and retired Canadian employees of the Pulp

and Paper Business to the Company.

Administrative Matters. The Tax Sharing Agreement
also sets forth Kimberly-Clark’s and the Company’s respec-

tive obligations with respect to the ﬁ ling of tax returns, the

In connection with the Spin-Off, outstanding options

administration of tax contests, assistance and cooperation

held by transferring employees under Kimberly-Clark’s

and other matters.

equity compensation plans (other than the Kimberly-Clark

Corporation Global Stock Option Plan) were converted into

substitute options to purchase Company common stock, or to

N O T E 12. A S S E T I M PAI R M EN T LO S S

the extent such options were exercisable they may instead, at

The Company’s Terrace Bay, Ontario, pulp manufacturing

the election of the option holder on or before November 30,

facility incurred operating losses in 2002, 2003 and 2004. The

2004, remain exercisable in accordance with the terms of such

Company anticipates that the facility will continue to incur

plans as applicable to terminated employees.

operating losses in 2005, 2006 and 2007. The principal causes

Tax Sharing Agreement

The Company and Kimberly-Clark have entered into a Tax

Sharing Agreement, which generally governs Kimberly-Clark’s

and the Company’s respective rights, responsibilities and obli-

gations after the Spin-Off with respect to taxes attributable

to the Company’s business, as well as any taxes incurred by

Kimberly-Clark as a result of the failure of the Spin-Off to

qualify for tax-free treatment under Section 355 of the Code.
General Taxes. Under the Tax Sharing Agreement,
Kimberly-Clark is generally liable for all pre-Spin-Off, and

the Company is generally be liable for all post-Spin-Off,

U.S. federal income taxes, foreign taxes and certain state tax-

es attributable to the Company’s business. The Tax Sharing

Agreement sets forth rules for determining which taxes are

attributable to pre-Spin-Off and post-Spin-Off periods and

rules on the effect of subsequent adjustments to those taxes

due to tax audits or examinations.
Distribution-Related Taxes. Under the Tax Sharing
Agreement, the Company is liable for taxes incurred by

Kimberly-Clark that arise as a result of the Company taking

or failing to take, as the case may be, certain actions that result

in the Spin-Off failing to meet the requirements of a tax-free

distribution under Section 355 of the Code. The Company is

also liable for taxes incurred by Kimberly-Clark in connection

with certain acquisitions or issuances of Company stock, even

if such acquisitions or issuances occurred after the Spin-Off,

of these projected losses are:

(cid:127) continued high operating costs at this facility;

(cid:127) prices for pulp sold to Kimberly-Clark under the

new pulp supply agreement, which will be at substantially

higher discounts than those at which pulp was transferred

to Kimberly-Clark prior to the Spin-Off;

(cid:127) anticipated lower market prices for pulp in the second

half of 2005 and forward as a result of an expected down-

turn in the pulp cycle; and

(cid:127) continued strength of the Canadian dollar relative to

the U.S. dollar.

Because projected extended periods of operating losses are

indicators of impairment under SFAS 144, Accounting for the
Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets (“SFAS 144”),
the Company performed an asset impairment test on the facil-

ity under the guidance of SFAS 144, which indicated that

the carrying amount of the Terrace Bay facility would not be

recoverable from estimated future cash ﬂ ows. Accordingly, in

December 2004, the Company recorded a pre-tax, non-cash

impairment loss of approximately $110.0 million to reduce

the carrying amount of the Terrace Bay facility. In addition,

in December 2004, in recognition of the probability that

Terrace Bay’s No. 1 mill would be closed (See Note 15), the

Company recorded an additional impairment loss of approxi-

mately $2.8 million related to the long-lived assets of the

Terrace Bay facility. A deferred tax beneﬁ t of approximately

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

$40.8 million was also recorded as a result of the impairment

N O T E 13. B U S I N ES S S E G M EN T A N D

losses, resulting in a net after-tax charge of approximately

GE O GRA P H IC INF ORMAT ION

The Company reports its operations in three segments: Fine

Paper, Technical Paper and Pulp. The Fine Paper business is a

leading producer of premium writing, text, cover and specialty

papers. The Technical Paper business is a leading producer of

durable, saturated and coated base papers for a variety of end

uses. The Pulp business consists of the Terrace Bay, Ontario,

pulp mill and the Pictou, Nova Scotia, pulp mill and related

timberlands. Each segment requires different technologies and

marketing strategies. Disclosure of segment information is on

the same basis that management uses internally for evaluating

segment performance and allocating resources.

Prior to the Spin-Off, Kimberly-Clark provided the Pulp

and Paper Business with certain centralized administrative

functions to realize economies of scale and efﬁ cient use of

resources. The costs of shared services, and other administra-

tive functions managed on a common basis, are allocated to

the segments based on usage, where possible, or other factors

based on the nature of the activity. The accounting policies

of the reportable operating segments are the same as those

described in the Summary of Signiﬁ cant Accounting Policies

(see Note 2).

$72.0 million.

In determining the impairment losses, the estimated

fair value of the Terrace Bay facility was based on probability-

weighted, pre-tax cash ﬂ ows from operating the facility,

discounted at a risk-free interest rate. The signiﬁ cant assump-

tions used to determine fair value of the facility included the

Company’s long-term projections of the market price of pulp,

the projected cost structure of the facility and the long-term

relationship of the Canadian dollar and the U.S. dollar.

The Company also considered its plans to improve the cost

structure at Terrace Bay, primarily through future capital proj-

ects and a plan for a cogeneration arrangement that would

lower the cost of electricity, when determining the fair value

of the facility used to determine the impairment losses. This

estimate of the fair value of the Terrace Bay facility reﬂ ects

these assumed improvements to the facility’s cost structure.

Prior to the Spin-Off, Kimberly-Clark’s management also

performed an impairment test of the Terrace Bay facility under

the guidance of SFAS 144. The purpose of that analysis was to

determine if the Terrace Bay facility was impaired when held

by Kimberly-Clark prior to the Spin-Off. As operated by

Kimberly-Clark, the Terrace Bay facility supplied more than

90% of the pulp it produced to other Kimberly-Clark busi-

nesses where it was used to produce tissue and other products.

Kimberly-Clark’s management concluded that the facility

was not impaired prior to the Spin-Off because, as used by

Kimberly-Clark, it was an integrated part of Kimberly-Clark’s

tissue and other businesses and the estimated undiscounted

future cash ﬂ ows of the businesses consuming such pulp were

sufﬁ cient to recover the carrying amounts of their long-lived

assets, including the Terrace Bay facility.

pg. 77

Business Segments

Net Sales
Year
2004
2003(a)
2002(a)
Operating Income (Loss)
Year
2004(b)
2003
2002
Depreciation and Amortization
Year
2004
2003
2002
Total Assets
Year
2004
2003

Fine
Paper

Technical
Paper

Pulp

Unallocated
Corporate
Costs

Intersegment Combined

Sales

Total

$ 220.8
210.4
224.7

$ 132.3
121.6
120.7

$ 448.6
405.1
380.0

–
–
–

$ (29.6)
(26.8)
(23.4)

$ 772.1
710.3
702.0

67.0
63.2
77.2

21.9
16.6
18.4

(120.5)
(16.5)
3.7

9.7
9.6
10.0

3.7
4.0
4.0

22.4
21.7
20.3

140.9
131.9

58.2
62.8

382.3
397.3

(8.3)
–
–

0.2
–
–

5.2
–

–
–
–

–
–

(39.9)
63.3
99.3

36.0
35.3
34.3

586.6
592.0

(a) The above amounts of Net sales for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002 have been increased from the amounts previously reported to be in confor-
mity with EITF 00-10, which prohibits the netting of shipping and handling costs against revenues. Amounts reﬂ ected for “Net sales” in 2003 for the Fine
Paper and Pulp businesses increased from the amounts previously reported by $8.1 million and $38.6 million, respectively. Amounts reﬂ ected for “Net sales”
in 2002 for the Fine Paper and Pulp businesses increased from the amounts previously reported by $8.1 million and $38.0 million, respectively.

(b) Income before income taxes for the pulp business in 2004 includes an impairment loss of $112.8 million for the Terrace Bay facility.

Capital Spending
Year
2004
2003
2002

Geographic Information

Net Sales
Year
2004
2003
2002
Total Assets
Year
2004
2003

Fine
Paper

Technical
Paper

Pulp

Corporate

Combined
Total

3.5
2.5
4.8

1.6
2.2
4.6

$ 11.0
19.7
9.0

3.0
–
–

$ 19.1
24.4
18.4

United States

Canada

Items

Total

Inter-

Geographic Combined

$ 354.0
332.8
349.4

$ 448.2
404.6
378.5

$ (30.1)
(27.1)
(25.9)

$ 772.1
710.3
702.0

250.2
195.0

336.4
397.0

–
–

586.6
592.0

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

Net sales are attributed to geographic areas based on the

Supplemental Balance Sheet Data

physical location of the entities comprising the Pulp and Paper

Business and the Company for the respective years. Segment

identiﬁ able assets are those that are directly used in the seg-

ments operations. Corporate assets are primarily cash, prepaid

pension costs and deferred ﬁ nancing costs.

Concentrations

For the years 2004, 2003 and 2002, the Company had

$351.0 million, $305.1 million and $262.1 million, respectively,

December 31,

2004

2003

Summary of Accounts
Receivable, net
Accounts Receivable:
From customers
Other
Less allowance for doubtful
accounts and sales discounts
Total

$ 84.9
11.8

$ 74.8
3.5

(4.3)
$ 92.4

(1.2)
$ 77.1

of net sales revenue for pulp transferred to Kimberly-Clark. For

Accounts receivable are carried at amounts that approximate

the periods presented, other than Kimberly-Clark, no single

fair value.

customer accounts for more than 10% of the consolidated and

combined revenue of the Company. Except for wood chips

used by the pulp mills and certain specialty latex grades used

by Technical Paper, management is not aware of any signiﬁ -

cant concentration of business transacted with a particular

supplier that could, if suddenly eliminated, have a material

adverse affect on its operations. In 2004 and 2003, over 55%

of the wood chips used by the Pictou mill were supplied by

two suppliers and approximately 60% of the wood chips used

by the Terrace Bay mill were supplied by one supplier. While

December 31,

2004

2003

Summary of Inventories
Inventories by Major Class:
Raw materials
Work in process
Finished goods
Supplies and other

Excess of FIFO cost over LIFO cost
Total

$ 31.1
7.7
42.1
14.4
95.3
(6.6)
$ 88.7

$ 37.2
5.7
28.8
20.5
92.2
(6.5)
$ 85.7

management believes that alternative sources of critical sup-

The FIFO values of total inventories valued on the LIFO

plies, such as wood chips, would be available, disruption of its

method were $33.5 million and $27.6 million at December 31,

primary sources could create a temporary, adverse effect on

2004 and 2003, respectively.

product shipments. An interruption in supply of a latex spe-

cialty grade could disrupt and eventually cause a shutdown of

production of certain technical paper, latex specialty grades.

N O T E 14. SUPPLEMEN TA L DATA

Supplemental Statement of Operations Data

Year Ended December 31,

2004

2003

2002

Summary of Advertising
and Research Expenses
Advertising expense
Research expense

December 31,

2004

2003

Summary of Property,
Plant and Equipment – Net
Land and land improvements
Buildings
Machinery and equipment
Roads
Construction in progress

Less accumulated depreciation
Net Property, Plant and Equipment(a)

$
4.8
84.6
487.9
26.5
13.6
617.4
359.8
$ 257.6

$ 3.2
143.4
820.5
50.7
7.3
1,025.1
657.0
$ 368.1

7.7
1.7

$ 5.8
2.1

$ 6.7
1.8

(a) In December 2004, the Company recorded an impairment loss of

$112.8 million to write down the value of the Terrace Bay facility.

pg. 79

December 31,

2004

2003

severance and deﬁ ned-beneﬁ t pension plans of approximately

Summary of Accrued Expenses
Accrued salaries and
employee beneﬁ ts
Accrued income taxes
Accrued interest
Other
Total

$ 27.2
0.5
1.4
7.5
$ 36.6

$ 22.9
–
–
7.5
$ 30.4

N O T E 15. S U B S E Q U EN T EV EN T

On March 1, 2005, the Company announced the planned

closure of the smaller of the two single-line pulp mills at

the Terrace Bay facility (the “No. 1 Mill”). The No. 1 Mill

was originally constructed in 1948 and has annual capac-

ity of approximately 125,000 tons of bleached kraft pulp.

In conjunction with the closing, the Company will offer

early retirement and severance packages to approximately

130 employees. The closing was authorized by our Chief

Executive Ofﬁ cer on February 28, 2005, pursuant to a reso-

lution of the Board of Directors, and is expected to occur

in early May 2005.

The Company expects to incur approximately $6.0 mil-

lion of exit costs in connection with the closure, including

one-time termination beneﬁ ts related to early retirement,

$5.5 million and other associated exit costs of $0.5 million.

In addition, we expect to incur approximately $1.0 million of

general expenses related to training of employees. Approxi-

mately $6.3 million of the estimated costs of $7.0 million will

result in future cash expenditures during 2005 and 2006.

In addition, in March 2005, the Company will record a

pre-tax, non-cash impairment loss of approximately $0.9 mil-

lion related to the remaining value of the long-lived assets of

the No. 1 Mill (See Note 12).

As a result of closing the No. 1 Mill, the Company noti-

ﬁ ed Kimberly-Clark of its intention to terminate a part of its

commitment to supply and their requirement to purchase

northern bleached hardwood kraft pulp pursuant to the terms

of the pulp supply agreement. Under the pulp supply agree-

ment, the Company was obligated to provide 40,000, 30,000,

20,000 and 10,000 tons of northern bleached hardwood kraft

pulp produced at the Terrace Bay mill annually in 2005, 2006,

2007 and 2008, respectively. Our commitment to supply and

Kimberly-Clark’s requirement to purchase northern bleached

hardwood kraft pulp pursuant to the terms of the pulp supply

agreement from the Pictou mill (in annual quantities which

are identical to those shown above) are unchanged.

Neenah Paper, Inc. 2004 Annual Report

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

N O T E 16. UNAU DI TED Q UARTERLY DATA

Net Sales(d)
Gross Proﬁ t
Operating Income (Loss)
Net Income (Losss)

Earnings (Loss) Per Common Share(e):
Basic

Diluted

Net Sales (d)
Gross Proﬁ t
Operating Income
Net Income

Earnings Per Common Share(e):
Basic

Diluted

2004 Quarters (a)

First

Second

Third

Fourth

Year

$ 198.4
33.1
24.3
15.1

$ 207.4
45.0
37.3
23.7

$ 188.9
23.3
7.8
4.5

$ 177.4(c)
22.8
(109.3)(b)
(69.7)(b)

$ 772.1
124.2
(39.9)
(26.4)

$ 1.03

$ 1.60

$ 0.31

$ (4.73)

$ (1.79)

2003 Quarters (a)

First

Second

Third

Fourth

$ 174.9
27.5
14.9
9.4

$ 173.3
24.5
10.8
6.4

$ 179.6
24.1
15.5
8.9

$ 182.5
31.8
22.1
14.2

Year

$ 710.3
107.9
63.3
38.9

$ 0.64

$ 0.43

$ 0.60

$ 0.97

$ 2.64

(a) The annual maintenance shutdowns for the Company’s two pulp mills occurred during the third quarter in 2004 instead of one each during the second

and third quarters in 2003 and 2002.

(b) Includes an asset impairment loss of $112.8 million.

(c) Net sales subsequent to the Spin-Off (in December 2004) were reduced by $12.9 million, reﬂ ecting the one-time effect resulting from the new pulp supply

agreement with Kimberly-Clark which transfers title at product delivery rather than shipment date.

(d) The above amounts of Net sales for all quarters prior to the fourth quarter of 2004 have been increased from the amounts previously reported to be in con-
formity with EITF 00-10, which prohibits the netting of shipping and handling costs against revenues. Net sales for the ﬁ rst, second and third quarters
of 2004 were increased from amounts previously reported by $12.6 million, $12.7 million and $10.9 million, respectively. Net sales for the year and ﬁ rst,
second, third and fourth quarters of 2003 were increased from amounts previously reported by $44.5 million, $11.0 million, 10.5 million, $11.5 million
and $11.5 million, respectively. (See Note 2)

(e) For 2004 prior to the Spin-Off and 2003, basic and diluted earnings per share were computed using the number of shares of Neenah common stock out-

standing on November 30, 2004, the date on which Neenah common stock was distributed to the stockholders of Kimberly-Clark.

Being one of the world’s most

respected paper companies, we

couldn’t limit the paper used in our

annual report to just one choice.

So we’ve used a range of our most