SunPower
Annual Report 2015

Plain-text annual report

CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS SunPower Corporation 77 Rio Robles, San Jose California 95134 USA 408.240.5500 sunpower.com ©2016 SunPower Corporation. All Rights Reserved. SUNPOWER and the SUNPOWER logo are registered trademarks of SunPower Corporation in the U.S. and other countries as well. Annual Report 2015 sp_annual_report_2015_cover_print.indd 1 3/8/16 4:34 PM Changing the Way Our World is Powered As one of the world’s most innovative and sustainable energy companies, SunPower provides residential, commercial and utility customers with complete solar solutions, services and Smart Energy choices. Our global customers rely on our more than 30 years of proven experience. From the first flip of the switch, SunPower delivers maximum value and superb performance throughout the long life of every solar system. Headquartered in Silicon Valley, SunPower has about 8,000 dedicated, customer-focused employees in Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, North and South America. Since 2011, we’ve been majority-owned by Total, the fourth largest publicly-traded energy company. We passionately believe that our company’s achievements and our individual contributions are making the world a better place. We are driven to innovate, persevere, blaze new trails, and deliver on our promises. We are changing the way our world is powered and empowering customers to realize the potential of clean, renewable solar energy. SunPower provides clean energy through residential, commercial and power plant installations worldwide. EXECUTIVE OFFICERS Thomas H. Werner President, CEO and Chairman of the Board Lisa Bodensteiner Executive Vice President and General Counsel Charles D. Boynton Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Eric Branderiz Senior Vice President, Corporate Controller and Chief Accounting Officer Marty T. Neese Chief Operating Officer Douglas J. Richards Executive Vice President Administration Howard Wenger President Business Units BOARD OF DIRECTORS Thomas H. Werner Chairman of the Board Arnaud Chaperon Director Bernard Clément Director Denis Giorno Director Daniel Lauré Director Catherine Lesjak Director Thomas R. McDaniel Humbert de Wendel Director Director Pat Wood III Director sp_annual_report_2015_cover_print.indd 2 3/8/16 4:34 PM Dear Shareholders: We are in the midst of a global transition to renewable energy as a primary source of electricity. At SunPower, we’re proud to be a driving force of this transformation. We closed out 2015 with record non-GAAP financial results, released market leading products, doubled our commercial Americas bookings, gained share in residential and commercial segments, and completed the world’s largest solar power plant. We also launched 8point3 Energy Partners, our growth-oriented limited partnership with First Solar to own, operate and acquire solar energy generation projects. The fundamentals for solar have never been better and SunPower is well positioned to be a leader in the solar industry’s next phase of growth – mass adoption. Adoption and Momentum Solar adoption is at an all-time high and climbing, with global shipments in 2015 up 34 percent from the previous year. We estimate that the amount of solar installed around the world is enough to power 140 million homes – more than all the homes in the United States and then some. Total cumulative solar deployment has grown almost fifty-fold over the past decade and solar is leading the way in helping to lower our carbon footprint by keeping nearly 580 million tons of carbon pollutants out of the air since 2006 alone. Given the momentum of this technology, it’s not a question of whether the world turns to solar as the primary source of electricity - it’s a matter of how fast it happens. Looking forward, we’re forecasting global solar demand to approximately double over the coming five years with annual industry shipments exceeding 100 gigawatts (GW) by 2020. For perspective, just one GW is equal to about two coal-fired power plants. The scale and continued growth of the solar power industry is being driven by three interrelated factors: cost reduction, global market expansion and policy support. The solar industry is scaling and innovating across the entire value chain in both distributed generation and power plant applications, driving down the cost of power to the point where solar is increasingly competitive with conventional sources of electricity. More competitive solar power is driving market growth in all key regions, with particularly strong growth expected in the U.S. and in new emerging markets. In the U.S., solar power capacity additions last year already exceeded those of natural gas fired generation according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance. Policy Actions Support Continued Growth At the end of last year, we saw a number of critical developments that reinforced the central role of solar power in the evolving mainstream energy mix. The reality of clean solar power at prices competitive with conventional electricity galvanized support from regulators and policymakers worldwide. 2015 was a landmark year for solar policy with California’s Net Energy Metering 2.0, the U.S. Clean Power Plan, extension of the U.S. solar investment tax credit and the Paris COP21 agreement. These policies will create a market structure supportive of the transition to solar power as a mainstream energy source. Given the unprecedented global market opportunity, we’re planning to aggressively expand our market share and footprint. In business for more than 30 years, we offer our residential, commercial and utility customers key differentiators – innovation, experience, value and sustainability – that help drive customer choice. At the core of what we do is a relentless effort to provide all of our customers with a seamless experience from start to finish. We were proud to receive the 2015 Customer Experience Excellence Award from Temkin Group, an industry leader and one of the most highly regarded customer experience firms. Innovation at Our Core Headquartered in the heart of Silicon Valley, we consider ourselves first and foremost a technology company, as evidenced by more than 600 patents. Technology remains the basis for our competitive market advantage. We’re continuing to invest in our record-setting module technology while expanding our range of complete energy solutions. SunPower innovators have consistently raised the bar for the industry, and will continue to push the boundaries of performance and quality for our customers. We set a new world record when the SunPower® X- Series solar panel achieved production efficiencies of more than 22 percent, far exceeding conventional solar panel efficiencies that range from 15 to 18 percent. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory, a federal lab that rigorously evaluates renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies, tested and verified this accomplishment. The SunPower X-Series solar panel produces 70 percent more energy in the same space over 25 years compared with typical panels and is the world’s most efficient solar panel available to homeowners. Following the acquisition of start-up Cogenra Solar, we introduced a new line of solar panels, our Performance or P-Series. While the SunPower E-Series and X-Series remain the best choices for customers with limited roof area or for those who simply want the very best in performance and reliability, our new Performance Series panels provide a strong value proposition with lower up-front cost for power plant projects in non-OECD countries and for customers with unconstrained roof area. Using methods perfected over the past three decades, SunPower combined Cogenra’s innovative panel assembly approach with our proven module technologies to create products that meet our stringent quality and reliability standards. We are backing this new panel with our industry-leading combined 25-year product and power warranty. Complementing our best-in-class solar panel technology are new panel mounted microinverters, utilizing technology we acquired in 2014 from our SolarBridge acquisition. The majority of panels we ship to the residential channel now include an AC microinverter. This product can dramatically reduce installation times and also optimizes the performance of the system. We continue to invest in developing complete solar energy solutions. As the solar industry matures and becomes a mainstream source of energy, established channels such as electric utilities will become more active in supplying solar energy to their customers. By packaging all of the required complements into a truly integrated “plug and play” solution, we can enable a large number of channel partners to serve their existing customers using SunPower technology. Last year we introduced the Helix™ platform, a game-changing product for the commercial business that builds on our legacy of complete solar solutions. The Helix system is the world’s first fully-integrated commercial solar solution. Designed for the rooftop, carport and commercial ground mount markets, Helix systems deliver significantly lower cost and improved reliability, while accelerating installation times. Proven Experience and Long-Term Value Regardless of the business segment, customers turn to SunPower because of our proven experience and long- term value. From the moment it's switched on, a SunPower system generates more energy than conventional panels and keeps providing value when other brands fade. We’re proud of our global customer portfolio. This includes being a trusted partner to strong well-known brands including six of the top ten solar corporate users and eight of the top ten home builders. About 500,000 residential consumers and hundreds of commercial customers utilize SunPower systems every day. During 2015, we completed Solar Star, the world’s largest solar power plant project, which is now owned and operated by BHE Renewables. We deliver what we promise and we stand behind our work. We’ll continue to build on our track record of designing, building and operating global power plants as we’ve expanded our development asset base to more than 7 GW and have development teams on the ground in Chile, Mexico, Turkey and South Africa. We also have great pipeline opportunities with our acquisition last year of 1.5 GW of U.S. solar power plant development assets from Australia-based Infigen Energy. With that acquisition, SunPower has assumed ownership of projects in varying stages of development across 11 states. Our experience in China allowed us to continue growing in the world’s largest market, where we’ve installed more than 160 megawatts to date and plan to meaningfully expand this volume in 2016 and beyond. In our upstream business we once again demonstrated the value of our extensive manufacturing experience with our fourth solar cell Fab. We produced the first cells using our latest generation high-efficiency solar cell technology at the end of last year. Fab 4 once again raises the bar in terms of solar cell efficiency and will help us meet the growing global demand for SunPower products. Walking the Talk on Sustainability We empower our customers to generate their own clean, affordable, emissions-free electricity and we value our role as a sustainability advisor. We believe that solar is positioned to make the single biggest contribution of any industry to carbon reduction goals – more than wind, more than energy efficiency, more than any other clean technology on the horizon. Our solar solutions and services help our customers achieve meaningful cost, energy and carbon reduction goals, making a point to learn through direct collaboration and the data that is collectively derived from it. We also believe in creating solar products that are as sustainable as the clean energy they produce. SunPower has taken steps to reduce our environmental footprint by cutting down on packaging, waste, water use and more at our facilities around the world. It matters to us that we are serving our customers in the most environmentally responsible way. SunPower is walking the talk on sustainability and is the world’s first and only solar company to be part of the Circular Economy 100, joining other leaders and innovators in the movement to create a truly regenerative economy. We also maintain a dominant position in the sustainability landscape, receiving the Cradle to Cradle Certified™ Silver designation for our panels manufactured in Mexico and France, four gold LEED certifications and one platinum, as well as with our zero waste to landfill manufacturing facilities. We’re proud to let others speak to our work as we were recognized by the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, Green Builder Media, NSF and the Guardian. Opportunity Going Forward 2015 was an incredible transformational year demonstrating the importance of solar as a mainstream energy source. The momentum gained last year will ensure that solar power has a dominant place in the world’s future energy mix. As a leading solar provider, we are squarely focused on meeting this unprecedented customer demand with unique and innovative high quality products. We’re very well positioned with unsurpassed technology, a track record of innovation and more than 8,000 customer-focused employees around the globe. There’s no better time to be in solar and there’s no better company to be with than SunPower. We look forward to creating the world’s most innovative and sustainable energy company and to changing the way our world is powered. Sincerely, Thomas H. Werner President and Chief Executive Officer SunPower Corporation UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-K T ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended January 3, 2016 OR o TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from ______________ to ______________ Commission file number 001-34166 SunPower Corporation (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter) Delaware (State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization) 94-3008969 (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) 77 Rio Robles, San Jose, California 95134 (Address of Principal Executive Offices and Zip Code) (408) 240-5500 (Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code) Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Title of each class Common Stock $0.001 par value Preferred Stock Purchase Rights d Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None _________________________________________ Name of each exchange on which registered Nasdaq Global Select Market Nasdaq Global Select Market Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes T No o Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 of Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes o No x Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Sections 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes T No o Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes T No o Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. T Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one): Large accelerated filer x Accelerated filer o Non-accelerated filer o Smaller reporting company o (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes o No T The aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant on June 28, 2015 was $1,720 million. Such aggregate market value was computed by reference to the closing price of the common stock as reported on the Nasdaq Global Select Market on June 26, 2015. For purposes of determining this amount only, the registrant has defined affiliates as including Total Energies Nouvelles Activités USA, formerly known as Total Gas & Power USA, SAS and the executive officers and directors of registrant on June 26, 2015. The total number of outstanding shares of the registrant’s common stock as of February 12, 2016 was 136,718,418. Parts of the registrant’s definitive proxy statement for the registrant’s 2016 annual meeting of stockholders are incorporated by reference in Items 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 of Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Part I. Item 1. Business Item 1A. Risk Factors Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments Item 2. Properties Item 3. Legal Proceedings Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures Part II. Part III. Part IV. Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities Item 6. Selected Consolidated Financial Data Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosure About Market Risk Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data Item 9. Changes and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosures Item 9A. Controls and Procedures Item 9B. Other Information Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance Item 11. Executive Compensation Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules Signatures Index to Exhibits 2 4 15 47 48 48 49 50 51 51 77 79 135 135 136 137 137 137 137 137 138 144 145 Trademarks INTRODUCTORY NOTES The following terms, among others, are our trademarks and may be used in this report: SunPower®, Maxeon®, Oasis®, EnergyLink™, InvisiMount®, Tenesol®, Greenbotics®, Customer Cost of Energy™ (“CCOE™”), SunPower Spectrum™, Helix™, Signature™, SolarBridge®, and The Power of One™. Other trademarks appearing in this report are the property of their respective owners. Unit of Power When referring to our solar power systems, our facilities’ manufacturing capacity, and total sales, the unit of electricity in watts for kilowatts (“KW”), megawatts (“MW”), and gigawatts (“GW”) is direct current (“DC”), unless otherwise noted as alternating current (“AC”). Levelized Cost of Energy (“LCOE”) LCOE is an evaluation of the life-cycle energy cost and life-cycle energy production of an energy producing system. It allows alternative technologies to be compared to different scales of operation, investment or operating time periods. It captures capital costs and ongoing system-related costs, along with the amount of electricity produced, and converts them into a common metric. Key drivers for LCOE reduction for photovoltaic products include panel efficiency, capacity factors, reliable system performance, and the life of the system. Customer Cost of Energy™ (“CCOE™”) Our customers are focused on reducing their overall cost of energy by intelligently integrating solar and other distributed generation, energy efficiency, energy management, and energy storage systems with their existing utility-provided energy. The CCOE™ measurement is an evaluation of a customer’s overall cost of energy, taking into account the cost impact of each individual generation source (including the utility), energy storage systems, and energy management systems. The CCOE measurement includes capital costs and ongoing operating costs, along with the amount of electricity produced, stored, saved, or re-sold, and converts all of these variables into a common metric. The CCOE metric allows a customer to compare different portfolios of generation sources, energy storage, and energy management, and to tailor towards optimization. Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements are statements that do not represent historical facts and the assumptions underlying such statements. We use words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “continue,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “plan,” “predict,” “project,” “potential,” “will,” “would,” “should,” and similar expressions to identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K include, but are not limited to, our plans and expectations regarding future financial results, expected operating results, business strategies, projected costs and cost reduction, development of new products and improvements to our existing products, our manufacturing capacity and manufacturing costs, the adequacy of our agreements with our suppliers, our ability to monetize utility projects, competitive positions, management’s plans and objectives for future operations, the sufficiency of our cash and our liquidity, our ability to obtain financing, our ability to comply with debt covenants or cure any defaults, trends in average selling prices, the success of our joint ventures and acquisitions, expected capital expenditures, warranty matters, outcomes of litigation, our exposure to foreign exchange, interest and credit risk, general business and economic conditions in our markets, industry trends, the impact of changes in government incentives, expected restructuring charges, and the likelihood of any impairment of project assets and long-lived assets. These forward-looking statements are based on information available to us as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and current expectations, forecasts and assumptions and involve a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated by these forward-looking statements. Such risks and uncertainties include a variety of factors, some of which are beyond our control. Please see “Item 1A. Risk Factors” herein and our other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) for additional information on risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ. These forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as representing our views as of any subsequent date, and we are under no obligation to, and expressly disclaim any responsibility to, update or alter our forward- looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. The following information should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and the accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Our fiscal year ends on the Sunday closest to the end of the applicable calendar year. All references to fiscal periods apply to our fiscal quarter or year, which end on the Sunday closest to the calendar month end. 3 ITEM 1. BUSINESS Corporate History PART I SunPower has been a leader in the solar industry for 30 years, originally incorporated in California in 1985 and reincorporated in Delaware during 2004 in connection with our initial public offering. In November 2011, our stockholders approved the reclassification of all outstanding former class A common stock and class B common stock into a single class of common stock listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol “SPWR.” In fiscal 2011, we became a majority owned subsidiary of Total Energies Nouvelles Activités USA, formerly known as Total Gas & Power USA, SAS (“Total”), a subsidiary of Total S.A. (“Total S.A.”). Company Overview We are a leading global energy company dedicated to changing the way our world is powered. We deliver complete solar solutions to residential, commercial, and power plant customers worldwide by offering: • Cutting-edge solar module technology and solar power systems that are designed to generate electricity over a system life typically exceeding 25 years; • • • Integrated Smart Energy software solutions that enable customers to effectively manage and optimize their CCOE measurement; Installation, construction, and ongoing maintenance and monitoring services; and Financing solutions that provide customers a variety of options for purchasing or leasing high efficiency solar products at competitive energy rates. Our global reach is enhanced by Total S.A.’s long-standing presence in many countries where significant solar installation goals are being established. Residential Residential Systems We offer a complete set of residential solutions that deliver value to homeowners and our dealer partners. We have developed the capability to deliver AC panels with factory-integrated microinverters. AC system architecture, as compared with DC systems, facilitates direct panel installation, eliminating the need to mount or assemble additional components on the roof or the side of a building, driving down systems costs, improving overall system reliability, and providing improved, cleaner design aesthetics. As part of our complete solution approach, we are developing a fully-integrated residential solar platform that will combine solar power production and energy management and will allow residential customers to quickly and easily complete their system installations. We offer the SunPower® InvisiMount® residential mounting system in our product portfolio. The InvisiMount® system is designed specifically for use with our panels and reduces installation time through pre-assembled parts and integrated grounding. The InvisiMount system is well-suited for residential sloped roof applications and provides design flexibility and enhanced aesthetics by delivering a unique, “floating” appearance. We support our hardware development with investments in our proprietary set of advanced monitoring applications (the “SunPower Monitoring System”) and our EnergyLink™ customer portal, which enable customers to gain visibility into their solar system production and household energy consumption. This software is available for use on the web or through the SunPower mobile application on smartphones and tablets. In fiscal 2015, we issued six software upgrades to our EnergyLink customer portal offering and, as a result, have experienced increases in customer traffic, engagement, satisfaction, and referrals. Sales Channels, Residential Leasing Program and other Financing Options We sell our residential solar energy solutions to end customers through a variety of means, including cash sales and long-term leases directly to end customers, sales to resellers, including the Company’s third-party global dealer network, and sales of the Company’s operations and maintenance (“O&M”) services. 4 We offer financing programs that are designed to offer customers a variety of options to obtain high efficiency solar products and systems, including loans arranged through our third-party lending partners, in some cases for no money down, or by leasing high efficiency solar systems at competitive energy rates. Our residential lease program, in partnership with third- party investors, provides U.S. customers SunPower systems under 20-year lease agreements that include system maintenance and warranty coverage, including warranties on system performance. SunPower residential lease customers have the option to purchase their leased solar systems upon the sale or transfer of their home. These financing options enhance our ability to provide individually-tailored solar solutions to a broad range of residential customers. We also have the ability to sell residential systems to 8point3 Energy Partners LP, a joint Yieldco vehicle in which we have a 40.7% ownership stake, through transactions in which we sell a portfolio of residential leases. For additional information on transactions with 8point3 Energy Partners LP, please see “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 3. 8point3 Energy Partners LP.” Commercial Commercial Roof and Ground Mounted Systems As part of our complete solution product approach, we launched our Helix™ commercial market product. The Helix system is a pre-engineered, modular solution that combines our industry-leading solar module technology with integrated plug- and-play power stations, cable management systems, and mounting hardware that is built to last and fast to install, enabling customers to scale their solar programs quickly with minimal business disruption. The Helix platform is standardized across rooftop, carport and ground installations and designed to lower system cost while improving performance. The Helix platform is also bundled with our Smart Energy software analytics, which provides our customers with detailed information about their energy consumption and production, enabling them to further reduce their energy costs. We also offer a variety of commercial solutions designed to address a wide range of site requirements for commercial rooftop, parking lot and open space applications, including a portfolio of solutions utilizing framed panels and a variety of internally or externally developed mounting methods for flat roof and high tilt roof applications. Our commercial flat rooftop systems are designed to be lightweight and interlock, enhancing wind resistance and providing for secure, rapid installations. We offer parking lot structures designed specifically for SunPower panels, balance of system components, and inverters and in fiscal 2015 expanded our capability to design and install innovative solar structures and systems for carport applications. These systems are typically custom design-build projects that utilize standard templates and design best practices to create a solution tailored to unique site conditions. SunPower’s highest efficiency panels are especially well suited to stand-alone structures, such as those found in parking lot applications, because our systems require less steel and other materials per unit of power or energy produced as compared with our competitors. Sales Channels and Financing Options We sell our commercial solar energy solutions to commercial and public entity end customers through a variety of means, including direct sales of turn-key engineering, procurement and construction (“EPC”) services, sales to the Company’s third-party global dealer network and to 8point3 Energy Partners, and sales of the Company’s O&M services. We also offer some of our commercial customers alternatives to purchasing systems, such as selling energy to them under power purchase agreements (“PPAs”). Power Plants Power Plant Systems We offer the industry’s first modular solar power block, the Oasis® system, which combines SunPower solar panels and tracker technology into a scalable 1.5 MW solar power block, which streamlines the construction process while optimizing the use of available land by conforming to the contours of the production site. The power block kits are shipped pre-assembled to the job site for rapid field installation. The Oasis operating system is designed to support future grid interconnection requirements for large-scale solar power plants, such as voltage ride-through and power factor control. More than 1.5 GW of the Oasis system is installed or under contract worldwide. The Oasis system was deployed at the 748 MW Solar Star Projects in California, formerly known as Antelope Valley Solar Projects, the world’s largest solar power project to date. Our robotic solar power plant cleaning system technology has been deployed on many of the utility-scale solar power systems for which we provide O&M services. The robots may be configured for use with a variety of solar panels and mounting types, including fixed-tilt arrays and single access trackers and significantly reduce water use and improve system performance. 5 Our single axis tracking systems automatically pivot solar panels to track the sun’s movement throughout the day. This tracking feature increases the amount of sunlight that is captured and converted into energy by up to 30% over flat or fixed-tilt systems, depending on geographic location and local climate conditions. A single motor and drive mechanism can control 10 to 20 rows, or more than 200 KW, of solar panels. This multi-row feature represents a cost advantage for our customers over dual axis tracking systems, as such systems require more motors, drives, land, and power to operate per KW of capacity. Our solar concentrator, LCPV, combines a horizontal single-axis tracker with rows of parabolic mirrors, reflecting light onto linear arrays of our high efficiency solar cells. The SunPower cell is uniquely suited for this application due to its extremely high efficiency under low levels of concentration. Similar to the Oasis system, the LCPV components come factory preassembled, enabling rapid installation using standard tools and requiring no specialized field expertise. Utility-Scale Solar Power System Construction and Development Our global project teams have established a scalable, fully integrated, vertical approach to constructing and developing utility-scale photovoltaic power plants in a sustainable way. Our industry experienced power plant development and project finance teams evaluate sites for solar developments; obtain land rights through purchase and lease options; conduct environmental and grid transmission studies; and obtain building, construction and grid-interconnection permits, licenses, and regulatory approvals. We enter into turnkey EPC agreements with customers under which we design, engineer, construct, commission, and deliver functioning rooftop- and ground-mounted solar power systems. This includes the development, execution, and sale of solar power plants, which generally include the sale or lease of related real estate. Under such development projects, the plants and project development rights, initially owned by us, are later sold to third parties. In the United States, commercial and electric utility customers typically choose to purchase solar electricity under a PPA with an investor or financing company that buys the system from us. In other areas, such as the Middle East, Africa, and South America, projects are typically purchased by an investor or financing company and operated as central-station solar power plants. Sales Channels and Financing Our power plant business refers to sales of our large-scale solar products and systems, including power plant project development and project sales, EPC services for power plant construction, power plant O&M services and component sales for power plants developed by third parties, sometimes on a multi-year, firm commitment basis. Our utility-scale solar power systems are typically purchased by an investor or financing company and operated as central-station solar power plants. We also sell utility-scale solar power plants to 8point3 Energy Partners. We are able to utilize various means to finance our utility-scale power plant development and construction projects, which include arranging tax equity financing structures, utilizing non-recourse project debt facilities, and executing our HoldCo strategy in conjunction with project sales to 8point3 Energy Partners. Operations and Maintenance Our solar power systems are designed to generate electricity over a system life typically exceeding 25 years. We offer our customers various levels of post-installation O&M services with the objective of optimizing our customers’ electrical energy production over the life of the system. The terms and conditions of post-installation O&M services may provide for remote monitoring of system production and performance, including providing performance reports, preventative maintenance, including solar module cleanings, corrective maintenance, and rapid-response outage restoration, including repair or replacement of all system components covered under warranty or major maintenance agreements. We incorporate leading information technology platforms to facilitate the management of our solar power systems operating worldwide. Real-time flow of data from our customers’ sites is aggregated centrally where an engine applies advanced solar specific algorithms to detect and report potential performance issues. Our work management system routes any anomalies to the appropriate responders to help ensure timely resolution. Our performance model, PVSim, was developed over the last 20 years and has been audited by independent engineers. Solar panel performance coefficients are established through independent third-party testing. The SunPower Monitoring System also provides customers real-time performance status of their solar power system, with access to historical or daily system performance data through our customer website (www.sunpowermonitor.com). The SunPower Monitoring System is available through applications on Apple® and Android™ devices. Some customers choose to install “digital signs” or kiosks to display system performance information from the lobby of their facility. We believe these displays enhance our brand and educate the public and prospective customers about solar power. 6 We typically provide a system output performance warranty, separate from our standard solar panel product warranty, to customers that have subscribed to our post-installation O&M services. The system output performance warranty expires upon termination of the post-installation O&M services related to the system. In connection with system output performance warranties, we agree to pay liquidated damages in the event the system does not perform to the stated specifications, with certain exclusions. The warranty excludes system output shortfalls attributable to force majeure events, customer curtailment, irregular weather, and other similar factors. In the event that the system output falls below the warrantied performance level during the applicable warranty period, and provided that the shortfall is not caused by a factor that is excluded from the performance warranty, the warranty provides that SunPower will pay the customer an amount based on the value of the shortfall of energy produced relative to the applicable warrantied performance level. For leased systems, we provide a system output performance warranty with similar terms and conditions as that for non-leased systems. We calculate our expectation of system output performance based on a particular system’s design specifications, including the type of panels used, the type of inverters used, site irradiation measures derived from historical weather data, our historical experience as a manufacturer, EPC services provider, and project developer as well as other unique design considerations such as system shading. The warrantied system output performance level varies by system depending on the characteristics of the system and the negotiated agreement with the customer, and the level declines over time to account for the expected degradation of the system. Actual system output is typically measured annually for purposes of determining whether warrantied performance levels have been met. Our primary remedy for the system output performance warranty is our ongoing O&M services which enable us to quickly identify and remediate potential issues before they have a significant impact on system performance. We also have remedies in the form of our standard product warranties and third-party original equipment manufacturer warranties that cover certain components, such as inverters, to prevent potential losses under our system output performance warranties or to minimize further losses. Technology We believe that we possess a technological advantage as the leading manufacturer of back-contact, back-junction cells that enables our panels to produce more electricity, last longer and resist degradation more effectively. We believe that our technology allows us to deliver: • • • • • superior performance, including the ability to generate up to 50% more power per unit area than conventional solar cells; superior aesthetics, with our uniformly black surface design that eliminates highly visible reflective grid lines and metal interconnection ribbons; superior reliability, as confirmed by multiple independent reports and internal reliability data; superior energy production per rated watt of power, as confirmed by multiple independent reports; and solar power systems that are designed to generate electricity over a system life typically exceeding 25 years. With industry-leading conversion efficiencies, we continuously improve our Maxeon® solar cells and believe they perform better and are tested more extensively to deliver maximum return on investment when compared with the products of our competitors. Panels Solar panels are solar cells electrically connected together and encapsulated in a weatherproof panel. Solar cells are semiconductor devices that convert sunlight into direct current electricity. Our solar cells are designed without highly reflective metal contact grids or current collection ribbons on the front of the solar cell, which provides additional efficiency and allows our solar cells to be assembled into solar panels with a more uniform appearance. Our X-Series solar panels, made with our Maxeon Gen 3 solar cells, have demonstrated average panel efficiencies exceeding 22% in high-volume production. In fiscal 2015, one of our standard production modules set a world record for aperture area efficiency as tested by National Renewable Energy Laboratory (“NREL”). We believe our X-Series solar panels are the highest efficiency solar panels available for the mass market, and we continue to focus on increasing cell efficiency even as we produce solar cells with over 25% efficiency in a lab setting. Because our solar cells are more efficient relative to conventional solar cells, when our solar cells are assembled into panels, the assembly cost per watt is less because more power can be incorporated into a given size panel. Higher solar panel 7 efficiency allows installers to mount a solar power system with more power within a given roof or site area and can reduce per watt installation costs. Our suite of SunPower solar panels provides customers a variety of features to fit their needs, including the SunPower® Signature™ Black design which allows the panels to blend seamlessly into the rooftop. We offer panels that can be used both with inverters that require transformers as well as with the highest performing transformer-less inverters to maximize output. Both our X-Series and E-Series panels have proven performance with low levels of degradation, as validated by third- party performance tests. Additionally, in fiscal 2015, we announced the development of a new line of solar panels under the Performance Series product name. The new products utilize a proprietary manufacturing process to assemble conventional silicon solar cells into panels with increased efficiency and reliability compared with conventional panels. Designed to target a new set of customers and global markets, we expect that the Performance Series panels will be available in all three of SunPower’s business segments starting in fiscal 2016. Balance of System Components “Balance of system components” are components of a solar power system other than the solar panels, and include mounting structures, charge controllers, grid interconnection equipment, and other devices, depending on the specific requirements of a particular system and project. We possess advanced module-level control electronics in our technology portfolio that enable longer series strings and significant balance of system components cost reductions in large arrays. Inverters Every solar power system needs an inverter to transform the direct current electricity collected from the solar panels into utility-grade AC power that is ready for use. We sell inverters manufactured by third parties, some of which are SunPower- branded. We also have integrated microinverter technology that converts DC generated by a single solar photovoltaic panel into AC directly on the panel. We are utilizing this technology to develop next generation microinverters for use with our high efficiency solar panels. Panels with these factory-integrated microinverters perform better in shaded applications compared to conventional string inverters and allow for optimization and monitoring at the solar panel level, enabling maximum energy production by the solar system. Warranties SunPower provides a 25-year standard solar panel product warranty for defects in materials and workmanship. The solar panel product warranty also warrants that the panel will provide 95% of the panel’s minimum peak power rating for the first five years, declining due to expected degradation by no more than 0.4% per year for the following 20 years, such that the power output at the end of year 25 will be at least 87% of the panel’s minimum peak power rating. Our warranty provides that we will repair or replace any defective solar panels during the warranty period. We also pass through long-term warranties from the original equipment manufacturers of certain system components to customers for periods ranging from five to 20 years. In addition, we generally warrant our workmanship on installed systems for periods ranging up to 25 years. Smart Energy We see “Smart Energy” as a way to harness our world’s energy potential by connecting the most powerful and reliable solar systems on the market with an increasingly vast array of actionable data that can help our customers make smarter decisions about their energy use. Our Smart Energy initiative is designed to add layers of intelligent control to homes, buildings and grids—all personalized through easy-to-use customer interfaces. In order to enhance the portfolio of Smart Energy solutions we offer, we continue to invest in integrated technology solutions to help customers manage and optimize their CCOE measurement. We have an investment in Tendril Networks, Inc. and have licensed its data-driven Energy Services Management Platform. We believe that this open, cloud-based software platform provides the infrastructure, analytics and understanding required to power the development of new Smart Energy applications that will deliver personalized energy services to our residential customers. We have also negotiated several agreements with residential and commercial energy storage providers to integrate storage technology into our residential and commercial solar solutions. By combining storage with energy management, we lower our customers’ cost of energy through improvements in self-consumption, rate arbitrage, demand management, and grid and market participation. We continue to work to make combined solar and storage solutions broadly commercially available. 8 We are developing next generation microinverters for use with our high efficiency solar panels in order to enhance our portfolio of Smart Energy solutions. Panels with these factory-integrated microinverters can convert direct current generated by the solar panel into alternating current, enabling optimization and monitoring at the solar panel level to ensure maximum energy production by the solar system. Research and Development We engage in extensive research and development efforts to improve solar cell efficiency through enhancement of our existing products, development of new techniques, and reducing manufacturing cost and complexity. Our research and development group works closely with our manufacturing facilities, our equipment suppliers and our customers to improve our solar cell design and to lower solar cell, solar panel and system product manufacturing and assembly costs. In addition, we have dedicated employees who work closely with our current and potential suppliers of crystalline silicon, a key raw material used in the manufacture of our solar cells, to develop specifications that meet our standards and ensure the high quality we require, while at the same time controlling costs. Under our Research & Collaboration Agreement with Total, our majority stockholder, we have established a joint committee to engage in long-term research and development projects with continued focus on maintaining and expanding our technology position in the crystalline silicon domain and ensuring our competitiveness. Please see “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Research and Development.” Supplier Relationships, Manufacturing, and Panel Assembly We purchase polysilicon, ingots, wafers, solar cells, balance of system components, and inverters from various manufacturers, including our joint venture, AUO SunPower Sdn. Bhd. (“AUOSP”), on both a contracted and a purchase order basis. We have contracted with some of our suppliers for multi-year supply agreements. Under such agreements, we have annual minimum purchase obligations and in certain cases prepayment obligations. We have certain purchase obligations under our material supply agreement with AUOSP, which is a supplier of our cells. This material supply contract has a remaining term of two years and does not contain prepayment obligations. Please see “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Contractual Obligations” for further information regarding the amount of our purchase obligations in fiscal 2016 and beyond. Under other supply agreements, we are required to make prepayments to vendors over the terms of the arrangements. As of January 3, 2016, advances to suppliers totaled $359.1 million. We may be unable to recover such prepayments if the credit conditions of these suppliers materially deteriorate. For further information regarding our future prepayment obligations, please see “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 10. Commitments and Contingencies—Advances to Suppliers.” We currently believe our supplier relationships and various short- and long-term contracts will afford us the volume of material and services required to meet our planned output. For more information about risks related to our supply chain, please see “Item 1A. Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Supply Chain.” We are working with our suppliers and partners along all steps of the value chain to reduce costs by improving manufacturing technologies and expanding economies of scale. Crystalline silicon is the principal commercial material for solar cells and is used in several forms, including single-crystalline, or monocrystalline silicon, multicrystalline, or polycrystalline silicon, ribbon and sheet silicon, and thin-layer silicon. Our solar cell value chain starts with high purity silicon called polysilicon. Polysilicon is created by refining quartz or sand. Polysilicon is melted and grown into crystalline ingots and sawed into wafers by business partners specializing in those processes. The wafers are processed into solar cells in our manufacturing facility located in the Philippines and by our joint venture, AUOSP, located in Malaysia. The solar cell manufacturing facility we own and operate in the Philippines has a total rated annual capacity of over 700 MW. AUOSP currently operates a solar cell manufacturing facility with a total rated annual capacity of over 800 MW. We also own a 222,000 square foot building in the Philippines that we are building out as an additional solar cell manufacturing facility with a planned annual capacity of 350 MW once fully operational, which is expected to occur in fiscal 2016; initial production launched during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2015. We use our solar cells to manufacture our solar panels at our solar panel assembly facilities located in the Philippines, Mexico and France. Our solar panel manufacturing facilities have a combined total rated annual capacity of close to 1.8 GW. Our solar panels are also assembled for us by third-party contract manufacturers in California and China. We source the solar panels and balance of system components based on quality, performance, and cost considerations both internally and from third-party suppliers. We typically assemble proprietary components, while we purchase generally available components from third-party suppliers. The balance of system components, along with the EPC cost to construct the project, can comprise as much as two-thirds of the cost of a solar power system. Therefore, we focus on standardizing our products with the goal of driving down installation costs, such as with our SunPower® Oasis® system. 9 Customers In the first quarter of fiscal 2015, in connection with a realignment of its internal organizational structure, the Company changed its segment reporting from its Americas, EMEA and APAC Segments to three end-customer segments: (i) Residential Segment, (ii) Commercial Segment and (iii) Power Plant Segment. See “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data— Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 1. The Company and Summary of its Accounting Policies” for additional information. The Residential and Commercial Segments combined are referred to as Distributed Generation. Our scope and scale allow us to deliver solar solutions across all segments, ranging from consumer homeowners to the largest commercial and governmental entities in the world. Our customers typically include investors, financial institutions, project developers, electric utilities, independent power producers, commercial and governmental entities, production home builders, residential owners and small commercial building owners. We leverage a combination of direct sales as well as a broad partner ecosystem to efficiently reach our global customer base. We work with development, construction, system integration, and financing companies to deliver our solar power products and solutions to wholesale sellers, retail sellers, and retail users of electricity. In the United States, commercial and electric utility customers typically choose to purchase solar electricity under a PPA with an investor or financing company that buys the system from us. End-user customers typically pay the investors and financing companies over an extended period of time based on energy they consume from the solar power systems, rather than paying for the full capital cost of purchasing the solar power systems. Our utility-scale solar power systems are typically purchased by an investor or financing company, such as 8point3 Energy Partners, and operated as central-station solar power plants. In addition, our third-party global dealer network and our new homes division have deployed thousands of SunPower rooftop solar power systems to residential customers. Please see “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Revenue” for our significant customers. Competition The market for solar electric power technologies is competitive and continually evolving. We expect to face increased competition, which may result in price reductions, reduced margins, or loss of market share. Our solar power products and systems compete with many competitors in the solar power market, including, but not limited to: • Residential and Commercial: Canadian Solar Inc., Hanwha Corporation, JA Solar Holdings Co., Kyocera Corporation, LG Corporation, Mitsubishi Corporation, NRG Energy, Inc., Panasonic Corporation, Recurrent Energy, Sharp Corporation, SolarCity Corporation, SolarWorld AG, SunEdison Inc., Sungevity, Inc., SunRun, Inc., Trina Solar Ltd., Vivint, Inc., and Yingli Green Energy Holding Co. Ltd. • Utility and Power Plant: Abengoa Solar S.A., Acciona Energia S.A., AES Solar Energy Ltd., Chevron Energy Solutions (a subsidiary of Chevron Corporation), EDF Energy plc, First Solar Inc., NextEra Energy, Inc., NRG Energy, Inc., Sempra Energy, Silverado Power LLC., Skyline Solar, Inc., Solargen Energy, Inc., Solaria Corporation, SunEdison, and Tenaska, Inc. We also face competition from resellers that have developed related offerings that compete with our product and service offerings, or have entered into strategic relationships with other existing solar power system providers. We compete for limited government funding for research and development contracts, customer tax rebates and other programs that promote the use of solar, and other renewable forms of energy with other renewable energy providers and customers. In addition, universities, research institutions, and other companies have brought to market alternative technologies, such as thin films, which compete with our technology in certain applications. Furthermore, the solar power market in general competes with conventional fossil fuels supplied by utilities and other sources of renewable energy such as wind, hydro, biomass, solar thermal, and emerging distributed generation technologies such as micro-turbines, sterling engines and fuel cells. In the large-scale on-grid solar power systems market, we face direct competition from a number of companies, including those that manufacture, distribute, or install solar power systems as well as construction companies that have expanded into the renewable sector. In addition, we will occasionally compete with distributed generation equipment suppliers. We believe that the key competitive factors in the market for solar systems include: • total system price; • LCOE evaluation; • CCOE evaluation; 10 • • • • • • • • power efficiency and performance; aesthetic appearance of solar panels and systems; speed and ease of installation through modular solutions such as Oasis and Helix systems; strength of distribution relationships; availability of third-party financing and investments; established sales channels to customers such as 8point3 Energy Partners; timeliness of new product introductions; bankability, strength, and reputation of our company; and • warranty protection, quality, and customer service. We believe that we can compete favorably with respect to each of these elements, although we may be at a disadvantage in comparison to larger companies with broader product lines, greater technical service and support capabilities, and financial resources. For more information on risks related to our competition, please see the risk factors set forth under the caption “Item 1A. Risk Factors” including “Risks Related to Our Sales Channels—The increase in the global supply of solar cells and panels, and increasing competition, may cause substantial downward pressure on the prices of such products and cause us to lose sales or market share, resulting in lower revenues, earnings, and cash flows.” Intellectual Property We rely on a combination of patent, copyright, trade secret, trademark, and contractual protections to establish and protect our proprietary rights. “SunPower” and the “SunPower” logo are our registered trademarks in countries throughout the world for use with solar cells, solar panels and mounting systems. We also hold registered trademarks for, among others, “Maxeon”, “Oasis”, “EnergyLink”, “Helix”, “InvisiMount”, “Serengeti”, “Smarter Solar”, “Solar Showdown”, “SunTile”, “SunPower Electric”, “SuPo Solar”, “Tenesol”, “Greenbotics”, “PowerLight”, “More Energy. For Life.”, “The Planet’s Most Powerful Solar”, “The World’s Standard for Solar”, and “Use More Sun” in certain countries. We are seeking and will continue to seek registration of the “SunPower” trademark and other trademarks in additional countries as we believe is appropriate. As of January 3, 2016, we held registrations for 28 trademarks in the United States, and had 14 trademark registration applications pending. We also held 149 trademark registrations and had over 34 trademark applications pending in foreign jurisdictions. We typically require our business partners to enter into confidentiality and non-disclosure agreements before we disclose any sensitive aspects of our solar cells, technology, or business plans. We typically enter into proprietary information agreements with employees, consultants, vendors, customers, and joint venture partners. We own multiple patents and patent applications that cover aspects of the technology in the solar cells, mounting products, and electrical and electronic systems that we currently manufacture and market. We continue to file for and receive new patent rights on a regular basis. The lifetime of a utility patent typically extends for 20 years from the date of filing with the relevant government authority. We assess appropriate opportunities for patent protection of those aspects of our technology, designs, methodologies, and processes that we believe provide significant competitive advantages to us, and for licensing opportunities of new technologies relevant to our business. As of January 3, 2016, we held 324 patents in the United States, which will expire at various times through 2033, and had 370 U.S. patent applications pending. We also held 271 patents and had 690 patent applications pending in foreign jurisdictions. While patents are an important element of our intellectual property strategy, our business as a whole is not dependent on any one patent or any single pending patent application. We additionally rely on trade secret rights to protect our proprietary information and know-how. We employ proprietary processes and customized equipment in our manufacturing facilities. We therefore require employees and consultants to enter into confidentiality agreements to protect them. When appropriate, we enforce our intellectual property rights against other parties. For more information about risks related to our intellectual property, please see the risk factors set forth under the caption “Item 1A. Risk Factors” including “Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property—We depend on our intellectual property, and we may face intellectual property infringement claims that could be time-consuming and costly to defend and could result in the loss of significant rights,” “Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property—We rely substantially upon trade secret laws and contractual restrictions to protect our proprietary rights, and, if these rights are not sufficiently protected, our ability to compete and generate revenue could suffer,” and “Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property—We may not obtain sufficient patent protection on the technology embodied in the solar products we currently manufacture and market, which could harm our competitive position and increase our expenses.” 11 Backlog We believe that backlog is not a meaningful indicator of our future business prospects. In the residential and commercial markets we often sell large volumes of solar panel, mounting systems, and other solar equipment to third parties, which are typically ordered by our third-party global dealer network and customers under standard purchase orders with relatively short delivery lead-times. We often require project financing for development and construction of our solar power plant projects, which require significant investments before the equity is later sold to investors. Our solar power system project backlog would therefore exclude sales contracts signed and completed in the same quarter and contracts still conditioned upon obtaining financing. Based on these reasons, we believe backlog at any particular date is not necessarily a meaningful indicator of our future revenue for any particular period of time. Regulations Public Policy Considerations Different policy mechanisms have been used by governments to accelerate the adoption of solar power. Examples of customer-focused financial mechanisms include capital cost rebates, performance-based incentives, feed-in tariffs, tax credits, and net metering. Some of these government mandates and economic incentives are scheduled to be reduced or to expire, or could be eliminated altogether. Capital cost rebates provide funds to customers based on the cost and size of a customer’s solar power system. Performance-based incentives provide funding to a customer based on the energy produced by their solar power system. Feed-in tariffs pay customers for solar power system generation based on energy produced, at a rate generally guaranteed for a period of time. Tax credits reduce a customer’s taxes at the time the taxes are due. Net metering allows customers to deliver to the electric grid any excess electricity produced by their on-site solar power systems, and to be credited for that excess electricity at or near the full retail price of electricity. In addition to the mechanisms described above, new market development mechanisms to encourage the use of renewable energy sources continue to emerge. For example, many states in the United States have adopted renewable portfolio standards which mandate that a certain portion of electricity delivered to customers come from eligible renewable energy resources. In certain developing countries, governments are establishing initiatives to expand access to electricity, including initiatives to support off-grid rural electrification using solar power. For more information about how we avail ourselves of the benefits of public policies and the risks related to public policies, please see the risk factors set forth under the caption “Item 1A. Risk Factors” including “Risks Related to Our Sales Channels—The reduction, modification or elimination of government incentives could cause our revenue to decline and harm our financial results,” and “Risks Related to Our Sales Channels—Existing regulations and policies and changes to these regulations and policies may present technical, regulatory, and economic barriers to the purchase and use of solar power products, which may significantly reduce demand for our products and services.” Environmental Regulations We use, generate, and discharge toxic, volatile, or otherwise hazardous chemicals and wastes in our research and development, manufacturing, and construction activities. We are subject to a variety of foreign, U.S. federal and state, and local governmental laws and regulations related to the purchase, storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials. We believe that we have all environmental permits necessary to conduct our business and expect to obtain all necessary environmental permits for future activities. We believe that we have properly handled our hazardous materials and wastes and have appropriately remediated any contamination at any of our premises. For more information about risks related to environmental regulations, please see the risk factors set forth under the caption “Item 1A. Risk Factors” including “Risks Related to Our Operations— Compliance with environmental regulations can be expensive, and noncompliance with these regulations may result in adverse publicity and potentially significant monetary damages and fines.” The Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act of 2012 Section 13(r) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), requires us to disclose whether Total S.A. or any of its affiliates (collectively, the “Total Group”) engaged during the 2015 calendar year in certain Iran-related activities. While the Total Group has not engaged in any activity that would be required to be disclosed pursuant to subparagraphs (A), (B) or (C) of Section 13(r)(1), affiliates of Total S.A. may be deemed to have engaged in certain transactions or dealings with the government of Iran that would require disclosure pursuant to Section 13(r)(1)(D), as discussed below. Unless otherwise noted, all foreign currency translations to U.S. dollars in this section are made using exchange rates as of January 3, 2016. 12 Upstream The Total Group has no upstream activities in Iran and maintains a local office in Iran solely for non-operational functions. Some payments are yet to be reimbursed to the Total Group with respect to past expenditures and remuneration under buyback contracts entered into between 1997 and 1999 with the National Iranian Oil Company (“NIOC”) for the development of the South Pars 2&3 and Dorood fields. With respect to these contracts, development operations were completed in 2010 and the Total Group is no longer involved in the operation of these fields. In 2015, Total E&P Iran (100%), Elf Petroleum Iran (99.8%), Total Sirri (100%) and Total South Pars (99.8%) collectively made payments of approximately IRR 4 billion (approximately $0.1 million) to (i) the Iranian administration for taxes and social security contributions concerning the personnel of the aforementioned local office and residual buyback contract-related obligations, and (ii) Iranian public entities for payments with respect to the maintenance of the aforementioned local office (e.g., utilities, telecommunications). Total S.A. expects similar payments to be made by these affiliates in 2016. Neither revenues nor profits were recognized from the aforementioned activities in 2015. In the context of the future suspension of part of the sanctions targeting Iran following the adoption of the JCPOA on July 14, 2015, there were contacts in 2015 between representatives of certain wholly-owned affiliates of Total S.A and representatives of the Iranian Government and NIOC within the framework of delegations organized by French authorities or during public international events. During the course of these contacts, such affiliates received in 2015 verbal information of a general nature concerning certain oil and gas fields and projects in Iran and no information not permitted by applicable international economic sanctions was provided to Iranian authorities for the development of Iranian hydrocarbons. Neither Total S.A. nor any of its affiliates recognized any revenue or profit from this activity in 2015, and, in compliance with the remaining applicable international economic sanctions, similar discussions are expected in the future. Total E&P UK Limited (“TEP UK”), a wholly-owned affiliate of Total S.A., holds a 43.25% interest in a joint venture at the Bruce field in the United Kingdom with BP Exploration Operating Company Limited (37.5%, operator), BHP Billiton Petroleum Great Britain Ltd (16%) and Marubeni Oil & Gas (North Sea) Limited (3.75%). This joint venture is party to an agreement (the “Bruce Rhum Agreement”) governing certain transportation, processing and operation services provided to a joint venture at the Rhum field in the UK that is co-owned by BP (50%, operator) and the Iranian Oil Company UK Ltd (“IOC”), a subsidiary of NIOC (50%) (together, the “Rhum Owners”). TEP UK owns and operates the Frigg UK Association pipeline and St Fergus Gas Terminal and is party to an agreement governing provision of transportation and processing services to the Rhum Owners (the “Rhum FUKA Agreement”) (the Bruce Rhum Agreement and the Rhum FUKA Agreement being referred to collectively as the “Rhum Agreements”). To Total S.A.’s knowledge, provision of all services under the Rhum Agreements was initially suspended in November 2010, when the Rhum field stopped production following the adoption of EU sanctions, other than critical safety-related services (i.e., monitoring and marine inspection of the Rhum facilities), which were permitted by EU sanctions regulations. On October 22, 2013, the UK government notified IOC of its decision to apply a temporary management scheme to IOC’s interest in the Rhum field within the meaning of UK Regulations 3 and 5 of the Hydrocarbons (Temporary Management Scheme) Regulations 2013 (the “Hydrocarbons Regulations”). Since that date all correspondence in respect of IOC’s interest in the Rhum Agreements has been with the UK government in its capacity as temporary manager of IOC’s interests and TEP UK has had no contact with IOC in 2015 regarding the Rhum Agreements. On December 6, 2013, the UK government authorized TEP UK, among others, under Article 43a of EU Regulation 267/2012, as amended by 1263/2012 and under Regulation 9 of the Hydrocarbons Regulations, to carry out activities in relation to the operation and production of the Rhum field. In addition, on September 4, 2013, the U.S. Treasury Department issued a license to BP authorizing BP and certain others to engage in various activities relating to the operation and production of the Rhum field. Following receipt of all necessary authorizations, the Rhum field resumed production on October 26, 2014 with IOC’s interest in the Rhum field and the Rhum Agreements subject to the UK government’s temporary management pursuant to the Hydrocarbons Regulations. Services have been provided by TEP UK under the Rhum Agreements since that date and TEP UK has received tariff income from BP and the UK government (in its capacity as temporary manager of IOC’s interest in the Rhum field) in accordance with the terms of the Rhum Agreements. In 2015, these activities generated for TEP UK gross revenue of approximately £4.6 million (approximately $6.8 million) and net profit of approximately £1.4 million (approximately $2.1 million). On August 27, 2015, TEP UK signed a sale and purchase agreement to divest its entire interest in the Frigg UK Association pipeline and St Fergus Gas Terminal to NSMP Operations Limited (“NSMP”). TEP UK expects this transaction to complete on or around March 1, 2016. Upon completion of the divestment, TEP UK’s interest in the Rhum FUKA Agreement will be novated to NSMP whereupon TEP UK’s only interest in the Rhum FUKA Agreement will be in relation to the settlement of historical force majeure claims with the Rhum Owners relating to the period when the Rhum field was shut down. Subject to the foregoing, TEP UK intends to continue such activities so long as they continue to be permissible under UK and EU law and not be in breach of remaining applicable international economic sanctions. 13 Downstream The Total Group does not own or operate any refineries or chemicals plants in Iran and did not purchase Iranian hydrocarbons when prohibited by applicable EU and U.S. economic and financial sanctions. Hutchinson, a wholly-owned affiliate of Total S.A., conducted, in conjunction with a delegation of international companies (Fédération des Industries des Equipements pour Véhicules), two visits in Iran in 2015 to discuss business opportunities in the Iranian car industry sector with several companies, including some having direct or indirect ties to the government of Iran. Hutchinson recognized no revenue or profit from this activity in 2015 and expects to continue such discussions in the future. Until December 2012, at which time it sold its entire interest, the Total Group held a 50% interest in the lubricants retail company Beh Total (now named Beh Tam) along with Behran Oil (50%), a company controlled by entities with ties to the government of Iran. As part of the sale of the Total Group’s interest in Beh Tam, Total S.A. agreed to license the trademark “Total” to Beh Tam for an initial three-year period for the sale by Beh Tam of lubricants to domestic consumers in Iran. In 2014, Total E&P Iran (“TEPI”), a wholly-owned affiliate of Total S.A., received, on behalf of Total S.A., royalty payments of approximately IRR 24 billion (nearly $1 million based on an average daily exchange rate of $1 = IRR 0.000039 during 2014, as published by Bloomberg) from Beh Tam for such license. These payments were based on Beh Tam’s sales of lubricants during the previous calendar year. In 2015, royalty payments were suspended due to an adjustment procedure concerning these payments brought by the Iranian tax authorities against TEPI, which TEPI expects will be settled in 2016. Therefore, TEPI expects royalty payments may resume in 2016. In addition, representatives of the Total Group and Beh Tam met several times in 2015 to discuss the local lubricants market and further discussions are expected to take place in the future. Total Liban, a Lebanese company wholly-owned by the Total Group, is a member of a consortium with five other companies for the purpose of providing services for fueling facilities at Beirut International Airport to the members of the consortium. The consortium members assume, for a rotating three-year term, ministerial and administrative responsibilities (including supervision of fuel services) in connection with the consortium. Until October 2015, Total Liban served in this capacity. During this period, another consortium member had a fuel supply contract with Iran Air (and was compensated for fuel sales to Iran Air). Total Liban did not receive, directly or indirectly, any profit or remuneration in connection with the fuel sold to Iran Air by this other consortium member. Total Marketing Middle East FZE (“TMME”), a wholly-owned affiliate of the Total Group, sold lubricants to Beh Tam in 2015. The sale in 2015 of approximately 299 tons of lubricants and special fluids generated gross revenue of approximately AED 2 million (approximately $0.5 million) and net profit of approximately AED 1.7 million (approximately $0.5 million). TMME expects to continue this activity in 2016. Total Marketing France (“TMF”), a French company wholly-owned by Total Marketing Services, itself a French company wholly-owned by Total S.A. and six Total Group employees, provided in 2015 fuel payment cards to the Iranian embassy in France for use in the Total Group’s service stations. In 2015, these activities generated gross revenue of approximately €25,000 (approximately $27,177) and net profit of approximately €1,000 (approximately $1,087). TMF expects to continue this activity in 2016. Total Belgium (“TB”), a Belgian company wholly-owned by the Total Group, provided in 2015 fuel payment cards to the Iranian embassy in Brussels for use in the Total Group’s service stations. In 2015, these activities generated gross revenue of approximately €23,100 (approximately $25,112) and net profit of approximately €1,600 (approximately $1,739). TB expects to continue this activity in 2016. Proxifuel, a Belgian company wholly-owned by the Total Group, sold in 2015 heating oil to the Iranian embassy in Brussels. In 2015, these activities generated gross revenue of approximately €2,400 (approximately $2,609) and net profit of approximately €200 (approximately $217). Proxifuel expects to continue this activity in 2016. Caldeo, a French company wholly-owned by TMS, sold in 2015 domestic heating oil to the Iranian embassy in France, which generated gross revenue of nearly €3,500 (approximately $3,805) and net profit of approximately €700 (approximately $761). Caldeo expects to continue this activity in 2016. Total Namibia (PTY) Ltd (“TN”), a wholly-owned affiliate of Total South Africa (PTY) Ltd (of which the Total Group holds a 50.1% interest), sold petroleum products and services during 2015 to Rössing Uranium Limited, a company in which the Iranian Foreign Investment Co. holds an interest of 15.3%. In 2015, these activities generated gross revenue of approximately N$115 million (approximately $7.4 million) and net profit of nearly N$5 million (approximately $0.3 million). TN expects to continue this activity in 2016. 14 Employees As of January 3, 2016, we had approximately 8,309 full-time employees worldwide, of which 1,283 were located in the United States, 4,881 were located in the Philippines, and 2,145 were located in other countries. Of these employees, 6,071 were engaged in manufacturing, 793 in construction projects, 449 in research and development, 545 in sales and marketing, and 451 in general and administrative services. Although in certain countries we have works councils and statutory employee representation obligations, our employees are generally not represented by labor unions on an ongoing basis. We have never experienced a work stoppage, and we believe our relations with our employees are good. Geographic Information Information regarding financial data by segment and geographic area is available in Note 6 and Note 18 under “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.” Seasonal Trends Our business is subject to industry-specific seasonal fluctuations including changes in weather patterns and economic incentives, among others. Sales have historically reflected these seasonal trends with the largest percentage of total revenues realized during the last two quarters of a fiscal year. The construction of solar power systems or installation of solar power components and related revenue may decline during cold winter months. In the United States, many customers make purchasing decisions towards the end of the year in order to take advantage of tax credits or for other budgetary reasons. In addition, revenues may fluctuate due to the timing of project sales, construction schedules, and revenue recognition of certain projects, such as those involving real estate, which may significantly impact the quarterly profile of the Company’s results of operations. The Company may also retain certain development projects on its balance sheet for longer periods of time than in preceding periods in order to optimize the economic value received at the time of sale, which may further impact the period-over-period profile of the Company’s results of operations. Available Information We make available our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) free of charge on our website at www.sunpower.com, as soon as reasonably practicable after they are electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC. The contents of our website are not incorporated into, or otherwise to be regarded as part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Copies of such material may be obtained, free of charge, upon written request submitted to our corporate headquarters: SunPower Corporation, Attn: Investor Relations, 77 Rio Robles, San Jose, California, 95134. Copies of materials we file with the SEC may also be accessed at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street NE, Washington, D.C., or at the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. The public may obtain additional information on the operation of the SEC’s Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS Our business is subject to various risks and uncertainties, including those described below and elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, which could adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition. Although we believe that we have identified and discussed below certain key risk factors affecting our business, there may be additional risks and uncertainties that are not currently known to us or that are not currently believed by us to be material that may also harm our business, results of operations and financial condition. Risks Related to Our Sales Channels Our operating results are subject to significant fluctuations and are inherently unpredictable. We do not know whether our revenue will continue to grow, or if it will continue to grow sufficiently to outpace our expenses, which we also expect to grow. As a result, we may not be profitable on a quarterly basis. Our quarterly revenue and operating results are difficult to predict and have in the past fluctuated significantly from quarter to quarter. The principal reason for these significant fluctuations in our results is that we derive a substantial portion of our total revenues from our large commercial and utility-scale and power plant customers, and, consequently: 15 • • • • • • • • the amount, timing and mix of sales to our large commercial, utilities and power plant customers, often for a single medium or large-scale project, may cause large fluctuations in our revenue and other financial results because, at any given time, a single large-scale project can account for a material portion of our total revenue in a given quarter; our inability to monetize our projects as planned, or any delay in obtaining the required government support or initial payments to begin recognizing revenue under the relevant recognition criteria, and the corresponding revenue impact under the percentage-of-completion method of recognizing revenue, may similarly cause large fluctuations in our revenue and other financial results; our ability to monetize projects as planned is also subject to market conditions, including the increasing number of power plants being constructed or available for sale and competition for financing, which can make both financing and disposition more challenging; in the event a project is subsequently canceled, abandoned, or is deemed unlikely to occur, we will charge all prior capital costs as an operating expense in the quarter in which such determination is made, which could materially adversely affect operating results; a delayed disposition of a project could require us to recognize a gain on the sale of assets instead of recognizing revenue; our agreements with these customers may be canceled if we fail to meet certain product specifications or materially breach the agreement; in the event of a customer bankruptcy, our customers may seek to renegotiate the terms of current agreements or renewals; and the failure by any significant customer to pay for orders, whether due to liquidity issues or otherwise, could materially and adversely affect our results of operations. Any decrease in revenue from our large commercial and utility-scale power plant customers, whether due to a loss or delay of projects or an inability to collect, could have a significant negative impact on our business. See also “Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.” See also “Risks Related to Our Sales Channels - Revenues from a limited number of customers and large projects are expected to continue to comprise a significant portion of our total revenues and any decrease in revenues from those customers or projects, payment of liquidated damages, or an increase in related expenses, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.” Sales to our residential and light commercial customers are similarly susceptible to fluctuations in volumes and revenue. In addition, demand from our commercial and residential customers may fluctuate based on the perceived cost-effectiveness of the electricity generated by our solar power systems as compared to conventional energy sources, such as natural gas and coal (which fuel sources are subject to significant price swings from time to time), and other non-solar renewable energy sources, such as wind. Declining average selling prices immediately affect our residential and light commercial sales volumes, and therefore lead to large fluctuations in revenue. Further, our revenue mix of materials sales versus project sales can fluctuate dramatically from quarter to quarter, which may adversely affect our margins and financial results in any given period. Any of the foregoing may cause us to miss our financial guidance for a given period, which could adversely impact the market price for our common stock and our liquidity. We base our planned operating expenses in part on our expectations of future revenue and a significant portion of our expenses is fixed in the short term. If revenue for a particular quarter is lower than we expect, we likely will be unable to proportionately reduce our operating expenses for that quarter, which would materially adversely affect our operating results for that quarter. See also “-Risks Related to Our Sales Channels-Our business could be adversely affected by seasonal trends and construction cycles.” 16 The execution of our growth strategy is dependent upon the continued availability of third-party financing arrangements for our solar power plants, our residential lease program and our customers, and is affected by general economic conditions and other factors. Our growth strategy depends on third-party financing arrangements. We often require project financing for development and construction of our solar power plant projects, which require significant investments before the equity is later sold to investors. Many purchasers of our systems projects have entered into third-party arrangements to finance their systems over an extended period of time, while many end-customers have chosen to purchase solar electricity under a power purchase agreement (“PPA”) with an investor or financing company that purchases the system from us or our authorized dealers. We often execute PPAs directly with the end-user, with the expectation that we will later assign the PPA to a financier. Under such arrangements, the financier separately contracts with us to acquire and build the solar power system, and then sells the electricity to the end-user under the assigned PPA. When executing PPAs with end-users, we seek to mitigate the risk that financing will not be available for the project by allowing termination of the PPA in such event without penalty. However, we may not always be successful in negotiating for penalty-free termination rights for failure to obtain financing, and certain end-users have required substantial financial penalties in exchange for such rights. These structured finance arrangements are complex and may not be feasible in many situations. Global economic conditions, including conditions that may make it more difficult or expensive for us to access credit and liquidity, could materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations. Credit markets are unpredictable, and if they become more challenging, we may be unable to obtain project financing for our projects, customers may be unable or unwilling to finance the cost of our products, we may have difficulties in reaching agreements with financiers to finance the construction of our solar power systems, or the parties that have historically provided this financing may cease to do so, or only do so on terms that are substantially less favorable for us or our customers, any of which could materially and adversely affect our revenue and growth in all segments of our business. Our plans to continue to grow our residential lease program may be delayed if credit conditions prevent us from obtaining or maintaining arrangements to finance the program. We are actively arranging additional third-party financing for our residential lease program; however, if we encounter challenging credit markets, we may be unable to arrange additional financing partners for our residential lease program in future periods, which could have a negative impact on our sales. In the event we enter into a material number of additional leases without obtaining corresponding third- party financing, our cash, working capital and financial results could be negatively affected. In addition, a rise in interest rates would likely increase our customers’ cost of financing or leasing our products and could reduce their profits and expected returns on investment in our products. The general reduction in available credit to would-be borrowers or lessees, worldwide economic uncertainty, and the condition of worldwide housing markets could delay or reduce our sales of products to new homebuilders and authorized resellers. The availability of financing depends on many factors, including market conditions, the demand for and supply of solar projects, and resulting risks of refinancing or disposing of such projects. It also depends in part on government incentives, such as tax incentives. In the United States, with the expiration of the Treasury Grant under Section 1603 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act program, we will need to identify in the near term interested financiers with sufficient taxable income to monetize the tax incentives created by our solar systems. In the long term, as we look towards markets not supported (or supported less) by government incentives, we will continue to need to identify financiers willing to finance residential solar systems without such incentives. Our failure to effectively do so could materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations. The lack of project financing, due to tighter credit markets or other reasons, could delay the development and construction of our solar power plant projects, thus reducing our revenues from the sale of such projects. We may in some cases seek to pursue partnership arrangements with financing entities to assist residential and other customers to obtain financing for the purchase or lease of our systems, which would expose us to credit or other risks. We face competition for financing partners and if we are unable to continue to offer a competitive investment profile, we may lose access to financing partners or they may offer financing on less favorable terms than our competitors, which could materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations. We may fail to realize the expected benefits of our YieldCo strategy, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations. In June 2015, 8point3 Energy Partners, a joint YieldCo vehicle formed by us and First Solar, Inc. to own, operate and acquire solar energy generation assets, launched an initial public offering of Class A shares representing its limited partner interests. The IPO was consummated on June 24, 2015, whereupon the Class A shares were listed on The NASDAQ Global Select Market under the trading symbol “CAFD.” 17 Immediately after the IPO, we contributed a portfolio of solar generation assets to 8point3 Energy Partners in exchange for cash proceeds as well as equity interests in several 8point3 Energy Partners affiliated entities (collectively, the “8point3 Group”). Additionally, we entered into a Right of First Offer Agreement with 8point3 Energy Partners in connection with the IPO under which we granted 8point3 Energy Partners a right of first offer to purchase certain of our solar energy projects that are in various stages of development in our project pipeline. We may be unable to fully realize our expected strategic and financial benefits from the 8point3 Group on a timely basis or at all. The operations of the 8point3 Group are not consolidated with ours. Instead, we account for our investments in the 8point3 Group using the equity method, whereby the book value of our investments is recorded as a non-current asset and our portion of their earnings is recorded in the Consolidated Statements of Operations under the caption “Equity in earnings (loss) of unconsolidated investees.” There is no assurance that we will realize a return on our equity investments in the 8point3 Group. The ability of the 8point3 Group to make cash distributions will depend primarily upon its cash flow, which is not solely a function of 8point3 Energy Partners’ profitability. There is no assurance that we will receive any such cash distributions. Accordingly, we may never recover the value of the assets we contribute to the YieldCo vehicle, and we may realize less of a return on such contribution than if we had retained or operated these assets. In addition, 8point3 Energy Partners may be unable to obtain funding through the sale of equity securities or otherwise. If adequate funds and other resources are not available on acceptable terms, 8point3 Group may be unable to purchase assets that we wish to sell, or otherwise function as anticipated and planned. In such event, our YieldCo strategy may not succeed, and our business, financial condition and results of operations would be materially adversely affected. We believe that the viability of our YieldCo strategy will depend, among other things, upon our ability to continue to develop revenue-generating solar assets and to productively manage our relationship with First Solar and the 8point3 Group, which are subject to the project-level, joint venture relationship, business and industry risks described herein. If we are unable to realize the strategic and financial benefits that we expect to derive from our YieldCo strategy and 8point3 Energy Partners in particular, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected. If we fail to successfully execute our cost reduction roadmap, or fail to develop and introduce new and enhanced products and services, we may be unable to compete effectively, and our ability to generate revenues would suffer. Our solar panels are currently competitive in the market compared with lower cost conventional solar cells, such as thin-film, due to our products’ higher efficiency, among other things. Given the general downward pressure on prices for solar panels driven by increasing supply and technological change, a principal component of our business strategy is reducing our costs to manufacture our products to remain competitive. We also focus on standardizing our products with the goal of driving down installation costs. If our competitors are able to drive down their manufacturing and installation costs faster than we can or increase the efficiency of their products, our products may become less competitive even when adjusted for efficiency. Further, if raw materials costs and other third-party component costs were to increase, we may not meet our cost reduction targets. If we cannot effectively execute our cost reduction roadmap, our competitive position will suffer, and we could lose market share and our margins would be adversely affected as we face downward pricing pressure. The solar power market is characterized by continually changing technology and improving features, such as increased efficiency, higher power output and enhanced aesthetics. Technologies developed by our direct competitors, including thin-film solar panels, concentrating solar cells, solar thermal electric and other solar technologies, may provide energy at lower costs than our products. We also face competition in some markets from other energy generation sources, including conventional fossil fuels, wind, biomass, and hydro. In addition, other companies could potentially develop a highly reliable renewable energy system that mitigates the intermittent energy production drawback of many renewable energy systems. Companies could also offer other value-added improvements from the perspective of utilities and other system owners, in which case such companies could compete with us even if the cost of electricity associated with any such new system is higher than that of our systems. We also compete with traditional utilities that supply energy to our potential customers. Such utilities have greater financial, technical, operational and other resources than we do. If electricity rates decrease and our products become less competitive by comparison, our operating results and financial condition will be adversely affected. Our failure to further refine our technology, reduce cost in our manufacturing process, and develop and introduce new solar power products could cause our products or our manufacturing facilities to become less competitive or obsolete, which could reduce our market share, cause our sales to decline, and cause the impairment of our assets. This risk requires us to continuously develop new solar power products and enhancements for existing solar power products to keep pace with evolving industry standards, competitive pricing and changing customer preferences, expectations, and requirements. It is difficult to successfully predict the products and services our customers will demand. If we cannot continually improve the efficiency of our 18 solar panels as compared with those of our competitors, our pricing will become less competitive, we could lose market share and our margins would be adversely affected. We have new products, such as our P-Series and Helix products, which have not yet been mass-deployed in the market. We need to prove their reliability in the field as well as drive down their cost in order to gain market acceptance. As we introduce new or enhanced products or integrate new technology into our products, we will face risks relating to such transitions including, among other things, the incurrence of high fixed costs, technical challenges, acceptance of products by our customers, disruption in customers’ ordering patterns, insufficient supplies of new products to meet customers’ demand, possible product and technology defects arising from the integration of new technology and a potentially different sales and support environment relating to any new technology. Our failure to manage the transition to newer products or the integration of newer technology into our products could adversely affect our business’s operating results and financial condition. The reduction, modification or elimination of government incentives could cause our revenue to decline and harm our financial results. The market for on-grid applications, where solar power is used to supplement a customer’s electricity purchased from the utility network or sold to a utility under tariff, depends in large part on the availability and size of government mandates and economic incentives because, at present, the cost of solar power generally exceeds retail electric rates in many locations and wholesale peak power rates in some locations. Incentives and mandates vary by geographic market. Various government bodies in most of the countries where we do business have provided incentives in the form of feed-in tariffs, rebates, and tax credits and other incentives and mandates, such as renewable portfolio standards and net metering, to end-users, distributors, system integrators and manufacturers of solar power products to promote the use of solar energy in on-grid applications and to reduce dependency on other forms of energy. These various forms of support for solar power are subject to change (as for example occurred in 2011 in Germany and other European countries, and with Nevada’s decision in 2015 to change net energy metering), and are expected in the longer term to decline. Even changes that may be viewed as positive (such as the extension at the end of 2015 of U.S. tax credits related to solar power) can have negative effects if they result, for example, in delaying purchases that otherwise might have been made before expiration or scheduled reductions in such credits. Governmental decisions regarding the provision of economic incentives often depend on political and economic factors that we cannot predict and that are beyond our control. The reduction, modification or elimination of grid access, government mandates or economic incentives in one or more of our customer markets would materially and adversely affect the growth of such markets or result in increased price competition, either of which could cause our revenue to decline and materially adversely affect our financial results. Existing regulations and policies and changes to these regulations and policies may present technical, regulatory, and economic barriers to the purchase and use of solar power products, which may significantly reduce demand for our products and services. The market for electric generation products is heavily influenced by federal, state and local government laws, regulations and policies concerning the electric utility industry in the United States and abroad, as well as policies promulgated by electric utilities. These regulations and policies often relate to electricity pricing and technical interconnection of customer-owned electricity generation, and changes that make solar power less competitive with other power sources could deter investment in the research and development of alternative energy sources as well as customer purchases of solar power technology, which could in turn result in a significant reduction in the demand for our solar power products. The market for electric generation equipment is also influenced by trade and local content laws, regulations and policies that can discourage growth and competition in the solar industry and create economic barriers to the purchase of solar power products, thus reducing demand for our solar products. In addition, on-grid applications depend on access to the grid, which is also regulated by government entities. We anticipate that our solar power products and their installation will continue to be subject to oversight and regulation in accordance with federal, state, local and foreign regulations relating to construction, safety, environmental protection, utility interconnection and metering, trade, and related matters. It is difficult to track the requirements of individual states or local jurisdictions and design equipment to comply with the varying standards. In addition, the U.S., European Union and Chinese governments, among others, have imposed tariffs or are in the process of evaluating the imposition of tariffs on solar panels, solar cells, polysilicon, and potentially other components. These tariffs may increase the price of our solar products and adversely affect our cost reduction roadmap, which could harm our results of operations and financial condition. Any new regulations or policies pertaining to our solar power products may result in significant additional expenses to us, our resellers and our resellers’ customers, which could cause a significant reduction in demand for our solar power products. 19 As our sales to residential customers have continued to grow, we have increasingly become subject to substantial financing and consumer protection laws and regulations. As we continue to seek to expand our retail customer base, our activities with customers- and in particular, our financing activities with our residential customers- are subject to consumer protection laws that may not be applicable to our commercial and power plant segments, such as federal truth-in-lending, consumer leasing, and equal credit opportunity laws and regulations, as well as state and local finance laws and regulations. Claims arising out of actual or alleged violations of law may be asserted against us by individuals or governmental entities and may expose us to significant damages or other penalties, including fines. We may incur unexpected warranty and product liability claims that could materially and adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. Our current standard product warranty for our solar panels includes a 25-year warranty period for defects in materials and workmanship and for greater than promised declines in power performance. We believe our warranty offering is in line with industry practice. This long warranty period creates a risk of extensive warranty claims long after we have shipped product and recognized revenue. We perform accelerated lifecycle testing that exposes our solar panels to extreme stress and climate conditions in both environmental simulation chambers and in actual field deployments in order to highlight potential failures that could occur over the 25-year warranty period. We also employ measurement tools and algorithms intended to help us assess actual and expected performance; these attempt to compare actual performance against an expected performance baseline that is intended to account for many factors (like weather) that can affect performance. Although we conduct accelerated testing of our solar panels, our solar panels have not and cannot be tested in an environment that exactly simulates the 25-year warranty period and it is difficult to test for all conditions that may occur in the field. Further, there can be no assurance that our efforts to accurately measure and predict panel performance will be successful. Although we have not faced any material warranty claims to date, we have sold solar panels under our warranties since the early 2000s and have therefore not experienced the full warranty cycle. In our project installations, our current standard warranty for our solar power systems differs by geography and end- customer application and usually includes a limited warranty of 10 years for defects in workmanship, after which the customer may typically extend the period covered by its warranty for an additional fee. We also typically provide a system output performance warranty, separate from our standard solar panel product warranty, to customers that have subscribed to our post- installation O&M services. The long warranty period and nature of the warranties create a risk of extensive warranty claims long after we have completed a project and recognized revenues. Warranty and product liability claims may also result from defects or quality issues in certain third party technology and components that our business incorporates into its solar power systems, particularly solar cells and panels, over which we have little or no control. See also “-Risks Related to Our Supply Chain-We will continue to be dependent on a limited number of third-party suppliers for certain raw materials and components for our products, which could prevent us from delivering our products to our customers within required timeframes and could in turn result in sales and installation delays, cancellations, penalty payments and loss of market share.” While we generally pass through to our customers manufacturer warranties we receive from our suppliers, in some circumstances, we may be responsible for repairing or replacing defective parts during our warranty period, often including those covered by manufacturers’ warranties, or incur other non-warranty costs. If a manufacturer disputes or otherwise fails to honor its warranty obligations, we may be required to incur substantial costs before we are compensated, if at all, by the manufacturer. Furthermore, our warranties may exceed the period of any warranties from our suppliers covering components, such as third-party solar cells, third-party panels and third- party inverters, included in our systems. In addition, manufacturer warranties may not fully compensate us for losses associated with third-party claims caused by defects or quality issues in their products. For example, most manufacturer warranties exclude certain losses that may result from a system component’s failure or defect, such as the cost of de-installation, re-installation, shipping, lost electricity, lost renewable energy credits or other solar incentives, personal injury, property damage, and other losses. In certain cases the direct warranty coverage we provide to our customers, and therefore our financial exposure, may exceed our recourse available against cell, panel or other manufacturers for defects in their products. In addition, in the event we seek recourse through warranties, we will also be dependent on the creditworthiness and continued existence of the suppliers to our business. In the past, certain of our suppliers have entered bankruptcy and our likelihood of a successful warranty claim against such suppliers is minimal. Increases in the defect rate of SunPower or third-party products could cause us to increase the amount of warranty reserves and have a corresponding material, negative impact on our results of operations. Further, potential future product failures could cause us to incur substantial expense to repair or replace defective products, and we have agreed in some circumstances to indemnify our customers and our distributors against liability from some defects in our solar products. A successful indemnification claim against us could require us to make significant damage payments. Repair and replacement costs, as well as successful indemnification claims, could materially and negatively impact our financial condition and results of operations. 20 Like other retailers, distributors and manufacturers of products that are used by customers, we face an inherent risk of exposure to product liability claims in the event that the use of the solar power products into which solar cells and solar panels are incorporated results in injury, property damage or other damages. We may be subject to warranty and product liability claims in the event that our solar power systems fail to perform as expected or if a failure of our solar power systems results, or is alleged to result, in bodily injury, property damage or other damages. Since our solar power products are electricity-producing devices, it is possible that our systems could result in injury, whether by product malfunctions, defects, improper installation or other causes. In addition, since we only began selling our solar cells and solar panels in the early 2000s and the products we are developing incorporate new technologies and use new installation methods, we cannot predict the extent to which product liability claims may be brought against us in the future or the effect of any resulting negative publicity on our business. Moreover, we may not have adequate resources to satisfy a successful claim against us. We rely on our general liability insurance to cover product liability claims. A successful warranty or product liability claim against us that is not covered by insurance or is in excess of our available insurance limits could require us to make significant payments of damages. In addition, quality issues can have various other ramifications, including delays in the recognition of revenue, loss of revenue, loss of future sales opportunities, increased costs associated with repairing or replacing products, and a negative impact on our goodwill and reputation, any of which could adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition. Revenues from a limited number of customers and large projects are expected to continue to comprise a significant portion of our total revenues and any decrease in revenues from those customers or projects, payment of liquidated damages, or an increase in related expenses, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. Even though we expect our customer base and number of large projects to expand and our revenue streams to diversify, a substantial portion of our revenues will continue to depend on sales to a limited number of customers as well as construction of a limited number of large projects, and the loss of sales to, or construction of, or inability to collect from those customers or for those projects, or an increase in expenses (such as financing costs) related to any such large projects, would have a significant negative impact on our business. In fiscal 2015, our top customer accounted for 14% of our total revenue. These larger projects create concentrated operating and financial risks. The effect of recognizing revenue or other financial measures on the sale of a larger project, or the failure to recognize revenue or other financial measures as anticipated in a given reporting period because a project is not yet completed under applicable accounting rules by period end, may materially affect our financial results. In addition, if construction, warranty or operational challenges arise on a larger project, or if the timing of such a project unexpectedly changes for other reasons, our financial results could be materially, adversely affected. Our agreements for such projects may be cancelled or we may incur large liquidated damages if we fail to execute the projects as planned, obtain certain approvals or consents by a specified time, meet certain product and project specifications, or if we materially breach the governing agreements, or in the event of a customer’s or project entity’s bankruptcy, our customers may seek to cancel or renegotiate the terms of current agreements or renewals. In addition, the failure by any significant customer to make payments when due, whether due to liquidity issues, failure of anticipated government support or otherwise, could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition. We do not typically maintain long-term agreements with our customers and accordingly we could lose customers without warning, which could adversely affect our operating results. Our product sales to residential dealers and components customers typically are not made under long-term agreements. We often contract to construct or sell large projects with no assurance of repeat business from the same customers in the future. Although we believe that cancellations on our purchase orders to date have been infrequent, our customers may cancel or reschedule purchase orders with us on relatively short notice. Cancellations or rescheduling of customer orders could result in the delay or loss of anticipated sales without allowing us sufficient time to reduce, or delay the incurrence of, our corresponding inventory and operating expenses. In addition, changes in forecasts or the timing of orders from these or other customers expose us to the risks of inventory shortages or excess inventory. These circumstances, in addition to the completion and non-repetition of large projects, declining average selling prices, changes in the relative mix of sales of solar equipment versus solar project installations, and the fact that our supply agreements are generally long-term in nature and many of our other operating costs are fixed, could cause our operating results to fluctuate and may result in a material adverse effect in our business, results of operations, and financial condition. In addition, since we rely partly on our network of international dealers for marketing and other promotional programs, if our dealers fail to perform up to our standards, our operating results could be adversely affected. 21 Our business could be adversely affected by seasonal trends and construction cycles. Our business is subject to significant industry-specific seasonal fluctuations. Our sales have historically reflected these seasonal trends, with the largest percentage of our total revenues realized during the last two fiscal quarters. There are various reasons for this seasonality, mostly related to economic incentives and weather patterns. For example, in European countries with feed-in tariffs, the construction of solar power systems may be concentrated during the second half of the calendar year, largely due to the annual reduction of the applicable minimum feed-in tariff and the fact that the coldest winter months in the Northern Hemisphere are January through March. In the United States, many customers make purchasing decisions towards the end of the year in order to take advantage of tax credits. In addition, sales in the new home development market are often tied to construction market demands, which tend to follow national trends in construction, including declining sales during cold weather months. The competitive environment in which we operate often requires us to undertake customer obligations, which may turn out to be costlier than anticipated and, in turn, materially and adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition. We are often required, as a condition of financing or at the request of our end customer, to undertake certain obligations such as: • • • • • • system output performance warranties; system maintenance; penalty payments or customer termination rights if the system we are constructing is not commissioned within specified timeframes or other construction milestones are not achieved; guarantees of certain minimum residual value of the system at specified future dates; system put-rights whereby we could be required to buy back a customer’s system at fair value on a future date if certain minimum performance thresholds are not met; and indemnification against losses customers may suffer as a result of reductions in benefits received under the solar commercial investment tax credit (“ITC”) under Section 48(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and Treasury grant programs under Section 1603 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (the “Cash Grant”). Such financing arrangements and customer obligations involve complex accounting analyses and judgments regarding the timing of revenue and expense recognition, and in certain situations these factors may require us to defer revenue recognition until projects are completed, which could adversely affect our revenues and profits in a particular period. The increase in the global supply of solar cells and panels, and increasing competition, may cause substantial downward pressure on the prices of such products and cause us to lose sales or market share, resulting in lower revenues, earnings, and cash flows. Global solar cell and panel production capacity has been materially increasing overall, and solar cell and solar panel manufacturers have in the past, and may again, have excess capacity, particularly in China. Excess capacity and industry competition have resulted in the past, and may continue to result, in substantial downward pressure on the price of solar cells and panels, including SunPower products. Intensifying competition could also cause us to lose sales or market share. Such price reductions or loss of sales or market share could have a negative impact on our revenue and earnings, and could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and cash flows. In addition, our internal pricing forecasts may not be accurate in such a market environment, which could cause our financial results to be different than forecasted. See also under this section, “Risks Related to Our Sales Channels - If we fail to successfully execute our cost reduction roadmap, or fail to develop and introduce new and enhanced products and services, we may be unable to compete effectively, and our ability to generate revenues would suffer.” 22 Risks Related to Our Liquidity We may be unable to generate sufficient cash flows or obtain access to external financing necessary to fund our operations and make adequate capital investments as planned due to the general economic environment and the continued market pressure driving down the average selling prices of our solar power products, among other factors. To develop new products, support future growth, achieve operating efficiencies, and maintain product quality, we must make significant capital investments in manufacturing technology, facilities and capital equipment, research and development, and product and process technology. We also anticipate increased costs as we make advance payments for raw materials or pay to procure such materials (especially polysilicon), increase our sales and marketing efforts, invest in joint ventures and acquisitions, invest in our residential lease business, and continue our research and development. Our manufacturing and assembly activities have required and will continue to require significant investment of capital and substantial engineering expenditures. In addition, we expect to invest a significant amount of capital to develop solar power systems and plants for sale to customers. Developing and constructing solar power plants requires significant time and substantial initial investments. The delayed disposition of such projects, or the inability to realize the full anticipated value of such projects on disposition, could have a negative impact on our liquidity. See under this section, “Risks Related to Our Operations - Project development or construction activities may not be successful and we may make significant investments without first obtaining project financing, which could increase our costs and impair our ability to recover our investments.” See also under this section, “Risks Related to Our Sales Channels - A limited number of customers and large projects are expected to continue to comprise a significant portion of our revenues and any decrease in revenues from those customers or projects, payment of liquidated damages, or an increase in related expenses, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.” Our capital expenditures and use of working capital may be greater than we anticipate if we decide to make additional investments in the development and construction of solar power plants, or if sales of power plants and associated receipt of cash proceeds is delayed, or if we decide to accelerate increases in our manufacturing capacity internally or through capital contributions to joint ventures. In addition, we could in the future make additional investments in certain of our joint ventures or could guarantee certain financial obligations of our joint ventures, which could reduce our cash flows, increase our indebtedness and expose us to the credit risk of our joint venture partners. In addition, if our financial results or operating plans deviate from our current assumptions, we may not have sufficient resources to support our business plan. See under this section, “Risks Related to Our Liquidity - We have a significant amount of debt outstanding. Our substantial indebtedness and other contractual commitments could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations, as well as our ability to meet our payment obligations under our debentures and our other debt.” Certain of our customers also require performance bonds issued by a bonding agency, or bank guarantees or letters of credit issued by financial institutions, which are returned to us upon satisfaction of contractual requirements. If there is a contractual dispute with the customer, the customer may withhold the security or make a draw under the security, which could have an adverse impact on our liquidity. Our uncollateralized letter of credit facility with Deutsche Bank, which as of January 3, 2016 had an outstanding amount of $294.5 million, is guaranteed by Total S.A. pursuant to the Credit Support Agreement between us and Total S.A. dated April 28, 2011 (the “Credit Support Agreement”). Any draws under this uncollateralized facility would require us to immediately reimburse the bank for the drawn amount. A default under the Credit Support Agreement or the guaranteed letter of credit facility, or the acceleration of our other indebtedness greater than $25 million, could cause Total S.A. to declare all amounts due and payable to Total S.A. and direct the bank to cease issuing additional letters of credit on our behalf, which could have a material adverse effect on our operations. In addition, the Credit Support Agreement will terminate as of July 2016 by its terms, and we may be unable to find adequate credit support in replacement, on acceptable terms or at all. In such case, our ability to obtain adequate amounts of debt financing, through our letter of credit facility or otherwise, may be harmed. We manage our working capital requirements and fund our committed capital expenditures, including the development and construction of our planned solar power plants, through our current cash and cash equivalents, cash generated from operations, and funds available under our revolving credit facility with Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank (“Credit Agricole”). As of January 3, 2016, we had $250.0 million available under our revolving credit facility with Credit Agricole. On February 17, 2016, we entered into an amendment to the credit agreement with Credit Agricole, expanding our available borrowings under the revolving credit facility to $300 million and adding a $200.0 million letter of credit subfacility, subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions. 23 The lenders under our credit facilities and holders of our debentures may also require us to repay our indebtedness to them in the event that our obligations under other indebtedness or contracts in excess of the applicable threshold amount, are accelerated and we fail to discharge such obligations. If our capital resources are insufficient to satisfy our liquidity requirements, for example, due to cross acceleration of indebtedness, we may seek to sell additional equity securities or debt securities or obtain other debt financings. Market conditions, however, could limit our ability to raise capital by issuing new equity or debt securities on acceptable terms, and lenders may be unwilling to lend funds on acceptable terms. The sale of additional equity securities or convertible debt securities may result in additional dilution to our stockholders. Additional debt would result in increased expenses and could impose new restrictive covenants that may be different from those restrictions contained in the covenants under certain of our current debt agreements and debentures. Financing arrangements, including project financing for our solar power plants and letters of credit facilities, may not be available to us, or may not be available in amounts or on terms acceptable to us. If additional financing is not available, we may be forced to seek to sell assets or reduce or delay capital investments, any of which could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition. If we cannot generate sufficient cash flows, find other sources of capital to fund our operations and solar power plant projects, make adequate capital investments to remain technologically and price competitive, or provide bonding or letters of credit required by our projects, we may need to sell additional equity securities or debt securities, or obtain other debt financings. If adequate funds and other resources are not available on acceptable terms, our ability to fund our operations, develop and construct solar power plants, develop and expand our manufacturing operations and distribution network, maintain our research and development efforts, provide collateral for our projects, meet our debt service obligations, or otherwise respond to competitive pressures would be significantly impaired. Our inability to do any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. We have a significant amount of debt outstanding. Our substantial indebtedness and other contractual commitments could adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations, as well as our ability to meet our payment obligations under the debentures and our other debt. We currently have a significant amount of debt and debt service requirements. As of January 3, 2016, we had approximately $1.6 billion of outstanding debt for borrowed money. This level of debt could have material consequences on our future operations, including: • making it more difficult for us to meet our payment and other obligations under the debentures and our other outstanding debt; • • • • • resulting in an event of default if we fail to comply with the financial and other restrictive covenants contained in our debt agreements (with certain covenants becoming more restrictive over time), which event of default could result in all or a significant portion of our debt becoming immediately due and payable; reducing the availability of our cash flows to fund working capital, capital expenditures, project development, acquisitions and other general corporate purposes, and limiting our ability to obtain additional financing for these purposes; subjecting us to the risk of increased sensitivity to interest rate increases on our indebtedness with variable interest rates, including borrowings under our credit agreement with Credit Agricole; limiting our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, and increasing our vulnerability to, changes in our business, the industry in which we operate and the general economy; and placing us at a competitive disadvantage compared with our competitors that have less debt or have lower leverage ratios. In the event-expected or unexpected-that any of our joint ventures is consolidated with our financial statements, such consolidation could significantly increase our indebtedness. See also under this section, “Risks Related to Our Operations - We may in the future be required to consolidate the assets, liabilities and financial results of certain of our existing or future joint ventures, which could have an adverse impact on our financial position, gross margin and operating results.” Our ability to meet our payment and other obligations under our debt instruments depends on our ability to generate significant cash flows, which, to some extent, is subject to general economic, financial, competitive, legislative and regulatory factors as well as other factors that are beyond our control. We cannot assure you that our business will generate cash flows from 24 operations, or that future borrowings will be available to us under our existing or any future credit facilities or otherwise, in an amount sufficient to enable us to meet our payment obligations under our debentures and our other debt and to fund other liquidity needs. If we are unable to generate sufficient cash flows to service our debt obligations, we may need to refinance or restructure our debt, including our debentures, sell assets, reduce or delay capital investments, or seek to raise additional capital. Although we are currently in compliance with the financial and other covenants contained in our debt agreements, we cannot assure you that we will be able to remain in compliance with such covenants in the future. We may not be able to cure future violations or obtain waivers from our creditors in order to avoid a default. An event of default under any of our debt agreements could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity, financial condition, and results of operations. Our current tax holidays in the Philippines and Switzerland have expired or will expire within the next several years, and other related international tax developments could adversely affect our results. We benefit from income tax holiday incentives in the Philippines in accordance with our subsidiary’s registration with the Philippine Economic Zone Authority (“PEZA”), which provide that we pay no income tax in the Philippines for those operations subject to the ruling. Tax savings associated with the Philippines tax holidays were approximately $21.2 million, $8.3 million, and $11.7 million in fiscal 2015, 2014, and 2013, respectively. Our income tax holidays were granted as manufacturing lines were placed in service and have expired within this fiscal year. We have applied for extensions and renewals upon expiration; however, while we expect all approvals to be granted, we can offer no assurance that they will be. We believe that if our Philippine tax holidays are not extended or renewed, (a) gross income attributable to activities covered by our PEZA registrations will be taxed at a 5% preferential rate, and (b) our Philippine net income attributable to all other activities will be taxed at the statutory Philippine corporate income tax rate, currently 30%. An increase in our tax liability could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. We have an auxiliary company ruling in Switzerland where we sell our solar power products. The auxiliary company ruling results in a reduced effective Swiss tax rate of approximately 11.5%. Tax savings associated with this ruling were approximately $1.6 million, $3.5 million, and $1.5 million in fiscal 2015, 2014, and 2013, respectively. The current ruling expires in 2019. If the ruling is not renewed in 2019, Swiss income would be taxable at the full Swiss tax rate of approximately 24.2%. Our joint venture AUOSP benefits from a tax holiday granted by the Malaysian government subject to certain hiring, capital spending, and manufacturing requirements. The joint venture partners of AUOSP have decided to postpone the construction of an additional manufacturing facility (“Fab 3B”), which fails to meet certain conditions required to continue to benefit from the tax ruling. Our joint venture is currently in discussions with the Malaysian government to extend the period by which buildout has to be completed. Should AUOSP be unable to renegotiate the tax ruling, they could be retroactively and prospectively subject to statutory tax rates and repayment of certain incentives which could negatively impact our share of equity earnings reported in our Consolidated Statements of Operations. More generally, with the finalization of specific actions contained within the Organization for Economic Development and Cooperation’s (“OECD”) Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (“BEPS”) study (“Actions”), many OECD countries have acknowledged their intent to implement the Actions and update their local tax regulations. Among the considerations required by the Actions is the need for appropriate local business operational substance to justify any locally granted tax incentives, such as those described above, and that the incentives are not determined to constitute “state aid” which would invalidate the incentive. If we fail to maintain sufficient operational substance or if the countries determine the incentive regimes do not conform with the BEPS regulations being considered for implementation, adverse material economic impacts may result. A change in our effective tax rate can have a significant adverse impact on our business, and an adverse outcome resulting from examination of our income or other tax returns could adversely affect our results. A number of factors may adversely affect our future effective tax rates, such as the jurisdictions in which our profits are determined to be earned and taxed; changes in the valuation of our deferred tax assets and liabilities; adjustments to estimated taxes upon finalization of various tax returns; adjustments to our interpretation of transfer pricing standards; changes in available tax credits, grants and other incentives; changes in stock-based compensation expense; the availability of loss or credit carryforwards to offset taxable income; changes in tax laws or the interpretation of such tax laws (for example, proposals for fundamental U.S. international tax reform); changes in U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”); expiration or the inability to renew tax rulings or tax holiday incentives; and the repatriation of non-U.S. earnings for which we have not previously provided for U.S. taxes. A change in our effective tax rate due to any of these factors may adversely affect our future results from operations. 25 Significant judgment is required to determine the recognition and measurement attributes prescribed in the accounting guidance for uncertainty in income taxes. The accounting guidance for uncertainty in income taxes applies to all income tax positions, including the potential recovery of previously paid taxes, which if settled unfavorably could adversely affect our provision for income taxes. In addition, we are subject to examination of our income tax returns by various tax authorities. We regularly assess the likelihood of adverse outcomes resulting from any examination to determine the adequacy of our provision for income taxes. An adverse determination of an examination could have an adverse effect on our operating results and financial condition. See “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data - Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements - Note 13. Derivative Financial Instruments.” Additionally, longstanding international tax norms that determine each country’s jurisdiction to tax cross-border international trade are evolving (for example, those relating to the Actions currently being undertaken by the OECD and similar actions by the G8 and G20). As these and other tax laws and related regulations change, our financial results could be materially impacted. Given the unpredictability of these possible changes and their potential interdependency, it is very difficult to assess whether the overall effect of such potential tax changes would be cumulatively positive or negative for our earnings and cash flow, but such changes could adversely impact our financial results. Our credit agreements contain covenant restrictions that may limit our ability to operate our business. We may be unable to respond to changes in business and economic conditions, engage in transactions that might otherwise be beneficial to us, or obtain additional financing, because our debt agreements, our Credit Support Agreement with Total S.A., our Affiliation Agreement with Total, foreign exchange hedging agreements and equity derivative agreements contain, and any of our other future similar agreements may contain, covenant restrictions that limit our ability to, among other things: • • incur additional debt, assume obligations in connection with letters of credit, or issue guarantees; create liens; • make certain investments or acquisitions; • • • • enter into transactions with our affiliates; sell certain assets; redeem capital stock or make other restricted payments; declare or pay dividends or make other distributions to stockholders; and • merge or consolidate with any person. Our ability to comply with these covenants is dependent on our future performance, which will be subject to many factors, some of which are beyond our control, including prevailing economic conditions. In addition, our failure to comply with these covenants could result in a default under our other debt instruments, which could permit the holders to accelerate such debt. If any of our debt is accelerated, we may not have sufficient funds available to repay such debt, which could materially and negatively affect our financial condition and results of operations. Risks Related to Our Supply Chain We will continue to be dependent on a limited number of third-party suppliers for certain raw materials and components for our products, which could prevent us from delivering our products to our customers within required timeframes and could in turn result in sales and installation delays, cancellations, penalty payments, and loss of market share. We rely on a limited number of third-party suppliers, including our joint ventures, for certain raw materials and components for our solar cells, panels and power systems, such as polysilicon, inverters and module material. If we fail to maintain our relationships with our suppliers or to build relationships with new suppliers, or if suppliers are unable to meet demand through industry consolidation, we may be unable to manufacture our products or our products may be available only at a higher cost or after a long delay. To the extent the processes that our suppliers use to manufacture components are proprietary, we may be unable to obtain comparable components from alternative suppliers. In addition, the financial markets could limit our suppliers’ ability to raise capital if required to expand their production or satisfy their operating capital requirements. As a result, they could be unable to 26 supply necessary raw materials, inventory and capital equipment which we would require to support our planned sales operations to us, which would in turn negatively impact our sales volume, profitability, and cash flows. The failure of a supplier to supply raw materials or components in a timely manner, or to supply raw materials or components that meet our quality, quantity and cost requirements, could impair our ability to manufacture our products or could increase our cost of production. If we cannot obtain substitute materials or components on a timely basis or on acceptable terms, we could be prevented from delivering our products to our customers within required timeframes. Any such delays could result in sales and installation delays, cancellations, penalty payments or loss of revenue and market share, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition. Our long-term, firm commitment supply agreements could result in excess or insufficient inventory, place us at a competitive disadvantage on pricing, or lead to disputes, each of which could impair our ability to meet our cost reduction roadmap, and in some circumstances may force us to take a significant accounting charge. If our supply agreements provide insufficient inventory to meet customer demand, or if our suppliers are unable or unwilling to provide us with the contracted quantities, we may be forced to purchase additional supply at market prices, which could be greater than expected and could materially and adversely affect our results of operations. Due to the industry- wide shortage of polysilicon experienced before 2011, we purchased polysilicon that we resold to third-party ingot and wafer manufacturers who deliver wafers to us that we then use in the manufacturing of our solar cells. Without sufficient polysilicon, some of those ingot and wafer manufacturers would not have been able to produce the wafers on which we rely. We have historically entered into multiple long-term fixed supply agreements for periods of up to 10 years to match our estimated customer demand forecasts and growth strategy for the next several years. The long-term nature of these agreements, which often provide for fixed or inflation-adjusted pricing, may prevent us from benefiting from decreasing polysilicon costs, may cause us to pay more at unfavorable payment terms than the current market prices and payment terms available to our competitors, and could cause us to record an impairment. In the event that we have inventory in excess of short-term requirements of polysilicon, in order to reduce inventory or improve working capital, we may, and sometimes do, elect to sell such inventory in the marketplace at prices below our purchase price, thereby incurring a loss. In some such circumstances, particularly if we continue to sell polysilicon into the marketplace at sustained levels, we may also be forced to mark our entire commitment under one or more agreements to market rates, in which case our financial condition and results of operations would be materially adversely affected. Additionally, because certain of these agreements are “take or pay,” if our demand for polysilicon from these suppliers were to decrease in the future, we could be required to purchase polysilicon that we do not need, resulting in either storage costs or payment for polysilicon we nevertheless choose not to accept from such suppliers. Further, we face significant, specific counterparty risk under long-term supply agreements when dealing with suppliers without a long, stable production and financial history. In the event any such supplier experiences financial difficulties or goes into bankruptcy, it could be difficult or impossible, or may require substantial time and expense, for us to recover any or all of our prepayments. Any of the foregoing could materially harm our financial condition and results of operations. We utilize construction loans, term loans, sale-leaseback, preferred equity, and other financing structures to fund acquisition, development, construction, and expansion of photovoltaic power plant projects in the future, and such funds may or may not continue to be available as required to further our plans. Furthermore, such project financing increases our consolidated debt and may be structurally senior to other debt such as our Credit Agricole revolving credit facility and outstanding convertible debentures. Certain of our subsidiaries and other affiliates are separate and distinct legal entities and, except in limited circumstances, have no obligation to pay any amounts due with respect to our indebtedness or indebtedness of other subsidiaries or affiliates, and do not guarantee the payment of interest on or principal of such indebtedness. Such subsidiaries may borrow funds to finance particular projects. In the event of a default under a project financing which we do not cure, the lenders or lessors generally have rights to the power plant project and related assets. In the event of foreclosure after a default, we may not be able to retain any interest in the power plant project or other collateral supporting such financing. In addition, any such default or foreclosure may trigger cross default provisions in our other financing agreements, including our corporate debt obligations, which could materially and adversely affect our results of operations. In the event of our bankruptcy, liquidation or reorganization (or the bankruptcy, liquidation or reorganization of a subsidiary or affiliate), such subsidiaries’ or other affiliates’ creditors, including trade creditors and holders of debt issued by such subsidiaries or affiliates, will generally be entitled to payment of their claims from the assets of those subsidiaries or affiliates before any assets are made available for distribution to us or the holders of our indebtedness. As a result, holders of our corporate indebtedness will be effectively subordinated to all present and future debts and 27 other liabilities (including trade payables) of certain of our subsidiaries. As of January 3, 2016, our subsidiaries had approximately $433.9 million in subsidiary project financing, which is effectively senior to our corporate debt, such as our Credit Agricole revolving credit facility, our 4.00% debentures due 2023, our 0.875% debentures due 2021, and our 0.75% debentures due 2018. Risks Related to Our Operations We have significant international activities and customers, and plan to continue these efforts, which subject us to additional business risks, including logistical complexity and political instability. A substantial portion of our sales are made to customers outside of the United States, and a substantial portion of our supply agreements are with supply and equipment vendors located outside of the United States. We have solar cell and module production lines located at our manufacturing facilities in the Philippines, Mexico, and France, and at our joint venture’s manufacturing facility in Malaysia. Risks we face in conducting business internationally include: • multiple, conflicting and changing laws and regulations, export and import restrictions, employment laws, environmental protection, regulatory requirements and other government approvals, permits and licenses; • • • • • • • • • • difficulties and costs in staffing and managing foreign operations as well as cultural differences; potentially adverse tax consequences associated with our permanent establishment of operations in more countries; relatively uncertain legal systems, including potentially limited protection for intellectual property rights, and laws, changes in the governmental incentives we rely on, regulations and policies which impose additional restrictions on the ability of foreign companies to conduct business in certain countries or otherwise place them at a competitive disadvantage in relation to domestic companies; taxation by the U.S. of the repatriation of non-U.S. earnings taxed at rates lower than the U.S. statutory effective tax rate; inadequate local infrastructure and developing telecommunications infrastructures; financial risks, such as longer sales and payment cycles and greater difficulty collecting accounts receivable; currency fluctuations, government-fixed foreign exchange rates, the effects of currency hedging activity, and the potential inability to hedge currency fluctuations; political and economic instability, including wars, acts of terrorism, political unrest, boycotts, curtailments of trade and other business restrictions; trade barriers such as export requirements, tariffs, taxes and other restrictions and expenses, which could increase the prices of our products and make us less competitive in some countries; and liabilities associated with compliance with laws (for example, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act in the United States and similar laws outside of the United States). In addition, we have a complex organizational structure involving many entities globally. As a result, we need to effectively manage our international inventory and warehouses. If we fail to do so, our shipping movements may not map with product demand and flow. Unsettled intercompany balances between entities could result, if changes in law, regulations or related interpretations occur, in adverse tax or other consequences affecting our capital structure, intercompany interest rates and legal structure. If we are unable to successfully manage any such risks, any one or more could materially and negatively affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. If we experience interruptions in the operation of our solar cell production lines, or we are not successful in operating our joint venture, AUOSP, our revenue and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected. If our solar cell or module production lines suffer problems that cause downtime, we might be unable to meet our production targets, which would adversely affect our business. Our manufacturing activities require significant management attention, a significant capital investment and substantial engineering expenditures. 28 We and AU Optronics Corporation (“AUO”) are parties to a joint venture agreement pursuant to which we jointly own and manage AUOSP, our joint venture that has constructed a manufacturing facility in Malaysia, which we call Fab 3A. The success of our manufacturing joint venture is subject to significant risks including: • • • • • • • • • • • • cost overruns, delays, supply shortages, equipment problems and other operating difficulties; custom-built equipment may take longer or cost more to engineer than planned and may never operate as designed; incorporating first-time equipment designs and technology improvements, which we expect to lower unit capital and operating costs, but which may not be successful; problems managing the joint venture with AUO, whom we do not control and whose business objectives may be different from ours and may be inconsistent with our best interests; either party’s inability to maintain compliance with the contractual terms of the joint venture agreement and challenges we could face enforcing such terms; the impact of the AUOSP arbitration proceedings described under “Item 3. Legal Proceedings;” the joint venture’s ability to obtain or maintain third party financing to fund its capital requirements; difficulties in maintaining or improving our historical yields and manufacturing efficiencies; difficulties in protecting our intellectual property and obtaining rights to intellectual property developed by the joint venture; difficulties in hiring key technical, management, and other personnel; difficulties in integration, implementing IT infrastructure and an effective control environment; and potential inability to obtain, or obtain in a timely manner, financing, or approvals from governmental authorities for operations. Any of these or similar difficulties may unexpectedly delay or increase costs of our supply of solar cells from AUOSP. In 2012, we and AUO decided to postpone construction of a second manufacturing facility (Fab 3B) that was contemplated under the AUOSP joint venture agreement and, accordingly, postponed further equity injections into AUOSP. AUOSP has a $300 million secured loan facility. The loan facility contains covenants that, among other things, require that we and AUO make certain scheduled equity injections into AUOSP. In connection with the decision to postpone construction of Fab 3B, AUOSP obtained a waiver from the lenders under the facility that modified and extended the equity injection schedule, which we and AUO have satisfied since. If AUOSP violates this or any other covenant in the facility, however, absent further modification or waiver, AUOSP would be in technical breach of the loan agreement. Any such breach would not create a cross-default under our consolidated debt agreements so long as AUOSP remains unconsolidated, is not a “significant subsidiary” as defined by Reg S-X of the Exchange Act, and our ownership in AUOSP remains no higher than 50%. Nevertheless, if the lenders were to accelerate payment on the loan or foreclose on their secured collateral, our supply of solar cells could be interrupted. If we are unable to utilize our expected capacity at our AUOSP manufacturing joint venture, or the operation of our existing production lines is interrupted, our per-unit manufacturing costs would increase, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. If we do not achieve satisfactory yields or quality in manufacturing our solar products, our sales could decrease and our relationships with our customers and our reputation may be harmed. The manufacture of solar cells is a highly complex process. Minor deviations in the manufacturing process can cause substantial decreases in yield and in some cases, cause production to be suspended or yield no output. We have from time to time experienced lower than anticipated manufacturing yields. As we expand our manufacturing capacity and qualify additional suppliers, we may initially experience lower yields. If we do not achieve planned yields, our product costs could increase, and product availability would decrease resulting in lower revenues than expected. In addition, in the process of transforming polysilicon into ingots, a significant portion of the polysilicon is removed in the process. In circumstances where we provide the polysilicon, if our suppliers do not have very strong controls in place to ensure maximum recovery and utilization, our economic yield can be less than anticipated, which would increase the cost of raw materials to us. 29 Additionally, products as complex as ours may contain undetected errors or defects, especially when first introduced. For example, our solar cells or solar panels may contain defects that are not detected until after they are shipped or are installed because we cannot test for all possible scenarios. These defects could cause us to incur significant warranty, non-warranty, and re- engineering costs, divert the attention of our engineering personnel from product development efforts, and significantly affect our customer relations and business reputation. If we deliver solar products with errors or defects, including cells or panels of third- party manufacturers, or if there is a perception that such solar products contain errors or defects, our credibility and the market acceptance and sales of our products could be harmed. In addition, some of our arrangements with customers include termination or put rights for non-performance. In certain limited cases, we could incur liquidated damages or even be required to buy back a customer’s system at fair value on specified future dates if certain minimum performance thresholds are not met. A change in our 1603 Treasury cash grant proceeds or solar investment tax credits could adversely affect our business, revenues, margins, results of operations and cash flows. We have incorporated into our financial planning and agreements with our customers certain assumptions regarding the future level of U.S. tax incentives, including the ITC and Cash Grant, which is administered by the U.S. Treasury Department (“Treasury”) and provides cash grant payments in lieu of the ITC. The ITC and Cash Grant allow qualified applicants to claim an amount equal to 30% of the eligible cost basis for qualifying solar energy property. We hold projects and have sold projects to certain customers based on certain underlying assumptions regarding the ITC and Cash Grant, including for CVSR and Solar Star. We have also accounted for certain projects and programs in our business using the same assumptions. Owners of our qualifying projects and our residential lease program have applied or will apply for the ITC, and have applied for the Cash Grant. We have structured the tax incentive applications, both in timing and amount, to be in accordance with the guidance provided by Treasury and Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”). Any changes to the Treasury or IRS guidance which we relied upon in structuring our projects, failure to comply with the requirements, including the safe harbor protocols, lower levels of incentives granted, or changes in assumptions including the estimated residual values and the estimated fair market value of financed and installed systems for the purposes of Cash Grant and ITC applications, could materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations. While all grants related to our projects have been fully paid by Treasury, if the IRS or Treasury disagrees, as a result of any future review or audit, with the fair market value of, or other assumptions concerning, our solar projects or systems that we have constructed or that we construct in the future, including the systems for which tax incentives have already been paid, it could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition. We also have obligations to indemnify certain of our customers for the loss of tax incentives to such customers. We may have to recognize impairments or lower margins than initially anticipated for certain of our projects, including Solar Star, CVSR, projects sold to 8point3 Energy Partners, and our residential lease program. Additionally, if the amount or timing of the Cash Grant or ITC payments received varies from what we have projected, our revenues, margins and cash flows could be adversely affected and we may have to recognize losses, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. There are continuing developments in the interpretation and application of how companies should calculate their eligibility and level of Cash Grant and ITC incentives. There have been recent cases in the U.S. district courts that challenge the criteria for a true lease, which could impact whether the structure of our residential lease program qualifies under the Cash Grant and ITC. Additionally, the Office of the Inspector General of the Treasury has issued subpoenas to a number of significant participants in the rooftop solar energy installation industry. The Inspector General is working with the Civil Division of the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate the administration and implementation of the Cash Grant program, including potential misrepresentations concerning the fair market value of certain solar power systems submitted for Cash Grant. While we have not received a subpoena, we could be asked to participate in the information gathering process. The results of the current investigation could affect the underlying assumption used by the solar industry, including us, in our Cash Grant and ITC applications, which could reduce eligibility and level of incentives and could adversely affect our results of operations and cash flows. We were notified by an investor in Section 1603 residential inverted lease structures of an IRS examination of such investor’s income tax filings. Under this structure, we transferred the cash grants to the investor pursuant to the 1603 program regulations. If the IRS redetermines the amount of the cash grant awards, the investor may be required to make corresponding adjustments to its taxable income or other changes. Such adjustments may provide us with an indication of IRS practice regarding the valuation of residential leased solar assets, and we would consider such adjustments in our accounting for our indemnification obligations to investors who receive cash grants and investment tax credits. 30 We obtain certain of our capital equipment used in our manufacturing process from sole suppliers and if this equipment is damaged or otherwise unavailable, our ability to deliver products on time will suffer, which in turn could result in order cancellations and loss of revenue. Some of the capital equipment used in the manufacture of our solar power products has been developed and made specifically for us, is not readily available from multiple vendors and would be difficult to repair or replace if it were to become damaged or stop working. If any of these suppliers were to experience financial difficulties or go out of business, or if there were any damage to or a breakdown of our manufacturing equipment, our business would suffer. In addition, a supplier’s failure to supply this equipment in a timely manner, with adequate quality and on terms acceptable to us, could delay our future capacity expansion or manufacturing process improvements and otherwise disrupt our production schedule or increase our costs of production. Project development or construction activities may not be successful, and we may make significant investments without first obtaining project financing, which could increase our costs and impair our ability to recover our investments. The development and construction of solar power electric generation facilities and other energy infrastructure projects involve numerous risks. We may be required to spend significant sums for preliminary engineering, permitting, legal, and other expenses before we can determine whether a project is feasible, economically attractive or capable of being built. In addition, we will often choose to bear the costs of such efforts prior to obtaining project financing, prior to getting final regulatory approval, and prior to our final sale to a customer, if any. Successful completion of a particular project may be adversely affected by numerous factors, including: • • • • • • failures or delays in obtaining desired or necessary land rights, including ownership, leases and/or easements; failures or delays in obtaining necessary permits, licenses or other governmental support or approvals, or in overcoming objections from members of the public or adjoining land owners; uncertainties relating to land costs for projects; unforeseen engineering problems; access to available transmission for electricity generated by our solar power plants; construction delays and contractor performance shortfalls; • work stoppages or labor disruptions and compliance with labor regulations; • • • • • cost over-runs; availability of products and components from suppliers; adverse weather conditions; environmental, archaeological and geological conditions; and availability of construction and permanent financing. If we are unable to complete the development of a solar power plant, or fail to meet one or more agreed target construction milestone dates, we may be subject to liquidated damages and/or penalties under the EPC agreement or other agreements relating to the power plant, and we typically will not be able to recover our investment in the project. We expect to invest a significant amount of capital to develop projects initially owned by us or ultimately owned by third parties. If we are unable to complete the development of a solar power project, we may write-down or write-off some or all of these capitalized investments, which would have an adverse impact on our net income in the period in which the loss is recognized. 31 If we cannot offer residential lease customers an attractive value proposition due to an inability to continue to monetize tax benefits in connection with our residential lease arrangements, an inability to obtain financing for our residential lease program, challenges implementing our third-party ownership model in new jurisdictions, declining costs of retail electricity or otherwise, we may be unable to continue to increase the size of our residential lease program, which could have a material, adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition. Our residential lease program has been eligible for the ITC and Cash Grant. We have relied on, and expect to continue to rely on, financing structures that monetize a substantial portion of those benefits. If we were unable to continue to monetize the tax benefits in our financing structures or such tax benefits were reduced or eliminated, we might be unable to provide financing or pricing that is attractive to our customers. Under current law, the ITC will be reduced from approximately 30% of the cost of the solar system to approximately 26% for solar systems placed into service after December 31, 2019 and then further reduced to approximately 22% for solar systems placed into service after December 31, 2020 before being reduced permanently to 10% for commercial projects and 0% for residential projects. In addition, Cash Grants are no longer available for new solar systems. Changes in existing law and interpretations by the IRS, Treasury and the courts could reduce the willingness of financing partners to invest in funds associated with our residential lease program. Additionally, benefits under the Cash Grant and ITC programs are tied, in part, to the fair market value of our systems, as ultimately determined by the federal agency administering the benefit program. This means that, in connection with implementing financing structures that monetize such benefits, we need to, among other things, assess the fair market value of our systems in order to arrive at an estimate of the amount of tax benefit expected to be derived from the benefit programs. We incorporate third-party valuation reports that we believe to be reliable into our methodology for assessing the fair market value of our systems, but these reports or other elements of our methodology may cause our fair market value estimates to differ from those ultimately determined by the federal agency administering the applicable benefit program. If the amount or timing of Cash Grant payments or ITC received in connection with our residential lease program varies from what we have projected, due to discrepancies in our fair value assessments or otherwise, our revenues, cash flows and margins could be adversely affected. Additionally, if any of our financing partners that currently provide financing for our solar systems decide not to continue to provide financing due to general market conditions, changes in tax benefits associated with our solar systems, concerns about our business or prospects or any other reason, or if they materially change the terms under which they are willing to provide future financing, we will need to identify new financing partners and negotiate new financing terms. See also “Risks Related to Our Supply Chain - A change in our anticipated 1603 Treasury cash grant proceeds or solar investment tax credit could adversely affect our business, revenues, margins, results of operations and cash flows.” We have to quickly build infrastructure to support our residential lease program, and any failure or delay in implementing the necessary processes and infrastructure could adversely affect our financial results. We establish credit approval limits based on the credit quality of our customers. We may be unable to collect rent payments from our residential lease customers in the event they enter into bankruptcy or otherwise fail to make payments when due. If we experience higher customer default rates than we currently experience or if we lower credit rating requirements for new customers, it could be more difficult or costly to attract future financing. See also “Risks Related to Our Sales Channels - The execution of our growth strategy is dependent upon the continued availability of third-party financing arrangements for our solar power plants, our residential lease program and our customers, and is affected by general economic conditions.” We make certain assumptions in accounting for our residential lease program, including, among others, assumptions in accounting for our residual value of the leased systems. As our residential lease program grows, if the residual value of leased systems does not materialize as assumed, it will adversely affect our results of operations. At the end of the term of the lease, our customers have the option to extend the lease and certain of those customers may either purchase the leased systems at fair market value or return them to us. Should there be a large number of returns, we may incur de-installation costs in excess of amounts reserved. We believe that, as with our other customers, retail electricity prices factor significantly into the value proposition of our products for our residential lease customers. If prices for retail electricity or electricity from other renewable sources decrease, our ability to offer competitive pricing in our residential lease program could be jeopardized because such decreases would make the purchase of our solar systems or the purchase of energy under our lease agreements and PPAs less economically attractive. Our leases are third-party ownership arrangements. Sales of electricity by third parties face regulatory challenges in some states and jurisdictions. Other challenges pertain to whether third-party owned systems qualify for the same levels of rebates or other non-tax incentives available for customer-owned solar energy systems. Reductions in, or eliminations of, this treatment 32 of these third-party arrangements could reduce demand for our residential lease program. As we look to extend the third party ownership model outside of the United States, we will be faced with the same risks and uncertainties we have in the United States. Our growth outside of the United States could depend on our ability to expand the third party ownership model, and our failure to successfully implement a third-party ownership model globally could adversely affect our financial results. We act as the general contractor for many of our customers in connection with the installations of our solar power systems and are subject to risks associated with construction, cost overruns, delays and other contingencies tied to performance bonds and letters of credit, or other required credit and liquidity support guarantees, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations. We act as the general contractor for many of our customers in connection with the installation of our solar power systems. Some customers require performance bonds issued by a bonding agency or letters of credit issued by financial institutions, or may require other forms of liquidity support. Due to the general performance risk inherent in construction activities, it has become increasingly difficult recently to attain suitable bonding agencies willing to provide performance bonding. Obtaining letters of credit may require collateral. In the event we are unable to obtain bonding or sufficient letters of credit or other liquidity support, we will be unable to bid on, or enter into, sales contracts requiring such bonding. Almost all of our EPC contracts are fixed price contracts. We attempt to estimate all essential costs at the time of entering into the EPC contract for a particular project, and these are reflected in the overall price that we charge our customers for the project. These cost estimates are preliminary and may or may not be covered by contracts between us or the subcontractors, suppliers, and any other parties that may become necessary to complete the project. In addition, we require qualified, licensed subcontractors to install most of our systems. Thus, if the cost of materials or skilled labor were to rise dramatically, or if financing costs were to increase, our operating results could be adversely affected. In addition, the contracts with some of our larger customers require that we would be obligated to pay substantial penalty payments for each day or other period beyond an agreed target date that a solar installation for any such customer is not completed, up to and including the return of the entire project sale price. This is particularly true in Europe, where long-term, fixed feed-in tariffs available to investors are typically set during a prescribed period of project completion, but the fixed amount declines over time for projects completed in subsequent periods. We face material financial penalties in the event we fail to meet the completion deadlines, including but not limited to a full refund of the contract price paid by the customers. In certain cases we do not control all of the events which could give rise to these penalties, such as reliance on the local utility to timely complete electrical substation construction. Furthermore, investors often require that the solar power system generate specified levels of electricity in order to maintain their investment returns, allocating substantial risk and financial penalties to us if those levels are not achieved, up to and including the return of the entire project sale price. Also, our customers often require protections in the form of conditional payments, payment retentions or holdbacks, and similar arrangements that condition its future payments on performance. Delays in solar panel or other supply shipments, other construction delays, unexpected performance problems in electricity generation or other events could cause us to fail to meet these performance criteria, resulting in unanticipated and severe revenue and earnings losses and financial penalties. Construction delays are often caused by inclement weather, failure to timely receive necessary approvals and permits, or delays in obtaining necessary solar panels, inverters or other materials. Additionally, we sometimes purchase land in connection with project development and assume the risk of project completion. All such risks could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations. Acquisitions of other companies, project development pipelines and other assets, or investments in joint ventures with other companies could materially and adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations, and dilute our stockholders’ equity. To expand our business and maintain our competitive position, we have acquired a number of other companies and entered into several joint ventures over the past several years, including our 8point3 joint venture with First Solar and our acquisitions of Cogenra Solar, Inc. and Solaire Generation, Inc. in fiscal 2015. In the future, we may acquire additional companies, project pipelines, products, or technologies or enter into joint ventures or other strategic initiatives. Acquisitions and joint ventures involve a number of risks that could harm our business and result in the acquired business or joint venture not performing as expected, including: • insufficient experience with technologies and markets in which the acquired business or joint venture is involved, which may be necessary to successfully operate and/or integrate the business or the joint venture; 33 • • • • • • • • • • • problems integrating the acquired operations, personnel, IT infrastructure, technologies or products with the existing business and products; diversion of management time and attention from the core business to the acquired business or joint venture; potential failure to retain or hire key technical, management, sales and other personnel of the acquired business or joint venture; difficulties in retaining or building relationships with suppliers and customers of the acquired business or joint venture, particularly where such customers or suppliers compete with us; potential failure of the due diligence processes to identify significant issues with product quality and development or legal and financial liabilities, among other things; potential inability to obtain, or obtain in a timely manner, approvals from governmental authorities or work councils, which could delay or prevent acquisitions, delay our ability to achieve synergies, or our successful operation of acquired companies or joint ventures; potential necessity to re-apply for permits of acquired projects; problems managing joint ventures with our partners, meeting capital requirements for expansion, potential litigation with joint venture partners and reliance upon joint ventures which we do not control; for example, our ability to effectively manage our joint venture with AUO and our ability to effectively manage 8point3 Energy Partners with First Solar; differences in philosophy, strategy or goals with our joint venture partners; subsequent impairment of the acquired assets, including intangible assets; and assumption of liabilities including, but not limited to, lawsuits, tax examinations, warranty issues, environmental matters and liabilities associated with compliance with laws (for example, the FCPA). The success of our joint venture 8point3 Energy Partners is subject to additional risks described under the risk factor “Risks Related to Our Sales Channels - We may fail to realize the expected benefits of our YieldCo strategy.” Additionally, we may decide that it is in our best interests to enter into acquisitions or joint ventures that are dilutive to earnings per share or that negatively impact margins as a whole. In an effort to reduce our cost of goods sold, we have and may continue to enter into acquisitions or joint ventures involving suppliers or manufacturing partners, which would expose us to additional supply chain risks. Acquisitions or joint ventures could also require investment of significant financial resources and require us to obtain additional equity financing, which may dilute our stockholders’ equity, or require us to incur additional indebtedness. Such equity or debt financing may not be available on terms acceptable to us. In addition, we could in the future make additional investments in our joint ventures or guarantee certain financial obligations of our joint ventures, which could reduce our cash flows, increase our indebtedness and expose us to the credit risk of our joint ventures. To the extent that we invest in upstream suppliers or downstream channel capabilities, we may experience competition or channel conflict with certain of our existing and potential suppliers and customers. Specifically, existing and potential suppliers and customers may perceive that we are competing directly with them by virtue of such investments and may decide to reduce or eliminate their supply volume to us or order volume from us. In particular, any supply reductions from our polysilicon, ingot or wafer suppliers could materially reduce manufacturing volume. Acquisitions could also result in dilutive issuances of equity securities, the use of our available cash, or the incurrence of debt, which could harm our operating results. We may in the future be required to consolidate the assets, liabilities and financial results of certain of our existing or future joint ventures, which could have an adverse impact on our financial position, gross margin, and operating results. The Financial Accounting Standards Board has issued accounting guidance regarding variable interest entities (“VIEs”) that affects our accounting treatment of our existing and future joint ventures. We have variable interests in AUOSP, our joint venture with AUO. To ascertain whether we are required to consolidate this entity, we determine whether it is a VIE and if we are the primary beneficiary in accordance with the accounting guidance. Factors we consider in determining whether we are the VIE’s primary beneficiary include the decision making authority of each partner, which partner manages the day-to-day operations of 34 the joint venture and each partner’s obligation to absorb losses or right to receive benefits from the joint venture in relation to that of the other partner. Changes in the financial accounting guidance, or changes in circumstances at each of these joint ventures, could lead us to determine that we have to consolidate the assets, liabilities and financial results of such joint ventures. The consolidation of AUOSP would significantly increase our indebtedness. Consolidation of our VIEs could have a material adverse impact on our financial position, gross margin and operating results. In addition, we may enter into future joint ventures or make other equity investments, which could have an adverse impact on us because of the financial accounting guidance regarding VIEs. We may not be able to increase or sustain our recent growth rate, and we may not be able to manage our future growth effectively. We may not be able to continue to expand our business or manage future growth. We plan to continue to improve our manufacturing processes and build additional cell manufacturing production over the next five years, which will require successful execution of: • • • • • • expanding our existing manufacturing facilities and developing new manufacturing facilities, which would increase our fixed costs and, if such facilities are underutilized, would negatively impact our results of operations; ensuring delivery of adequate polysilicon and ingots; enhancing our customer resource management and manufacturing management systems; implementing and improving additional and existing administrative, financial and operations systems, procedures and controls, including the need to centralize, update and integrate our global financial internal control; hiring additional employees; expanding and upgrading our technological capabilities; • managing multiple relationships with our customers, suppliers and other third parties; • maintaining adequate liquidity and financial resources; and • continuing to increase our revenues from operations. Improving our manufacturing processes, expanding our manufacturing facilities or developing new facilities may be delayed by difficulties such as unavailability of equipment or supplies or equipment malfunction. Ensuring delivery of adequate polysilicon and ingots is subject to many market risks including scarcity, significant price fluctuations and competition. Maintaining adequate liquidity is dependent upon a variety of factors including continued revenues from operations, working capital improvements, and compliance with our indentures and credit agreements. If we are unsuccessful in any of these areas, we may not be able to achieve our growth strategy and increase production capacity as planned during the foreseeable future. In addition, we need to manage our organizational growth, including rationalizing reporting structures, support teams, and enabling efficient decision making. For example, the administration of the residential lease program requires processes and systems to support this business model. If we are not successful or if we delay our continuing implementation of such systems and processes, we may adversely affect the anticipated volumes in our residential lease business. If we are unable to manage our growth effectively, we may not be able to take advantage of market opportunities, develop new solar cells and other products, satisfy customer requirements, execute our business plan, or respond to competitive pressures. Fluctuations in the demand for our products may cause impairment of our project assets and other long-lived assets or cause us to write off equipment or inventory, and each of these events would adversely affect our financial results. We have tangible project assets on our Consolidated Balance Sheets related to capitalized costs incurred in connection with the development of solar power systems. Project assets consist primarily of capitalized costs relating to solar power system projects in various stages of development that we incur prior to the sale of the solar power system to a third party. These costs include costs for land and costs for developing and constructing a solar power system. These project assets could become impaired if there are changes in the fair value of these capitalized costs. If these project assets become impaired, we may write-off some or all of the capitalized project assets, which would have an adverse impact on our financial results in the period in which the loss is recognized. In addition, if the demand for our solar products decreases, our manufacturing capacity could be underutilized, and we may be required to record an impairment of our long-lived assets, including facilities and equipment, which would increase our expenses. In improving our manufacturing processes consistent with our cost reduction roadmap, we could write off equipment 35 that is removed from the manufacturing process. In addition, if product demand decreases or we fail to forecast demand accurately, we could be required to write off inventory or record excess capacity charges, which would have a negative impact on our gross margin. Factory-planning decisions may shorten the useful lives of long-lived assets, including facilities and equipment, and cause us to accelerate depreciation. Each of the above events would adversely affect our future financial results. Fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates and interest rates could adversely affect our business and results of operations. We have significant sales globally, and we are exposed to movements in foreign exchange rates, primarily related to sales to European customers that are denominated in Euros and South African customers that are denominated in South African Rand. A depreciation of the Euro or Rand would adversely affect our margins on sales to European customers. When foreign currencies appreciate against the U.S. dollar, inventories and expenses denominated in foreign currencies become more expensive. An increase in the value of the U.S. dollar relative to foreign currencies could make our solar power products more expensive for international customers, thus potentially leading to a reduction in demand, our sales and profitability. As a result, substantial unfavorable changes in foreign currency exchange rates could have a substantial adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. Although we seek to reduce our currency exposure by engaging in hedging transactions where we deem it appropriate, we do not know whether our efforts will be successful. Because we hedge some of our expected future foreign exchange exposure, if associated revenues do not materialize, we could experience losses. In the past, we have experienced an adverse impact on our revenue, gross margin, cash position and profitability as a result of foreign currency fluctuations. In addition, any break-up of the Eurozone would disrupt our sales and supply chain, expose us to financial counterparty risk, and materially and adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition. We are exposed to interest rate risk because many of our customers depend on debt financing to purchase our solar power systems. An increase in interest rates could make it difficult for our customers to obtain the financing necessary to purchase our solar power systems on favorable terms, or at all, and thus lower demand for our solar power products, reduce revenue and adversely affect our operating results. An increase in interest rates could lower a customer’s return on investment in a system or make alternative investments more attractive relative to solar power systems, which, in each case, could cause our customers to seek alternative investments that promise higher returns or demand higher returns from our solar power systems, which could reduce our revenue and gross margin and adversely affect our operating results. Our interest expense would increase to the extent interest rates rise in connection with our variable interest rate borrowings. Conversely, lower interest rates have an adverse impact on our interest income. See also “Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk” and “Risks Related to Our Sales Channels-The execution of our growth strategy is dependent upon the continued availability of third-party financing arrangements for our solar power plants, our residential lease program and our customers, and is affected by general economic conditions.” We depend on third-party contract manufacturers to assemble a portion of our solar cells into solar panels and any failure to obtain sufficient assembly and test capacity could significantly delay our ability to ship our solar panels and damage our customer relationships. We outsource a portion of module manufacturing to contract manufacturers in the United States and China. As a result of outsourcing this final step in our production, we face several significant risks, including limited control over assembly and testing capacity, delivery schedules, quality assurance, manufacturing yields and production costs. If the operations of our third- party contract manufacturers were disrupted or their financial stability impaired, or if they were unable or unwilling to devote capacity to our solar panels in a timely manner, our business could suffer as we might be unable to produce finished solar panels on a timely basis. We also risk customer delays resulting from an inability to move module production to an alternate provider or to complete production internationally, and it may not be possible to obtain sufficient capacity or comparable production costs at another facility in a timely manner. In addition, migrating our design methodology to third-party contract manufacturers or to a captive panel assembly facility could involve increased costs, resources and development time, and utilizing additional third-party contract manufacturers could expose us to further risk of losing control over our intellectual property and the quality of our solar panels. Any reduction in the supply of solar panels could impair our revenue by significantly delaying our ability to ship products and potentially damage our relationships with new and existing customers, any of which could have a material and adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operation. 36 While we believe we currently have effective internal control over financial reporting, we may identify a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting that could cause investors to lose confidence in the reliability of our financial statements and result in a decrease in the value of our common stock. Our management is responsible for maintaining internal control over financial reporting designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of consolidated financial statements for external purposes in accordance with U.S. GAAP. Management concluded that as of the end of each of fiscal 2015, 2014, and 2013, our internal control over financial reporting and our disclosure controls and procedures were effective. We need to continuously maintain our internal control processes and systems and adapt them as our business grows and changes. This process is expensive, time-consuming, and requires significant management attention. We cannot be certain that our internal control measures will continue to provide adequate control over our financial processes and reporting and ensure compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Furthermore, as we grow our business or acquire other businesses, our internal controls may become more complex and we may require significantly more resources to ensure they remain effective. Failure to implement required new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation, either in our existing business or in businesses that we may acquire, could harm our operating results or cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. If we or our independent registered public accounting firm identify material weaknesses in our internal controls, the disclosure of that fact, even if quickly remedied, may cause investors to lose confidence in our financial statements and the trading price of our common stock may decline. Remediation of a material weakness could require us to incur significant expense and if we fail to remedy any material weakness, our financial statements may be inaccurate, our ability to report our financial results on a timely and accurate basis may be adversely affected, our access to the capital markets may be restricted, the trading price of our common stock may decline, and we may be subject to sanctions or investigation by regulatory authorities, including the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) or The NASDAQ Global Select Market. We may also be required to restate our financial statements from prior periods. Our agreements with Cypress Semiconductor Corporation (“Cypress”) require us to indemnify Cypress for certain tax liabilities. These indemnification obligations and related contractual restrictions may limit our ability to pursue certain business initiatives. On October 6, 2005, while a subsidiary of Cypress, our former parent company, we entered into a tax sharing agreement with Cypress providing for each party’s obligations concerning various tax liabilities. The tax sharing agreement is structured such that Cypress would pay all federal, state, local and foreign taxes that are calculated on a consolidated or combined basis while we were a member of Cypress’s consolidated or combined group for federal, state, local and foreign tax purposes. Our portion of tax liabilities or benefits was determined based upon our separate return tax liability as defined under the tax sharing agreement. These tax liabilities or benefits were based on a pro forma calculation as if we were filing a separate income tax return in each jurisdiction, rather than on a combined or consolidated basis, subject to adjustments as set forth in the tax sharing agreement. On June 6, 2006, we ceased to be a member of Cypress’s consolidated group for federal income tax purposes and certain state income tax purposes. On September 29, 2008, we ceased to be a member of Cypress’s combined group for all state income tax purposes. To the extent that we become entitled to utilize our separate portion of any tax credit or loss carryforwards existing as of such date, we will distribute to Cypress the tax effect, estimated to be 40% for federal and state income tax purposes, of the amount of such tax loss carryforwards so utilized, and the amount of any credit carryforwards so utilized. We will distribute these amounts to Cypress in cash or in our shares, at Cypress’s option. During fiscal 2015, we recorded an estimated liability to Cypress of $3.5 million. As of January 3, 2016, we believe there is no future liability. We are jointly and severally liable for any tax liability during all periods in which we were deemed to be a member of the Cypress consolidated or combined group. Accordingly, although the tax sharing agreement allocates tax liabilities between Cypress and all its consolidated subsidiaries, for any period in which we were included in Cypress’s consolidated or combined group, we could be liable in the event that any federal or state tax liability was incurred, but not discharged, by any other member of the group. We will continue to be jointly and severally liable to Cypress until the statute of limitations runs or all appeal options are exercised for all years in which we joined in the filing of tax returns with Cypress. If Cypress experiences adjustments to their tax liability pursuant to tax examinations, we may incur an incremental liability. 37 We would also be liable to Cypress for taxes that might arise from the distribution by Cypress of our former class B common stock to Cypress’s stockholders on September 29, 2008, or “spin-off.” In connection with Cypress’s spin-off of our former class B common stock, we and Cypress, on August 12, 2008, entered into an amendment to our tax sharing agreement (“Amended Tax Sharing Agreement”) to address certain transactions that may affect the tax treatment of the spin-off and certain other matters. Subject to certain caveats, Cypress obtained a ruling from the IRS to the effect that the distribution by Cypress of our former class B common stock to Cypress’s stockholders qualified as a tax-free distribution under Section 355 of the Code. Despite such ruling, the distribution may nonetheless be taxable to Cypress under Section 355(e) of the Code if 50% or more of the voting power or value of our stock was or is later acquired as part of a plan or series of related transactions that included the distribution of our stock. The Amended Tax Sharing Agreement requires us to indemnify Cypress for any liability incurred as a result of issuances or dispositions of our stock after the distribution, other than liability attributable to certain dispositions of our stock by Cypress, that cause Cypress’s distribution of shares of our stock to its stockholders to be taxable to Cypress under Section 355(e) of the Code. Under the Amended Tax Sharing Agreement, we also agreed that, until October 29, 2010, we would not effect a conversion of any or all of our former class B common stock to former class A common stock or any similar recapitalization transaction or series of related transactions. On November 16, 2011, we reclassified our former class A common stock and class B common stock into a single class of common stock. In the event this reclassification does result in the spin-off being treated as taxable, we could face substantial liabilities as a result of our obligations under the Amended Tax Sharing Agreement. Our affiliation with Total S.A. requires us to join in certain tax filings with Total S.A. The allocation of tax liabilities between us and Total S.A., and any future agreements with Total S.A. regarding tax indemnification and certain tax liabilities may adversely affect our financial position. Until recently, we have not joined in tax filings on a consolidated, combined or unitary basis with Total S.A., and no formal tax sharing agreement is currently in place. However, we have recently determined that, with respect to fiscal year 2015, we are unitary with Total S.A. in certain U.S. states for income tax filing purposes. We continue to calculate our income tax liabilities on a separate company basis as informally agreed with Total S.A. although we will file our tax returns on a unitary basis with Total S.A. as required under applicable legal requirements in such states. In addition, we may in the future become required to join in other tax filings with Total S.A. on a consolidated, combined, or unitary basis in other jurisdictions. We seek to enter into a formal tax sharing agreement with Total S.A., which would allocate the tax liabilities among the parties, but no such agreement is currently in place. The current arrangement with Total S.A. and the entry into any future agreement with Total S.A. may result in less favorable allocation of certain liabilities than we experienced before becoming subject to unitary filing requirements, and may adversely affect our financial position. Our ability to use our net operating loss and credit carryforwards to offset future taxable income may be subject to certain limitations. As of January 3, 2016, we estimate that we have available to offset future taxable income approximately $58.2 million of federal and $112.9 million of California state operating loss carry-forwards, which expire at various dates from 2031 to 2033, federal credit carryforwards of approximately $49.8 million, which expire at various dates from 2018 to 2035, and $0.8 million of California state credit carryforwards that do not expire. The foregoing figures are net of significant amounts of net operating loss carryforwards and credit carryforwards applied or expected to be applied to offset taxable income in fiscal 2015. Our ability to utilize our net operating loss and credit carryforwards is dependent upon our ability to generate taxable income in future periods and may be limited due to restrictions imposed on utilization of net operating loss and credit carryforwards under federal and state laws upon a change in ownership, such as the transaction with Cypress. Section 382 of the Code imposes restrictions on the use of a corporation’s net operating losses, as well as certain recognized built-in losses and other carryforwards, after an “ownership change” occurs. A Section 382 “ownership change” occurs if one or more stockholders or groups of stockholders who own at least 5% of our stock increase their ownership by more than 50 percentage points over their lowest ownership percentage within the prior three-year period (calculated on a rolling basis). The issuance of common stock upon a conversion of our outstanding convertible notes debentures, and/or other issuances or sales of our stock (including certain transactions involving our stock that are outside of our control) could result in (or could have resulted in) an ownership change under Section 382. If an “ownership change” occurs, Section 382 would impose an annual limit on the amount of pre-change net operating losses and other losses we can use to reduce our taxable income generally equal to the product 38 of the total value of our outstanding equity immediately prior to the “ownership change” and the applicable federal long-term tax- exempt interest rate for the month of the “ownership change” (subject to certain adjustments). The applicable rate for ownership changes occurring in the month of February 2016 is 2.65%. Because U.S. federal net operating losses generally may be carried forward for up to 20 years, the annual limitation may effectively provide a cap on the cumulative amount of pre-ownership change losses, including certain recognized built-in losses that may be utilized. Such pre-ownership change losses in excess of the cap may be lost. In addition, if an ownership change were to occur, it is possible that the limitations imposed on our ability to use pre-ownership change losses and certain recognized built- in losses could cause a net increase in our U.S. federal income tax liability and require U.S. federal income taxes to be paid earlier than otherwise would be paid if such limitations were not in effect. Further, if for financial reporting purposes the amount or value of these deferred tax assets is reduced, such reduction would have a negative impact on the book value of our common stock. Our headquarters and manufacturing facilities, as well as the facilities of certain subcontractors and suppliers, are located in regions that are subject to earthquakes, floods, and other natural disasters, and climate change and climate change regulation could have an adverse effect on our operations. Our headquarters and research and development operations are located in California, and our manufacturing facilities are located in the Philippines, France, South Africa, and Mexico. The facilities of our joint venture for manufacturing are located in Malaysia. Any significant earthquake, flood, or other natural disaster in these countries or countries where our suppliers are located could materially disrupt our management operations and/or our production capabilities, and could result in our experiencing a significant delay in delivery, or substantial shortage, of our products and services. In addition, legislators, regulators, and non-governmental organizations, as well as companies in many business sectors, are considering ways to reduce green-house gas emissions. Further regulation could be forthcoming at the federal or state level with respect to green-house gas emissions. Such regulation or similar regulations in other countries could result in regulatory or product standard requirements for our global business, including our manufacturing operations. Furthermore, the potential physical impacts of climate change on our operations may include changes in weather patterns (including floods, tsunamis, drought and rainfall levels), water availability, storm patterns and intensities, and temperature levels. These potential physical effects may adversely affect the cost, production, sales and financial performance of our operations. We could be adversely affected by any violations of the FCPA and foreign anti-bribery laws. The FCPA generally prohibits companies and their intermediaries from making improper payments to non-U.S. government officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. Other countries in which we operate also have anti-bribery laws, some of which prohibit improper payments to government and non-government persons and entities. Our policies mandate compliance with these anti-bribery laws. We continue to acquire businesses outside of the United States and operate in many parts of the world that have experienced governmental corruption to some degree and, in certain circumstances, strict compliance with anti-bribery laws may conflict with local customs and practices. In addition, due to the level of regulation in our industry, our entry into new jurisdictions through internal growth or acquisitions requires substantial government contact where norms can differ from U.S. standards. While we implement policies and procedures and conduct training designed to facilitate compliance with these anti-bribery laws, thereby mitigating the risk of violations of such laws, our employees, subcontractors and agents may take actions in violation of our policies and anti-bribery laws. Any such violation, even if prohibited by our policies, could subject us to criminal or civil penalties or other sanctions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, cash flows and reputation. We sell our solar products to agencies of the U.S. government, and as a result, we are subject to a number of procurement rules and regulations, and our business could be adversely affected by an audit by the U.S. government if it were to identify errors or a failure to comply with regulations. We have sold and continue to sell our solar power systems to various U.S. government agencies. In connection with these contracts, we must comply with and are affected by laws and regulations relating to the award, administration, and performance of U.S. government contracts, which may impose added costs on our business. We are expected to perform in compliance with a vast array of federal laws and regulations, including, without limitation, the Federal Acquisition Regulation, the Truth in Negotiations Act, the Federal False Claims Act, the Anti-Kickback Act of 1986, the Trade Agreements Act, the Buy American Act, the Procurement Integrity Act, and the Davis Bacon Act. A violation of specific laws and regulations, even if prohibited by our policies, could result in the imposition of fines and penalties, reductions of the value of our contracts, contract modifications or termination, or suspension or debarment from government contracting for a period of time. 39 In some instances, these laws and regulations impose terms or rights that are more favorable to the government than those typically available to commercial parties in negotiated transactions. For example, the U.S. government may terminate any of our government contracts either at its convenience or for default based on performance. A termination arising out of our default may expose us to liability and have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete for future contracts. U.S. government agencies may audit and investigate government contractors. These agencies review a contractor’s performance under its contracts, cost structure, and compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and standards. If an audit or investigation uncovers improper or illegal activities, we may be subject to civil or criminal penalties and administrative sanctions, including termination of contracts, forfeiture of profits, suspension of payments, fines, and suspension or prohibition from doing business with the U.S. government. In addition, we could suffer reputational harm if allegations of impropriety were made against us. Compliance with environmental regulations can be expensive, and noncompliance with these regulations may result in adverse publicity and potentially significant monetary damages and fines. We are required to comply with all foreign, U.S. federal, state and local laws and regulations regarding pollution control and protection of the environment. In addition, under some statutes and regulations, a government agency, or other parties, may seek recovery and response costs from owners or operators of property where releases of hazardous substances have occurred or are ongoing, even if the owner or operator was not responsible for such release or otherwise at fault. We use, generate and discharge toxic, volatile and otherwise hazardous chemicals and wastes in our research and development and manufacturing activities. Any failure by us to control the use of, or to restrict adequately the discharge of, hazardous substances could subject us to, among other matters, potentially significant monetary damages and fines or liabilities or suspensions in our business operations. In addition, if more stringent laws and regulations are adopted in the future, the costs of compliance with these new laws and regulations could be substantial. If we fail to comply with present or future environmental laws and regulations, we may be required to pay substantial fines, suspend production or cease operations, or be subjected to other sanctions. In addition, U.S. legislation includes disclosure requirements regarding the use of “conflict” minerals mined from the Democratic Republic of Congo and adjoining countries and procedures regarding a manufacturer’s efforts to prevent the sourcing of such “conflict” minerals. We have incurred and will incur additional costs to comply with the disclosure requirements, including costs related to determining the source of any of the relevant minerals and metals used in our products. The implementation of these requirements could affect the sourcing and availability of minerals used in the manufacture of solar products. As a result, there may only be a limited pool of suppliers who provide conflict free minerals, and we cannot be certain that we will be able to obtain products in sufficient quantities or at competitive prices. Since our supply chain is complex, we have not been able to sufficiently verify, and in the future we may not be able to sufficiently verify, the origins for these conflict minerals used in our products. As a result, we may face reputational challenges with our customers and other stakeholders if we are unable to sufficiently verify the origins for all minerals used in our products. Our success depends on the continuing contributions of our key personnel. We rely heavily on the services of our key executive officers and the loss of services of any principal member of our management team could adversely affect our operations. In addition, we anticipate that we will need to hire a number of highly skilled technical, manufacturing, sales, marketing, administrative and accounting personnel. In recent years, we have conducted several restructurings, which may negatively affect our ability to execute our strategy and business model. The competition for qualified personnel is intense in our industry. We may not be successful in attracting and retaining sufficient numbers of qualified personnel to support our anticipated growth. We cannot guarantee that any employee will remain employed with us for any definite period of time since all of our employees, including our key executive officers, serve at-will and may terminate their employment at any time for any reason. Our insurance for certain indemnity obligations we have to our officers and directors may be inadequate, and potential claims could materially and negatively impact our financial condition and results of operations. Pursuant to our certificate of incorporation, by-laws, and certain indemnification agreements, we indemnify our officers and directors for certain liabilities that may arise in the course of their service to us. Although we currently maintain directors and officers liability insurance for certain potential third-party claims for which we are legally or financially unable to indemnify them, such insurance may be inadequate to cover certain claims. In addition, in previous years, we have primarily self-insured with respect to potential third-party claims. If we were required to pay a significant amount on account of these liabilities for which we self-insured, our business, financial condition, and results of operations could be materially harmed. 40 Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property We depend on our intellectual property, and we may face intellectual property infringement claims that could be time- consuming and costly to defend and could result in the loss of significant rights. From time to time, we, our respective customers, or third parties with whom we work may receive letters, including letters from other third parties, and may become subject to lawsuits with such third parties alleging infringement of their patents. Additionally, we are required by contract to indemnify some of our customers and our third-party intellectual property providers for certain costs and damages of patent infringement in circumstances where our products are a factor creating the customer’s or these third-party providers’ infringement liability. This practice may subject us to significant indemnification claims by our customers and our third-party providers. We cannot assure investors that indemnification claims will not be made or that these claims will not harm our business, operating results or financial condition. Intellectual property litigation is very expensive and time-consuming and could divert management’s attention from our business and could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results or financial condition. If there is a successful claim of infringement against us, our customers or our third-party intellectual property providers, we may be required to pay substantial damages to the party claiming infringement, stop selling products or using technology that contains the allegedly infringing intellectual property, or enter into royalty or license agreements that may not be available on acceptable terms, if at all. Parties making infringement claims may also be able to bring an action before the International Trade Commission that could result in an order stopping the importation into the United States of our solar products. Any of these judgments could materially damage our business. We may have to develop non-infringing technology, and our failure in doing so or in obtaining licenses to the proprietary rights on a timely basis could have a material adverse effect on our business. We have filed, and may continue to file, claims against other parties for infringing our intellectual property that may be very costly and may not be resolved in our favor. To protect our intellectual property rights and to maintain our competitive advantage, we have filed, and may continue to file, suits against parties who we believe infringe our intellectual property. Intellectual property litigation is expensive and time consuming, could divert management’s attention from our business, and could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results, or financial condition, and our enforcement efforts may not be successful. In addition, the validity of our patents may be challenged in such litigation. Our participation in intellectual property enforcement actions may negatively impact our financial results. We rely substantially upon trade secret laws and contractual restrictions to protect our proprietary rights, and, if these rights are not sufficiently protected, our ability to compete and generate revenue could suffer. We seek to protect our proprietary manufacturing processes, documentation, and other written materials primarily under trade secret and copyright laws. We also typically require employees, consultants, and third parties, such as our vendors and customers, with access to our proprietary information to execute confidentiality agreements. The steps we take to protect our proprietary information may not be adequate to prevent misappropriation of our technology. Our systems may be subject to intrusions, security breaches, or targeted theft of our trade secrets. In addition, our proprietary rights may not be adequately protected because: • • • • others may not be deterred from misappropriating our technologies despite the existence of laws or contracts prohibiting such misappropriation; policing unauthorized use of our intellectual property may be difficult, expensive, and time-consuming, the remedy obtained may be inadequate to restore protection of our intellectual property, and moreover, we may be unable to determine the extent of any unauthorized use; the laws of other countries in which we market our solar products, such as some countries in the Asia/Pacific region, may offer little or no protection for our proprietary technologies; and reports we file in connection with government-sponsored research contracts are generally available to the public and third parties may obtain some aspects of our sensitive confidential information. Reverse engineering, unauthorized copying, or other misappropriation of our proprietary technologies could enable third parties to benefit from our technologies without compensating us for doing so. Our joint ventures or our partners may not be deterred from misappropriating our proprietary technologies despite contractual and other legal restrictions. Legal protection in countries 41 where our joint ventures are located may not be robust and enforcement by us of our intellectual property rights may be difficult. As a result, our joint ventures or our partners could directly compete with our business. Any such activities or any other inabilities to adequately protect our proprietary rights could harm our ability to compete, to generate revenue, and to grow our business. We may not obtain sufficient patent protection on the technology embodied in the solar products we currently manufacture and market, which could harm our competitive position and increase our expenses. Although we substantially rely on trade secret laws and contractual restrictions to protect the technology in the solar products we currently manufacture and market, our success and ability to compete in the future may also depend to a significant degree upon obtaining patent protection for our proprietary technology. We currently own multiple patents and patent applications which cover aspects of the technology in the solar cells and mounting systems that we currently manufacture and market. Material patents that relate to our systems products and services primarily relate to our rooftop mounting products and ground-mounted tracking products. We intend to continue to seek patent protection for those aspects of our technology, designs, and methodologies and processes that we believe provide significant competitive advantages. Our patent applications may not result in issued patents, and even if they result in issued patents, the patents may not have claims of the scope we seek or we may have to refile patent applications due to newly discovered prior art. In addition, any issued patents may be challenged, invalidated, or declared unenforceable, or even if we obtain an award of damages for infringement by a third party, such award could prove insufficient to compensate for all damages incurred as a result of such infringement. The term of any issued patent is generally 20 years from its earliest filing date and if our applications are pending for a long time period, we may have a correspondingly shorter term for any patent that may issue. Our present and future patents may provide only limited protection for our technology and may be insufficient to provide competitive advantages to us. For example, competitors could develop similar or more advantageous technologies on their own or design around our patents. Also, patent protection in certain foreign countries may not be available or may be limited in scope and any patents obtained may not be readily enforceable because of insufficient judicial effectiveness, making it difficult for us to aggressively protect our intellectual property from misuse or infringement by other companies in these countries. Our inability to obtain and enforce our intellectual property rights in some countries may harm our business. In addition, given the costs of obtaining patent protection, we may choose not to protect certain innovations that later turn out to be important. We may not be able to prevent others from using the term SunPower or similar terms, or other trademarks which we hold, in connection with their solar power products which could adversely affect the market recognition of our name and our revenue. “SunPower” and the SunPower logo are our registered trademarks in certain countries, including the United States, for uses that include solar cells and solar panels. We are seeking registration of these trademarks in other countries, but we may not be successful in some of these jurisdictions. We hold registered trademarks for SunPower®, the SunPower logo, Maxeon®, Oasis®, EnergyLink™, InvisiMount®, Helix™, Smarter Solar®, Solar Showdown®, and many more marks, in certain countries, including the United States. We have not registered, and may not be able to register, these trademarks in other key countries. In the foreign jurisdictions where we are unable to obtain or have not tried to obtain registrations, others may be able to sell their products using trademarks compromising or incorporating “SunPower,” or a variation thereof, or our other chosen brands, which could lead to customer confusion. In addition, if there are jurisdictions where another proprietor has already established trademark rights in marks containing “SunPower,” or our other chosen brands, we may face trademark disputes and may have to market our products with other trademarks or without our trademarks, which may undermine our marketing efforts. We may encounter trademark disputes with companies using marks which are confusingly similar to the SunPower mark, or our other marks, which if not resolved favorably, could cause our branding efforts to suffer. In addition, we may have difficulty in establishing strong brand recognition with consumers if others use similar marks for similar products. Our past and possible future reliance on government programs to partially fund our research and development programs could impair our ability to commercialize our solar power products and services. Government funding of some of our research and development efforts imposed certain restrictions on our ability to commercialize results and could grant commercialization rights to the government. In some funding awards, the government is entitled to intellectual property rights arising from the related research. Such rights include a nonexclusive, nontransferable, irrevocable, paid-up license to practice or have practiced each subject invention developed under an award throughout the world by or on behalf of the government. Other rights include the right to require us to grant a license to the developed technology or products to a third party or, in some cases, if we refuse, the government may grant the license itself, if the government determines that action is 42 necessary because we fail to achieve practical application of the technology, because action is necessary to alleviate health or safety needs, to meet requirements of federal regulations, or to give the United States industry preference. Accepting government funding can also require that manufacturing of products developed with federal funding be conducted in the United States. We may be subject to information technology system failures or network disruptions that could damage our business operations, financial conditions, or reputation. We may be subject to information technology system failures and network disruptions. These may be caused by natural disasters, accidents, power disruptions, telecommunications failures, acts of terrorism or war, computer viruses, physical or electronic break-ins, or similar events or disruptions. System redundancy may be ineffective or inadequate, and our disaster recovery planning may not be sufficient for all eventualities. Such failures or disruptions could result in delayed or canceled orders. System failures and disruptions could also impede the manufacturing and shipping of products, delivery of online services, transactions processing, and financial reporting. We may be subject to breaches of our information technology systems, which could lead to disclosure of our internal information, damage our reputation or relationships with dealers and customers, and disrupt access to our online services. Such breaches could subject us to significant reputational, financial, legal, and operational consequences. Our business requires us to use and store customer, employee, and business partner personally identifiable information (“PII”). This may include names, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, contact preferences, tax identification numbers, and payment account information. Malicious attacks to gain access to PII affect many companies across various industries, including ours. We use encryption and authentication technologies to secure the transmission and storage of data. These security measures may be compromised as a result of third-party security breaches, employee error, malfeasance, faulty password management, or other irregularity, and result in persons obtaining unauthorized access to our data. Third parties may attempt to fraudulently induce employees or customers into disclosing passwords or other sensitive information, which may in turn be used to access our information technology systems. We devote resources to network security, data encryption, and other security measures to protect our systems and data, but these security measures cannot provide absolute security. Because the techniques used to obtain unauthorized access, disable or degrade service, or sabotage systems change frequently and may be difficult to detect for long periods of time, we may be unable to anticipate these techniques or implement adequate preventative measures and as a result, we may experience a breach of our systems and may be unable to protect sensitive data. In addition, hardware, software, or applications we develop or procure from third parties may contain defects in design or manufacture or other problems that could unexpectedly compromise information security. Unauthorized parties may also attempt to gain access to our systems or facilities through fraud, trickery or other forms of deceiving our team members, contractors and temporary staff. If we experience a significant data security breach or fail to detect and appropriately respond to a significant data security breach, we could be exposed to a risk of loss, litigation and possible liability, or government enforcement actions, any of which could detrimentally affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition. PII may also be shared with contractors and third-party providers to conduct our business. Although such contractors and third-party providers typically implement encryption and authentication technologies to secure the transmission and storage of data, those third-party providers may experience a significant data security breach of the shared PII. See also “Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property - We rely substantially upon trade secret laws and contractual restrictions to protect our proprietary rights, and, if these rights are not sufficiently protected, our ability to compete and generate revenue could suffer.” Our business is subject to a variety of U.S. and international laws, rules, policies, and other obligations regarding privacy, data protection, and other matters. We are subject to federal, state and international laws relating to the collection, use, retention, security, and transfer of PII. In many cases, these laws apply not only to third-party transactions, but also to transfers of information between one company and its subsidiaries, and among the subsidiaries and other parties with which we have commercial relations. The introduction of new products or expansion of our activities in certain jurisdictions may subject us to additional laws and regulations. In addition, foreign data protection, privacy, and other laws and regulations can be more restrictive than those in the United States. These U.S. federal and state and foreign laws and regulations, which can be enforced by private parties or government entities, are 43 constantly evolving and can be subject to significant change. In addition, the application and interpretation of these laws and regulations are often uncertain, particularly in the new and rapidly evolving industry in which we operate, and may be interpreted and applied inconsistently from country to country and inconsistently with our current policies and practices. These existing and proposed laws and regulations can be costly to comply with and can delay or impede the development of new products, result in negative publicity, increase our operating costs, require significant management time and attention, and subject us to inquiries or investigations, claims or other remedies, including fines or demands that we modify or cease existing business practices. A failure by us, our suppliers or other parties with whom we do business to comply with a posted privacy policies or with other federal, state or international privacy-related or data protection laws and regulations could result in proceedings against us by governmental entities or others, which could have a detrimental effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition. Risks Related to Our Debt and Equity Securities Our debentures are effectively subordinated to our existing and any future secured indebtedness and structurally subordinated to existing and future liabilities and other indebtedness of our current and any future subsidiaries. Our debentures are our general, unsecured obligations and rank equally in right of payment with all of our existing and any future unsubordinated, unsecured indebtedness. As of January 3, 2016, we and our subsidiaries had $1.1 billion in principal amount of senior indebtedness outstanding which was not secured and which ranks pari passu with our debentures. Our debentures are effectively subordinated to our existing and any future secured indebtedness we may have, including for example, our $250.0 million revolving credit facility with Credit Agricole and our $32.5 million in principal amount of outstanding debt owed to International Finance Corporation, to the extent of the value of the assets securing such indebtedness, and structurally subordinated to our existing and any future liabilities and other indebtedness of our subsidiaries. As of January 3, 2016, we and our subsidiaries had $466.4 million in principal amount of senior secured indebtedness outstanding. These liabilities may include indebtedness, trade payables, guarantees, lease obligations, and letter of credit obligations. Our debentures do not restrict us or our current or any future subsidiaries from incurring indebtedness, including senior secured indebtedness, in the future, nor do they limit the amount of indebtedness we can issue that is equal in right of payment. Recent or future regulatory actions may adversely affect the trading price and liquidity of our debentures. We believe that many investors in our debentures employ, or will seek to employ, a convertible arbitrage strategy with respect to our debentures. Investors that employ a convertible arbitrage strategy with respect to convertible debt instruments typically implement that strategy by selling short the common stock underlying the convertible debt instruments and dynamically adjusting their short position while they hold the debt instruments. Investors may also implement this strategy by entering into swaps on the common stock underlying the convertible debt instruments in lieu of or in addition to short selling the common stock. As a result, rules regulating equity swaps or short selling of securities or other governmental action that interferes with the ability of market participants to effect short sales or equity swaps with respect to our common stock could adversely affect the ability of investors in our debentures to conduct the convertible arbitrage strategy that we believe they employ, or will seek to employ, with respect to our debentures. This could, in turn, adversely affect the trading price and liquidity of our debentures. The SEC and other regulatory and self-regulatory authorities have implemented various rules in recent years and may adopt additional rules in the future that may impact those engaging in short selling activity involving equity securities (including our common stock). In particular, Rule 201 of SEC Regulation SHO restricts certain short selling when the price of a “covered security” triggers a “circuit breaker” by falling 10% or more from the security’s closing price as of the end of regular trading hours on the prior day. If this circuit breaker is triggered, short sale orders can be displayed or executed for the remainder of that day and the following day only if the order price is above the then-current national best bid, subject to certain limited exceptions. Because our common stock is a “covered security”, these Rule 201 restrictions, if triggered, may interfere with the ability of investors in our debentures to effect short sales in our common stock and conduct a convertible arbitrage strategy. In addition, during 2012, the SEC approved two proposals submitted by the national securities exchanges and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”) concerning extraordinary market volatility that may impact the ability of investors to effect a convertible arbitrage strategy. One initiative is the “Limit Up-Limit Down” plan, which requires securities exchanges, alternative trading systems, broker-dealers, and other trading centers to establish policies and procedures that prevent the execution of trades or the display of bids or offers outside of specified price bands. If the bid or offer quotations for a security are at the far limit of the price band for more than 15 seconds, trading in that security will be subject to a five-minute trading pause. The Limit Up-Limit Down plan became effective, on a pilot basis, on April 8, 2013 and has been extended several times, most recently through April 22, 2016. 44 The second initiative revised existing national securities exchange and FINRA rules that establish the market-wide circuit breaker system. The market-wide circuit breaker system provides for specified market-wide halts in trading of listed stocks and options for certain periods following specified market declines. The changes lowered the percentage-decline thresholds for triggering a market-wide trading halt and shortened the amount of time that trading is halted. Market declines under the new system are measured based on a decline in the S&P 500 Index compared to the prior day’s closing value rather than a decline in the Dow Jones Industrial Average compared to the prior quarterly closing value. The changes to the market-wide circuit breaker system became effective, on a pilot basis, on April 8, 2013 and have been extended so that the system will continue in effect so long as the Limit Up-Limit Down plan is effective, currently until April 22, 2016. The potential restrictions on trading imposed by the Limit Up-Limit Down plan and the market-wide circuit breaker system may interfere with the ability of investors in our debentures to effect short sales in our common stock and conduct a convertible arbitrage strategy. The enactment of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) on July 21, 2010 also introduced regulatory changes that may impact trading activities relevant to our debentures. As a result of this legislation and implementing rules, certain interest rate swaps and credit default swaps are currently required to be cleared through regulated clearinghouses. Certain other swaps (regulated by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the “CFTC”) and security-based swaps (regulated by the SEC) are likely going to be required to be cleared through regulated clearinghouses in the future. In addition, certain swaps and security-based swaps will be required to be traded on exchanges or comparable trading facilities. Furthermore, swap dealers, security-based swap dealers, major swap participants and major security-based swap participants will be required to comply with margin and capital requirements, the indirect cost of which will likely be borne by market participants. Market participants will also be subject to certain direct margin requirements. In addition, certain market participants are required to comply with public reporting requirements to provide transaction and pricing data on both cleared and uncleared swaps. Public reporting requirements will also apply with respect to security-based swaps in the future. These requirements could adversely affect the ability of investors in our debentures to maintain a convertible arbitrage strategy with respect to our debentures (including increasing the costs incurred by such investors in implementing such strategy). This could, in turn, adversely affect the trading price and liquidity of our debentures. Although some of the implementing rules have been adopted and are currently effective, we cannot predict how the SEC, CFTC, and other regulators will ultimately implement the legislation or the magnitude of the effect that this legislation will have on the trading price or liquidity of our debentures. Although the direction and magnitude of the effect that the amendments to Regulation SHO, FINRA and securities exchange rule changes, and/or implementation of the Dodd-Frank Act may have on the trading price and the liquidity of our debentures will depend on a variety of factors, many of which cannot be determined at this time, past regulatory actions have had a significant impact on the trading prices and liquidity of convertible debentures. For example, between July 2008 and September 2008, the SEC issued a series of emergency orders placing restrictions on the short sale of the common stock of certain financial services companies. The orders made the convertible arbitrage strategy that many holders of convertible debentures employ difficult to execute and adversely affected both the liquidity and trading price of convertible debentures issued by many of the financial services companies subject to the prohibition. Any governmental action that similarly restricts the ability of investors in our debentures to effect short sales of our common stock, including the amendments to Regulation SHO, FINRA and exchange rule changes, and the implementation of the Dodd-Frank Act, could similarly adversely affect the trading price and the liquidity of our debentures. Total’s majority ownership of our common stock may adversely affect the liquidity and value of our common stock. As of January 3, 2016, Total owned approximately 57% of our outstanding common stock. Pursuant to the Affiliation Agreement between us and Total, the Board of Directors of SunPower includes five designees from Total, giving Total majority control of our Board. As a result, subject to the restrictions in the Affiliation Agreement, Total possesses significant influence and control over our affairs. Our non-Total stockholders have reduced ownership and voting interest in our company and, as a result, have less influence over the management and policies of our company than they exercised prior to Total’s tender offer. As long as Total controls us, the ability of our other stockholders to influence matters requiring stockholder approval is limited. Total’s stock ownership and relationships with members of our Board of Directors could have the effect of preventing minority stockholders from exercising significant control over our affairs, delaying or preventing a future change in control, impeding a merger, consolidation, takeover, or other business combination or discouraging a potential acquirer from making a tender offer or otherwise attempting to obtain control of us, limiting our financing options. These factors in turn could adversely affect the market price of our common stock or prevent our stockholders from realizing a premium over the market price of our common stock. The Affiliation Agreement limits Total and any member of the Total affiliated companies (“Total Group”) from effecting, seeking, or entering into discussions with any third party regarding any transaction that would result in the Total Group beneficially owning our shares in excess of certain thresholds during a standstill period. The Affiliation Agreement also imposes certain limitations on the Total Group’s ability to seek to affect a tender offer or merger to acquire 100% of our outstanding voting power. Such 45 provisions may not be successful in preventing the Total Group from engaging in transactions which further increase their ownership and negatively impact the price of our common stock. See also “Risks Related to Our Liquidity - We may be unable to generate sufficient cash flows or obtain access to external financing necessary to fund our operations and make adequate capital investments as planned due to the general economic environment and the continued market pressure driving down the average selling prices of our solar power products, among other factors.” Finally, the market for our common stock has become less liquid and more thinly traded as a result of the Total tender offer. The lower number of shares available to be traded could result in greater volatility in the price of our common stock and affect our ability to raise capital on favorable terms in the capital markets. Conversion of our outstanding 0.75% debentures, 0.875% debentures, 4.00% debentures, and future substantial issuances or dispositions of our common stock or other securities, could dilute ownership and earnings per share or cause the market price of our stock to decrease. The conversion of some or all of our outstanding 0.75%, 0.875%, or 4.00% debentures into shares of our common stock will dilute the ownership interests of existing stockholders, including holders who had previously converted their debentures. Any sales in the public market of the common stock issuable upon such conversion could adversely affect prevailing market prices of our common stock. Sales of our common stock in the public market or sales of any of our other securities could dilute ownership and earnings per share, and even the perception that such sales could occur could cause the market prices of our common stock to decline. In addition, the existence of our outstanding debentures may encourage short selling of our common stock by market participants who expect that the conversion of the debentures could depress the prices of our common stock. Future sales of our common stock in the public market could lower the market price for our common stock and adversely impact the trading price of our debentures. In the future, we may sell additional shares of our common stock to raise capital. We cannot predict the size of future issuances or the effect, if any, that they may have on the market price for our common stock. In addition, a substantial number of shares of our common stock is reserved for issuance upon the exercise of stock options, restricted stock awards, restricted stock units, warrants, and upon conversion of the debentures and our outstanding 0.75%, 0.875%, and 4.00% debentures. The issuance and sale of substantial amounts of common stock, or the perception that such issuances and sales may occur, could adversely affect the trading price of our debentures and the market price of our common stock and impair our ability to raise capital through the sale of additional equity or equity-linked securities. The price of our common stock, and therefore of our outstanding 0.75%, 0.875%, and 4.00% debentures, may fluctuate significantly. Our common stock has experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations. The trading price of our common stock could be subject to further wide fluctuations due to many factors, including the factors discussed in this risk factors section. In addition, the stock market in general, and The NASDAQ Global Select Market and the securities of technology companies and solar companies in particular, have experienced severe price and volume fluctuations. These trading prices and valuations, including our own market valuation and those of companies in our industry generally, may not be sustainable. These broad market and industry factors may decrease the market price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance. Because the 0.75%, 0.875%, and 4.00% debentures are convertible into our common stock (and/or cash equivalent to the value of our common stock), volatility or depressed prices of our common stock could have a similar effect on the trading price of the debentures. If securities or industry analysts change their recommendations regarding our stock adversely, our stock price and trading volume could decline. The trading market for our common stock is influenced by the research and reports that industry or securities analysts publish about us, our business or our market. If one or more of the analysts who cover us change their recommendation regarding our stock adversely, our stock price would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts ceases coverage of our company or fails to regularly publish reports on us, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which in turn could cause our stock price or trading volume, and the value of our debentures, to decline. We do not intend to pay dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future. We have never declared or paid cash dividends. For the foreseeable future, we intend to retain any earnings, after considering any dividends on any preferred stock, to finance the development of our business, and we do not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our common stock. Any future determination to pay dividends will be at the discretion of our Board of 46 Directors and will be dependent upon then-existing conditions, including our operating results and financial condition, capital requirements, contractual restrictions, business prospects, and other factors that our Board of Directors considers relevant. Accordingly, holders of our common stock must rely on sales of their common stock after price appreciation, which may never occur, as the only way to realize a return on their shares of common stock. Delaware law and our certificate of incorporation and by-laws contain anti-takeover provisions, our outstanding 0.75%, 0.875%, and 4.00% debentures provide for a right to convert upon certain events, and our Board of Directors entered into a rights agreement and declared a rights dividend, any of which could delay or discourage takeover attempts that stockholders may consider favorable. Provisions in our certificate of incorporation and by-laws may have the effect of delaying or preventing a change of control or changes in our management. These provisions include the following: • • • • • • • the right of the Board of Directors to elect a director to fill a vacancy created by the expansion of the Board of Directors; the prohibition of cumulative voting in the election of directors, which would otherwise allow less than a majority of stockholders to elect director candidates; the requirement for advance notice for nominations for election to the Board of Directors or for proposing matters that can be acted upon at a stockholders’ meeting; the ability of the Board of Directors to issue, without stockholder approval, up to 10 million shares of preferred stock with terms set by the Board of Directors, which rights could be senior to those of common stock; our Board of Directors is divided into three classes of directors, with the classes to be as nearly equal in number as possible; stockholders may not call special meetings of the stockholders, except by Total under limited circumstances; and our Board of Directors is able to alter our by-laws without obtaining stockholder approval. Certain provisions of our outstanding debentures could make it more difficult or more expensive for a third party to acquire us. Upon the occurrence of certain transactions constituting a fundamental change, including an entity (such as Total) becoming the beneficial owner of 75% of our voting stock , holders of our outstanding debentures will have the right, at their option, to require us to repurchase, at a cash repurchase price equal to 100% of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest on the debentures, all or a portion of their debentures. We may also be required to issue additional shares of our common stock upon conversion of such debentures in the event of certain fundamental changes. In addition, we entered into a Rights Agreement with Computershare Trust Company, N.A., commonly referred to as a “poison pill,” which could delay or discourage takeover attempts that stockholders may consider favorable. ITEM 1B: UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS None. 47 ITEM 2: PROPERTIES The table below presents details for each of our principal properties: Facility Solar cell manufacturing facility1, 2 Solar cell manufacturing facility1 Solar cell manufacturing support and storage facility1 Solar module assembly facility1 Solar module assembly facility Solar module assembly facility Solar module assembly facility Corporate headquarters Global support offices Global support offices Global support offices Global support offices Global support offices Location Philippines Philippines Philippines Philippines Mexico France France California, U.S. California, U.S. California, U.S. Texas, U.S. France Philippines Approximate Square Footage 222,000 344,000 161,000 175,000 320,000 11,000 13,000 129,000 163,000 54,000 69,000 27,345 42,000 Held Owned Owned Leased Owned Leased Owned Leased Leased Leased Leased Leased Leased Owned Lease Term n/a n/a 2024 n/a 2021 n/a 2018 2021 2023 2017 2019 2023 n/a 1 The lease for the underlying land expires in May 2048 and is renewable for an additional 25 years. 2 This building will serve as an additional solar cell manufacturing facility with a planned annual capacity of 350 MW and is expected to be fully operational in fiscal 2016; with initial production launched during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2015. As of January 3, 2016, our principal properties include operating solar cell manufacturing facilities with a combined total annual capacity of over 1.5 GW and solar module assembly facilities with a combined total annual capacity of approximately 1.8 GW. For more information about our manufacturing capacity, including relationships with third-party contract manufacturers and our joint venture, AUOSP, see “Item 1. Business.” We do not identify or allocate assets by business segment. For more information on property, plant and equipment by country, see “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 6. Balance Sheet Components.” ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS Tax Benefit Indemnification Litigation On March 19, 2014, a lawsuit was filed by NRG Solar LLC, now known as NRG Renew LLC (“NRG”), against SunPower Corporation, Systems, our wholly-owned subsidiary (“SunPower Systems”), in the Superior Court of Contra Costa County, California. The complaint asserts that, according to the indemnification provisions in the contract pertaining to SunPower Systems’ sale of a large California solar project to NRG, SunPower Systems owes NRG $75.0 million in connection with certain tax benefits associated with the project that were approved by the U.S. Treasury Department (“Treasury”) for an amount that was less than expected. We do not believe that the facts support NRG’s claim under the operative indemnification provisions and SunPower Systems is vigorously contesting the claim. Additionally, SunPower Systems filed a cross-complaint against NRG seeking damages in excess of $7.5 million for breach of contract and related claims arising from NRG’s failure to fulfill its obligations under the contract, including its obligation to take “reasonable, available steps” to engage Treasury. We are currently unable to determine if the resolution of this matter will have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements. First Philec Arbitration On January 28, 2015, an arbitral tribunal of the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce issued a first partial award in the matter of an arbitration between First Philippine Electric Corporation (“FPEC”) and First Philippine Solar Corporation (“FPSC”) against SunPower Philippines Manufacturing, Ltd. (“SPML”), our wholly-owned subsidiary. FPSC is a joint venture of FPEC and SPML for the purpose of slicing silicon wafers from ingots. 48 The tribunal found SPML in breach of its obligations under its supply agreement with FPSC, and in breach of its joint venture agreement with FPEC. In its first partial award, the tribunal ordered that (i) SPML must purchase FPEC’s interests in FPSC for an aggregate of $30.3 million and (ii) after completing the purchase of FPEC’s controlling interest in FPSC, SPML must pay FPSC damages in the amount of $25.2 million. The arbitral tribunal issued its second partial award dated July 14, 2015, which ordered that (i) the price payable by SPML to FPEC for its interests in FPSC be reduced from $30.3 million to $23.2 million, (ii) FPEC’s request for interest is refused, and (iii) the payment and transfer of shares between FPEC and SPML is to take place in accordance with the procedure agreed between the parties. The tribunal issued its final award dated September 30, 2015, which ordered that (i) each side should bear its own costs and attorneys’ fees, and (ii) the arbitration costs should be split between the parties evenly. SPML has filed a challenge to both the first and second partial awards, as well as the final award, with the High Court in Hong Kong. The hearing on the challenge is scheduled for June 14 and 15, 2016 in Hong Kong. SPML has also filed applications to the Court in the Philippines to: (i) prevent FPSC or FPEC from enforcing the awards pending the outcome of the challenge in Hong Kong; and (ii) gain access to FPSC’s books and records. No ruling has been issued on the application to prevent enforcement of the award. The application for access was granted, and the inspection of FPSC’s books is ongoing. As a result, as of January 3, 2016, we recorded an accrual of $48.4 million related to this case based on our best estimate of probable loss. AUO Arbitration On April 17, 2015, SunPower Technology Ltd. (“SPTL”), our wholly-owned subsidiary, commenced an arbitration before the ICC International Court of Arbitration against AUO and AU Optronics Corporation, the ultimate parent company of AUO (“AUO Corp.,” and together with AUO, the “AUO Group”), for breaches of the AUOSP Joint Venture Agreement and associated agreements (the “JVA”). SPTL’s claim alleges that, among other things, the AUO Group has sold solar modules containing cells manufactured by AUOSP in violation of provisions in the JVA that set geographical restrictions on sales activities as well as provisions that restrict each party’s use of the other’s confidential information. SPTL seeks approximately $23.0 million in damages, as well as the right to purchase AUO’s shares in SPTL at 70% of “fair market value” determined as provided under the JVA. On June 23, 2015, the AUO Group filed and served its formal Memorial of Claim and Counterclaims against SPTL and us (collectively, the “SunPower Group”). In its counterclaim, the AUO Group alleges breach of contract, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, several tort causes of action, and improper use of the AUO Group’s proprietary manufacturing expertise. The AUO Group seeks $20.0 million in lost profits and $48.0 million in disgorgement from the SunPower Group, and an order requiring SPTL to purchase AUO’s shares in SPTL at 150% of fair market value. The hearing for the arbitration has not been set. We are currently unable to determine whether the resolution of this matter will have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated financial statements. Other Litigation We are a party to various other litigation matters and claims that arise from time to time in the ordinary course of our business. While we believe that the ultimate outcome of such matters will not have a material adverse effect on our business, their outcomes are not determinable and negative outcomes may adversely affect our financial position, liquidity, or results of operations. ITEM 4: MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES Not applicable. 49 PART II ITEM 5: MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES Market Information Our common stock is listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the trading symbol “SPWR.” During fiscal 2015 and 2014, the high and low closing trading prices of our common stock were as follows: Fiscal Year 2015 Fourth quarter Third quarter Second quarter First quarter Fiscal Year 2014 Fourth quarter Third quarter Second quarter First quarter SPWR High Low $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 30.77 28.73 34.85 33.60 35.64 40.98 41.06 35.90 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 19.12 20.95 30.01 23.35 23.06 32.92 26.53 29.14 As of February 12, 2016, there were approximately 805 record holders of our common stock. A substantially greater number of holders are in “street name” or beneficial holders, whose shares are held of record by banks, brokers, and other financial institutions. Dividends We have never declared or paid any cash dividend on our common stock, and we do not currently intend to pay a cash dividend on our common stock in the foreseeable future. Certain of the Company’s debt agreements place restrictions on the Company and its subsidiaries’ ability to pay cash dividends. For more information on our common stock and dividend rights, see “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 15. Common Stock.” Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities The following table sets forth all purchases made by or on behalf of us or any “affiliated purchaser,” as defined in Rule 10b-18(a)(3) under the Exchange Act, of shares of our common stock during each of the indicated periods. Period September 28, 2015 through October 25, 2015 October 26, 2015 through November 22, 2015 November 23, 2015 through January 3, 2016 Total Number of Shares Purchased1 13,528 28,745 14,955 57,228 Average Price Paid Per Share 24.23 $ 23.62 $ 24.45 $ 23.98 $ Maximum Number of Shares That May Yet Be Purchased Under the Publicly Announced Plans or Programs — — — — Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans or Programs — — — — 1 The shares purchased represent shares surrendered to satisfy tax withholding obligations in connection with the vesting of restricted stock issued to employees. 50 ITEM 6: SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA The following selected consolidated financial data should be read together with “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. (In thousands, except per share data) Consolidated Statements of Operations Data Revenue Gross margin Operating income (loss) Income (loss) from continuing operations before income taxes and equity in earnings (loss) of unconsolidated investees Income (loss) from continuing operations per share of common stock: Basic Diluted (In thousands) Consolidated Balance Sheet Data Cash and cash equivalents Working capital Total assets Long-term debt Convertible debt, net of current portion Total stockholders’ equity $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ January 3, 2016 December 28, 2014 Year Ended December 29, 2013 December 30, 2012 January 1, 2012 $ 1,576,473 244,646 $ (206,294) $ 3,027,265 625,127 251,240 $ $ $ 2,507,203 491,072 158,909 $ $ $ $ 2,417,501 $ 246,398 (287,708) $ 2,374,376 226,218 (534,098) (242,311) $ 184,614 $ 41,583 $ (329,663) $ (602,532) (1.39) $ (1.39) $ 1.91 1.55 $ $ 0.79 0.70 $ $ (3.01) $ (3.01) $ (6.28) (6.28) January 3, 2016 December 28, 2014 As of December 29, 2013 December 30, 2012 January 1, 2012 954,528 1,515,918 4,856,993 478,948 1,110,960 1,449,149 $ $ $ $ $ $ 956,175 1,273,236 4,345,582 214,181 692,955 1,534,174 $ $ $ $ $ $ 762,511 528,017 3,898,690 93,095 300,079 1,116,153 $ $ $ $ $ $ 457,487 976,627 3,340,948 375,661 438,629 993,352 $ $ $ $ $ $ 725,618 1,163,245 3,519,130 364,273 423,268 1,274,725 ITEM 7: MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS Overview SunPower is a leading global energy company that delivers complete solar solutions to residential, commercial, and power plant customers worldwide through an array of hardware, software, and financing options and through utility-scale solar power system construction and development capabilities, O&M services, and “Smart Energy” solutions. Our Smart Energy initiative is designed to add layers of intelligent control to homes, buildings and grids—all personalized through easy-to-use customer interfaces. Of all the solar cells commercially available to the mass market, we believe our solar cells have the highest conversion efficiency, a measurement of the amount of sunlight converted by the solar cell into electricity. For more information about our business, please refer to the section titled “Part I. Item 1. Business” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. 8point3 Energy Partners LP In June 2015, 8point3 Energy Partners LP (“8point3 Energy Partners”), a joint YieldCo vehicle formed by us and First Solar, Inc. to own, operate and acquire solar energy generation assets, completed an initial public offering (“IPO”) of Class A shares representing limited partner interests in 8point3 Energy Partners. The Class A shares were listed on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the trading symbol “CAFD.” 51 Immediately after the IPO, we contributed a portfolio of 170 MW AC of our solar generation assets (the “SPWR Projects”) to 8point3 Operating Company, LLC (“OpCo”), 8point3 Energy Partners’ primary operating subsidiary. In exchange for the SPWR Projects, we received cash proceeds of $371 million as well as equity interests in several 8point3 Energy Partners affiliated entities: primarily common and subordinated units representing a 40.7% stake in OpCo and a 50% economic and management stake in 8point3 Holding Company, LLC (“Holdings”), the parent company of the general partner of 8point3 Energy Partners and the owner of incentive distribution rights in OpCo. Holdings, OpCo, 8point3 Energy Partners and their respective subsidiaries are referred to herein as the “8point3 Group.” Additionally, pursuant to a Right of First Offer Agreement between us and OpCo, the 8point3 Group has rights of first offer on interests in an additional 513 MW AC of our solar energy projects that are currently contracted or are expected to be contracted before being sold by us to other parties (the “ROFO Projects”). In connection with the IPO, we also entered into operations and maintenance, asset management and management services agreements with the 8point3 Group. The services we provide under these agreements are priced consistently with market rates for such services and the agreements are terminable by the 8point3 Group for convenience. We account for our investments in the 8point3 Group using the equity method, whereby the book value of our investments is recorded as a non-current asset and our portion of the 8point3 Group’s earnings is recorded in the Consolidated Statements of Operations under the caption “Equity in earnings (loss) of unconsolidated investees.” For more information about our accounting of the IPO and related transactions, please refer to the sections titled “Note 3. 8point3 Energy Partners LP” and “Note 11. Equity Method Investments” under “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Segments Overview In the first quarter of fiscal 2015, in connection with a realignment of our internal organizational structure, we changed our segment reporting from our Americas, EMEA and APAC Segments to three end-customer segments: (i) Residential Segment, (ii) Commercial Segment and (iii) Power Plant Segment. Our President and Chief Executive Officer, as the chief operating decision maker, reviews our business and manages resource allocations and measures performance of our activities among these three end-customer segments. The Residential and Commercial Segments combined are referred to as Distributed Generation. Historically, the Americas Segment included both North and South America, the EMEA Segment included European countries as well as the Middle East and Africa, and the APAC Segment included all Asia-Pacific countries. For more information about our business segments, please refer to the section titled “Part I. Item 1. Business” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. For more segment information, please see “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 18. Segment Information” in this Annual Report. Unit of Power When referring to our solar power systems, our facilities’ manufacturing capacity, and total sales, the unit of electricity in watts for kilowatts (“KW”), megawatts (“MW”), and gigawatts (“GW”) is direct current (“DC”), unless otherwise noted as alternating current (“AC”). Seasonal Trends Our business is subject to industry-specific seasonal fluctuations including changes in weather patterns and economic incentives, among others. Sales have historically reflected these seasonal trends with the largest percentage of total revenues realized during the last two quarters of a fiscal year. The construction of solar power systems or installation of solar power components and related revenue may decline during cold winter months. In the United States, many customers make purchasing decisions towards the end of the year in order to take advantage of tax credits or for other budgetary reasons. In addition, revenues may fluctuate due to the timing of project sales, construction schedules, and revenue recognition of certain projects, such as those involving the sale of real estate, which may significantly impact the quarterly profile of our results of operations. We may also retain certain development projects on our balance sheet for longer periods of time than in preceding periods in order to optimize the economic value we receive at the time of sale, which may further impact the period-over-period profile of our results of operations. Fiscal Years We have a 52-to-53-week fiscal year that ends on the Sunday closest to December 31. Accordingly, every fifth or sixth year will be a 53-week fiscal year. The current fiscal year, fiscal 2015, is a 53-week fiscal year, and includes a 14-week fourth fiscal quarter, while fiscal years 2014 and 2013 were 52-week fiscal years. Fiscal 2015 ended on January 3, 2016, fiscal 2014 ended on December 28, 2014, and fiscal 2013 ended on December 29, 2013. 52 Outlook Demand While we remain focused on each of our three business segments and our U.S. market, we believe that our key growth areas will be in emerging markets and in our Commercial and Power Plant businesses. We plan on continuing to expand our business in growing and sustainable markets, including Chile, Mexico, Turkey, South Africa, China, and the Middle East. We are also working to expand our global components sales capabilities and international commercial opportunities. In June 2015, 8point3 Energy Partners, our joint YieldCo vehicle formed to own, operate and acquire solar energy generation assets, completed its IPO. 8point3 Energy Partners remains a reliable source of demand for our business and we plan to continue to sell to them our solar energy generating assets, including utility-scale solar power plants, commercial solar projects, and portfolios of residential solar power systems. For additional information on transactions with 8point3 Energy Partners and associated revenue recognition, please see “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 3. 8point3 Energy Partners LP.” In fiscal 2015, we had an income tax provision of $66.7 million on a loss before income taxes and equity in earnings of unconsolidated investees of $242.3 million due to an increase in taxable income resulting from gains realized primarily on the sale of projects involving real estate and a coinciding utilization of carryforward tax attributes; however, revenue and margin on the transactions that generated tax gains were deferred due to real estate accounting. We expect to continue to engage in transactions that generate taxable income, but defer GAAP revenue due to real estate accounting, and as such, expect to continue to generate taxable income in excess of tax attributes, such as net operating losses and tax credits, that can be used to offset such taxable income. In late fiscal 2015, the U.S. government enacted a budget bill that extended the solar commercial investment tax credit (the “Commercial ITC”) under Section 48(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the “IRC”) and the individual solar investment tax credit under Section 25D of the IRC (together with the Commercial ITC, the “ITC”) for five years, at rates gradually decreasing from 30% through 2019 to 22% in 2021. After 2021, the Commercial ITC is retained at 10%. We also saw other recent developments that contributed to a favorable policy environment, including (i) a significant focus on reducing world-wide carbon emissions through such events as the COP21 sustainable innovation forum held in Paris and the announcement of the Clean Power Plan in the United States, and (ii) domestic policy measures such as the extension of bonus depreciation and approval of California Net Metering “NEM 2.0.” We believe these factors will strengthen demand for our products in all three business segments in U.S. and global markets and provide us an opportunity to expand our suite of energy solutions and complement our strong, existing core business. For more information about the ITC and other policy mechanisms, please refer to the section titled “Part I. Item 1. Business—Regulations—Public Policy Considerations” in this Annual Report on Form 10- K. For more information about how we avail ourselves of the benefits of public policies and the risks related to public policies, please see the risk factors set forth under the caption “Item 1A. Risk Factors,” including “Risks Related to Our Sales Channels— The reduction, modification or elimination of government incentives could cause our revenue to decline and harm our financial results” and “Risks Related to Our Sales Channels—Existing regulations and policies and changes to these regulations and policies may present technical, regulatory, and economic barriers to the purchase and use of solar power products, which may significantly reduce demand for our products and services.” Supply We are focused on delivering complete solutions to customers in all three of our business segments. As part of our complete solution approach, we launched our Helix product for our Commercial Segment and are working on a new product offering for our Residential Segment as well, which we expect to launch in fiscal 2016. The Helix system is a pre-engineered modular solution for residential applications that combines our high-efficiency solar module technology with integrated plug-and- play power stations, cable management systems, and mounting hardware that enable our customers to quickly and easily complete system installations and manage their energy production. We continue to work on developing our next generation technology for our existing Oasis modular solar power blocks for power plant applications. With the addition of this modular solution in our residential application, as well as our anticipated commercial solution in fiscal 2016, we are able to provide complete solutions across all end-customer segments. Additionally, in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2015 we announced the launch of our new lower cost, high efficiency Performance Series product line, which will enhance our ability to rapidly expand our global footprint with minimal capital cost. 53 We continue to see significant and increasing opportunities in technologies and capabilities adjacent to our core product offerings that can significantly reduce our customers’ CCOE measurement, including the integration of energy storage and energy management functionality into our systems, and have made investments to realize those opportunities, including our investment in a data-driven Energy Services Management Platform from Tendril Networks, Inc., and our strategic partnership with EnerNOC to deploy their Software as a Service energy intelligence software solution to our commercial and power plant customers, enabling our customers to make intelligent energy choices by addressing how they buy energy, how they use energy and when they use it. We have added advanced module-level control electronics to our portfolio of technology designed to enable longer series strings and significant balance of system components cost reductions in large arrays. We are developing next generation microinverters designed to eliminate the need to mount or assemble additional components on the roof or the side of a building and enable optimization and monitoring at the solar panel level to ensure maximum energy production by the solar system. We also continue to work on making combined solar and distributed energy storage solutions broadly commercially available to certain customers in the United States and Australia through our agreement to offer Sunverge SIS energy solutions comprising batteries, power electronics, and multiple energy inputs controlled by software in the cloud. We continue to improve our unique, differentiated solar cell and panel technology. We emphasize improvement of our solar cell efficiency and LCOE and CCOE performance through enhancement of our existing products, development of new products and reduction of manufacturing cost and complexity in conjunction with our overall cost-control strategies. We are now producing our solar cells with over 25% efficiency in the lab and have reached production panel efficiencies over 22% in high- volume production. We are expanding our solar cell manufacturing capacity through the construction of a facility in the Philippines with a planned annual capacity of 350 MW once fully operational, which is expected to occur in fiscal 2016; initial production launched during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2015. We are focused on reducing the cost of our solar panels and systems and are working with our suppliers and partners along all steps of the value chain to reduce costs by improving manufacturing technologies and expanding economies of scale. We also continually focus on reducing manufacturing cost and complexity in conjunction with our overall cost-control strategies. We believe that the global demand for solar systems is highly elastic and that our aggressive, but achievable, cost reduction roadmap will reduce installed costs for our customers across all business segments and drive increased demand for our solar solutions. We also work with our suppliers and partners to ensure the reliability of our supply chain. We have contracted with some of our suppliers for multi-year supply agreements, under which we have annual minimum purchase obligations. We also have certain purchase obligations under our material supply agreement with our joint venture AUOSP, which is a supplier of our cells. For more information about our purchase commitments and obligations, please see “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Contractual Obligations” and “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 10. Commitments and Contingencies” in this Annual Report. We currently believe our supplier relationships and various short- and long-term contracts will afford us the volume of material and services required to meet our planned output; however, we face the risk that the pricing of our long-term contracts may exceed market value. We purchase our polysilicon under fixed-price long-term supply agreements; purchases in fiscal 2015 under these agreements significantly exceeded market value and the volume contracted to be purchased in fiscal 2016 exceeds our planned utilization, which may result in higher inventory balances until we are able to fully utilize the polysilicon inventory in future periods. Additionally, we face the risk that our joint venture AUOSP may not remain financially healthy or a reliable source in our supply chain. For more information about these risks, please see “—Our long-term, firm commitment supply agreements could result in excess or insufficient inventory, place us at a competitive disadvantage on pricing, or lead to disputes, each of which could impair our ability to meet our cost reduction roadmap” and “—We will continue to be dependent on a limited number of third-party suppliers for certain raw materials and components for our products, which could prevent us from delivering our products to our customers within required timeframes and could in turn result in sales and installation delays, cancellations, penalty payments and loss of market share” under “Item 1A. Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Supply Chain” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. M&A During fiscal 2015 we made strategic acquisitions and investments that will allow us to service a broader market with enhanced expertise. We look for similar investment opportunities to expand our business and portfolio of technology by making investments that will enable us to achieve our strategic vision. 54 Financing We are able to utilize various means to finance our utility-scale power plant development and construction projects, including our ability to sell projects to 8point3 Energy Partners. Through our investments in and involvement with the 8point3 Group, we anticipate that we will be able to reliably access a lower cost of capital, which will further enable the continued development of our project pipeline described below in our key U.S. market and in select, sustainable foreign markets. As part of this strategy, we plan to retain these development projects on our balance sheet for longer periods of time than in preceding periods in order to optimize the economic value we receive at the time of sale. Projects Sold / Under Contract The table below presents significant construction and development projects sold or under contract as of January 3, 2016: Project Prieska Solar Project1 Location South Africa Size (MW) 86 Third-Party Owner / Purchaser Mulilo Prieska PV (RF) Proprietary Limited Power Purchase Agreement(s) Eskom Holdings Soc LTD Expected Substantial Completion of Project2 2016 1 We have entered into an EPC agreement and a long-term fixed price O&M agreement with the owners of the Prieska Solar Project, which includes a subsidiary of Total S.A. 2 Expected completion of revenue recognition assumes completion of construction in the stated fiscal year. As of January 3, 2016, an aggregate of approximately $66 million of remaining revenue is expected to be recognized on projects reflected in the table above through the expected completion dates noted. Projects will be removed from the table above in the period in which substantially all of the revenue for such project has been recognized. Projects with Executed Power Purchase Agreements - Not Sold / Not Under Contract The table below presents significant construction and development projects with executed PPAs, but not sold or under contract as of January 3, 2016: Project Henrietta Solar Project2 Boulder Solar Project Stanford Solar Generating Station2 Hooper Solar Project2 Location California, USA Nevada, USA California, USA Colorado, USA Rio Bravo Solar Projects California, USA Size (MW) 128 125 68 60 50 Power Purchase Agreement(s) PG&E NV Energy Stanford University Public Service Company of Colorado Southern California Edison Expected Substantial Completion of Project1 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 1 Expected completion of revenue recognition assumes completion of construction and sale of the project in the stated fiscal year. 2 ROFO Project—pursuant to a Right of First Offer Agreement between SunPower and OpCo, the 8point3 Group has rights of first offer on interests in these projects. For additional information on 8point3 Energy Partners and related transactions, please refer to the section titled “Note 3. 8point3 Energy Partners LP” under “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Our project pipeline extends beyond the projects represented in the tables above. Significant projects with development and milestone activities in progress will be excluded from the table above until an associated PPA has been executed. 55 Components of Results of Operations The following section describes certain line items in our Consolidated Statements of Operations: Revenue We recognize revenue from the following activities and transactions within our end-customer segments: • • Solar power components: the sale of panels and balance of system components, primarily to dealers, system integrators and distributors, in some cases on a multi-year, firm commitment basis. Solar power systems: the design, manufacture, and sale of high-performance rooftop and ground-mounted solar power systems under construction and development agreements. • Residential leases: revenue recognized on systems under lease agreements with residential customers for terms of up to 20 years. • Other: revenue related to our solar power services and solutions, such as post-installation systems monitoring and maintenance in connection with construction contracts and commercial PPAs. For a discussion of how and when we recognize revenue, see “—Critical Accounting Estimates—Revenue Recognition.” Cost of Revenue We generally recognize our cost of revenue in the same period that we recognize related revenue. Our cost of revenue fluctuates from period to period due to the mix of projects that we complete and the associated revenue that we recognize, particularly for construction contracts and large-scale development projects involving real estate. For a discussion of how and when we recognize revenue, see “—Critical Accounting Estimates—Revenue Recognition.” The cost of solar panels is the single largest cost element in our cost of revenue. Our cost of solar panels consists primarily of: (i) polysilicon, silicon ingots and wafers used in the production of solar cells; (ii) solar cells from our joint venture, AUOSP; (iii) other materials and chemicals including glass, frame, and backing; and (iv) direct labor costs and assembly costs we pay to our third-party contract manufacturers. Other cost of revenue associated with the construction of solar power systems includes real estate, mounting systems, inverters, capitalized financing costs, and construction subcontract and dealer costs. Other factors that contribute to our cost of revenue include salaries and personnel-related costs, depreciation, facilities related charges, and freight. Gross Margin Our gross margin each quarter is affected by a number of factors, including average selling prices for our solar power components, the types of projects in progress, the gross margins estimated for those projects in progress, our product mix, our actual manufacturing costs, the utilization rate of our solar cell manufacturing facilities, and actual overhead costs. Research and Development Research and development expense consists primarily of salaries and related personnel costs; depreciation of equipment; and the cost of solar panel materials, various prototyping materials, and services used for the development and testing of products. Research and development expense is reported net of contributions under collaborative arrangements. Sales, General and Administrative Sales, general and administrative expense consists primarily of salaries and related personnel costs, professional fees, bad debt expenses, and other selling and marketing expenses. Restructuring Restructuring expense consists mainly of costs associated with our November 2014 reorganization plan aimed towards realigning resources consistently with SunPower’s global strategy and improving overall operating efficiency and cost structure. Charges in connection with this plan are primarily related to severance benefits. Remaining restructuring costs are related to 56 plans effected in both fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011. All restructuring activities were substantially complete as of January 3, 2016; however, we expect to continue to incur costs as we finalize previous estimates and actions in connection with these plans, primarily due to other costs, such as legal services. Other Income (Expense), Net Interest expense primarily relates to: (i) amortization expense recorded for warrants issued to Total S.A. in connection with the Liquidity Support Agreement executed in the first quarter of fiscal 2012; (ii) debt under our senior convertible debentures; (iii) fees for our outstanding letters of credit; and (iv) other outstanding bank and project debt. Other, net includes gains or losses on foreign exchange and derivatives as well as gains or losses related to sales and impairments of certain investments. Income Taxes Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for temporary differences between financial statement and income tax bases of assets and liabilities. Valuation allowances are provided against deferred tax assets when management cannot conclude that it is more likely than not that some portion or all deferred tax assets will be realized. We currently benefit from income tax holidays incentives in the Philippines in accordance with our registration with the Philippine Economic Zone Authority (“PEZA”). We have an auxiliary company ruling in Switzerland, where we sell our solar power products, which currently reduces our Swiss tax rate. For additional information see “Note 1. The Company and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” and “Note 14. Income Taxes” under “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data— Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. For financial reporting purposes, during periods when we were a subsidiary of Cypress, income tax expense and deferred income tax balances were calculated as if we were a separate entity and had prepared our own separate tax return. Effective with the closing of our public offering of common stock in June 2006, we were no longer eligible to file federal and most state consolidated tax returns with Cypress. As of September 29, 2008, Cypress completed a spin-off of all of its shares of our former class B common stock to its shareholders, so we are no longer eligible to file any remaining state consolidated tax returns with Cypress. Under our tax sharing agreement with Cypress, we agreed to pay Cypress for any federal and state income tax credit or net operating loss carryforwards utilized in our federal and state tax returns in subsequent periods that originated while our results were included in Cypress’s federal tax returns. The company has determined that it is unitary with Total S.A. in certain U.S. States for income tax filing purposes. The company continues to calculate its income tax liabilities on a separate company basis as agreed with Total S.A. Equity in Earnings (Loss) of Unconsolidated Investees Equity in earnings (loss) of unconsolidated investees represents our reportable share of earnings (loss) generated from entities in which we own an equity interest accounted for under the equity method. Net Loss Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests and Redeemable Noncontrolling Interests We have entered into facilities with third-party investors under which the parties invest in entities that hold SunPower solar power systems and leases with residential customers. We determined that we hold controlling interests in these less-than- wholly-owned entities and have fully consolidated these entities as a result. The investors were determined to hold noncontrolling interests, some of which are redeemable at the option of the noncontrolling interest holder. We apply the hypothetical liquidation at book value method in allocating recorded net income (loss) to each investor based on the change in the reporting period of the amount of net assets of the entity to which each investor would be entitled to under the governing contractual arrangements in a liquidation scenario. 57 Results of Operations Revenue (In thousands) Distributed Generation Residential Commercial Power Plant Total revenue 2015 % of total revenue 2014 % of total revenue 2013 % of total revenue Fiscal Year $ 643,520 277,143 655,810 $ 1,576,473 41% $ 17% 42% 655,936 361,828 2,009,501 $ 3,027,265 22% $ 12% 66% 737,677 360,249 1,409,277 $ 2,507,203 29% 14% 57% Total Revenue: Our total revenue decreased 48% during fiscal 2015 as compared to fiscal 2014 primarily because during fiscal 2015 we deferred the recognition of any revenue or profit on the sale of projects involving real estate to 8point3 Energy Partners under the accounting treatment described in “Item 1. Financial Statements—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 3. 8point3 Energy Partners LP.” The decrease during revenue in fiscal 2015 was also due to substantial completion of revenue recognition at the end of fiscal 2014 on certain large-scale solar power systems. A decline in sales of solar power systems and components to residential and commercial customers also contributed to the period-over-period decrease in total revenue. Our total revenue increased 21% during fiscal 2014 as compared to fiscal 2013 primarily due to timing of revenue recognition and significant progress on certain large-scale solar power systems involving real estate. During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2014, certain large-scale solar power systems involving real estate met the required criteria, as described in “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 1. The Company and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies,” to recognize $429 million of incremental revenue under the full accrual method. Concentrations: Sales for the Power Plant Segment as a percentage of total revenue recognized were approximately 42% and 66% during fiscal 2015 and fiscal 2014, respectively. The revenue for the Power Plant Segment as a percentage of total revenue recognized decreased primarily because we deferred the recognition of any revenue or profit on the sale of projects involving real estate to 8point3 Energy Partners under the accounting treatment described in “Item 1. Financial Statements—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 3. 8point3 Energy Partners LP.” The decrease during fiscal 2015 was additionally driven by substantial completion of revenue recognition at the end of fiscal 2014 on certain large-scale solar power systems. Sales for the Power Plant Segment as a percentage of total revenue recognized were approximately 66% and 57% during fiscal 2014 and fiscal 2013, respectively. The increase in the percentage of revenue for the Power Plant Segment was primarily due to timing of revenue recognition and significant progress on certain large-scale solar power systems involving real estate. During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2014, certain large-scale solar power systems involving real estate met the required criteria, as described in “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 1. The Company and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies,” to recognize $429 million of incremental revenue under the full accrual method. The table below represents our significant customers that accounted for greater than 10 percent of total revenue in fiscal 2015, 2014, and 2013, respectively. Revenue Significant Customers: MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company NRG Solar, Inc. * denotes less than 10% during the period Business Segment Power Plant Power Plant 2015 Fiscal Year 2014 2013 14% * 49% * 25% 17% 58 Residential Revenue: Residential revenue decreased 2% during fiscal 2015 as compared to fiscal 2014 primarily due to a decline in the sales of solar power components and systems to our residential customers, particularly in Japan, where a reduction in the country’s feed-in tariff during the last half of fiscal 2015 reduced demand for solar power systems and the decline in the value of the Japanese Yen reduced demand for imported goods in general. The decrease in residential revenue was partially offset by an increase in residential component sales in North America driven by stronger sales through our dealer network and an increase in the number of leases placed in service under our residential leasing program within the United States. Residential revenue decreased 11% during fiscal 2014 as compared to fiscal 2013 due to a decline in the sales of solar power components and systems to our residential customers across all regions. The decrease in residential revenue was also driven by a decrease in the number of solar power systems placed in service that were accounted for as sales-type leases, but was partially offset by an increase in revenue from operating leases in North America. Commercial Revenue: Commercial revenue decreased 23% during fiscal 2015 as compared to fiscal 2014 primarily because we deferred the recognition of any revenue or profit on the sale to 8point3 Energy Partners of projects involving real estate under the accounting treatment described in “Item 1. Financial Statements—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements— Note 3. 8point3 Energy Partners LP.” The decrease in revenue during fiscal 2015 was also due to the completion of certain commercial solar power system projects, and the associated revenue recognition, during fiscal 2014 and a decrease in commercial component sales across all geographies, particularly in Japan, where a reduction in the country’s feed-in tariff during the third quarter of fiscal 2015 reduced demand for solar power systems and the decline in the value of the Japanese Yen reduced demand for imported goods in general. Commercial revenue stayed flat during fiscal 2014 as compared to fiscal 2013 due to the substantial completion of commercial projects, and the associated revenue, primarily in North America, that offset an increase in commercial component sales across all regions, including sales made under long-term supply agreements in Japan. Power Plant Revenue: Power Plant revenue decreased 67% during fiscal 2015 as compared to fiscal 2014 primarily because we deferred the recognition of any revenue or profit on the sale of projects involving real estate to 8point3 Energy Partners under the accounting treatment described in “Item 1. Financial Statements—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 3. 8point3 Energy Partners LP.” The decrease in revenue during fiscal 2015 was also due to substantial completion of revenue recognition at the end of fiscal 2014 on certain large-scale solar power systems located within the United States. Power Plant revenue increased 43% during fiscal 2014 as compared to fiscal 2013 primarily due to timing of revenue recognition and significant progress on certain large-scale solar power systems involving real estate. During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2014, certain large-scale solar power systems involving real estate met the required criteria, as described in “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 1. The Company and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies,” to recognize $429 million of incremental revenue under the full accrual method. Cost of Revenue (In thousands) Distributed Generation Residential Commercial Power Plant Total cost of revenue Total cost of revenue as a percentage of revenue Total gross margin percentage 2015 Fiscal Year 2014 2013 $ 508,449 259,600 563,778 $ 1,331,827 $ 541,812 326,324 1,534,002 $ 2,402,138 $ 590,003 338,622 1,087,506 $ 2,016,131 84% 16% 79% 21% 80% 20% Total Cost of Revenue: Our total cost of revenue decreased 45% in fiscal 2015 as compared to fiscal 2014 primarily because we deferred the recognition of any revenue or profit, and corresponding costs, on the sale of projects involving real estate to 8point3 Energy Partners under the accounting treatment described in “Item 1. Financial Statements—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 3. 8point3 Energy Partners LP.” The decrease in the cost of sales during fiscal 2015 was also a result of the substantial completion at the end of fiscal 2014 of recognition of revenue and corresponding costs of certain large-scale solar power systems within the United States. 59 Our total cost of revenue increased 19% in fiscal 2014 as compared to fiscal 2013 primarily as a result of the substantial completion of recognition of revenue and corresponding costs of certain large-scale solar power systems, in addition to a charge of $56.8 million recorded in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2014 in connection with a legal accrual related to First Philec, as described in “Item 3. Legal Proceedings,” and a $52.0 million non-recurring gain that decreased our cost of revenue in fiscal 2013 due to the termination of a third-party supply contract. Gross Margin Distributed Generation Residential Commercial Power Plant 2015 21% 6% 14% Fiscal Year 2014 17% 10% 24% 2013 20% 6% 23% Residential Gross Margin: Gross margin for our Residential Segment increased four percentage points during fiscal 2015 as compared to fiscal 2014 primarily as a result of increased volume of sales with favorable margins for residential leases and solar power systems and components in the United States, partially offset by lower margins on solar power components resulting from declines in average selling prices in Japan and a charge of $10.9 million recorded in fiscal 2015 in connection with the contracted sale of raw material inventory to a third party. Gross margin for our Residential Segment decreased three percentage points during fiscal 2014 as compared to fiscal 2013 primarily as a result of a charge of $18.7 million recorded in fiscal 2014 in connection with a legal accrual related to First Philec, as described in “Item 3. Legal Proceedings,” as well as a $19.9 million non-recurring gain in fiscal 2013 that was associated with the termination of a third-party supply contract. Commercial Gross Margin: Gross margin for our Commercial Segment decreased four percentage points during fiscal 2015 as compared to fiscal 2014 primarily because we deferred the recognition of any profit on the sale of projects involving real estate to 8point3 Energy Partners under the accounting treatment described in “Item 1. Financial Statements—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 3. 8point3 Energy Partners LP.” Gross margin during fiscal 2015 also decreased as a result of higher than expected costs on and changes in the scope of certain commercial EPC projects in the United States and a charge of $5.7 million recorded in fiscal 2015 in connection with the contracted sale of raw material inventory to a third party. Gross margin for our Commercial Segment increased four percentage points during fiscal 2014 as compared to fiscal 2013 as a result of an increase in commercial component sales across all regions and favorable margins, but was partially offset by declines in average selling prices in Japan. The increase in the Commercial Segment’s gross margin was further offset by a charge of $9.7 million recorded in fiscal 2014 in connection with a legal accrual related to First Philec, as described in “Item 3. Legal Proceedings,” as well as a $10.0 million non-recurring gain in fiscal 2013 that was associated with the termination of a third-party supply contract. Power Plant Gross Margin: Gross margin for our Power Plant Segment decreased 10 percentage points during fiscal 2015 as compared to fiscal 2014 primarily because we deferred the recognition of any profit on the sale to 8point3 Energy Partners of projects involving real estate under the accounting treatment described in “Item 1. Financial Statements—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 3. 8point3 Energy Partners LP.” The decrease in gross margin during 2015 was also a result of the substantial completion of large-scale solar power systems with favorable margins at the end of fiscal 2014 within the United States and a charge of $16.1 million recorded in fiscal 2015 in connection with the contracted sale of raw material inventory to a third party. Gross margin for our Power Plants Segment increased one percentage point during fiscal 2014 as compared to fiscal 2013 primarily due to the recognition of $145 million in incremental margin because we met the criteria to recognize revenue under the full accrual method for certain large-scale solar power systems involving real estate, as described in “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 1. The Company and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.” The increase in fiscal 2014 gross margin was partially offset by a charge of $28.5 million recorded in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2014 in connection with a legal accrual related to First Philec, as described in “Item 3. Legal Proceedings,” as well as a $22.1 million non-recurring gain in fiscal 2013 that was associated with the termination of a third-party supply contract. 60 Research and Development (“R&D”) (In thousands) R&D As a percentage of revenue 2015 99,063 $ Fiscal Year 2014 73,343 $ 2013 58,080 $ 6% 2% 2% R&D expense increased $25.7 million or 35%, in fiscal 2015 as compared to fiscal 2014 primarily due to a $16.8 million increase in labor costs as a result of additional headcount and salary related expenses and a $4.5 million increase in consulting and outside services as we continue to develop our next generation solar technology and expand our product offerings. The remaining increase was a result of other net expenses to support R&D programs as well as amortization of intangible assets attributable to R&D activity. These increases were partially offset by contributions under the R&D Agreement with Total. R&D expense increased $15.3 million or 26%, in fiscal 2014 as compared to fiscal 2013 primarily due to a $10.3 million increase in labor costs as a result of additional headcount and salary related expenses, as well as an increase in other net expenses such as consulting and outside services supporting programs related to our next generation solar technology. These increases were partially offset by contributions under the R&D Agreement with Total. Sales, General and Administrative (“SG&A”) (In thousands) SG&A As a percentage of revenue 2015 345,486 $ Fiscal Year 2014 288,321 $ 2013 271,481 $ 22% 10% 11% SG&A expense increased $57.2 million, or 19.8%, during fiscal 2015 as compared to fiscal 2014 due to a $21.4 million increase in selling and marketing expenses as we grow our sales teams and increase our marketing activity in North America and through digital media and a $26.5 million increase in legal, consulting, and other costs related to the formation and IPO of 8point3 Energy Partners, acquisitions, and ongoing legal proceedings. SG&A expense increased $16.8 million, or 6.2% during fiscal 2014 as compared to fiscal 2013 primarily due to an increase in marketing activities. Restructuring Charges (In thousands) Restructuring charges As a percentage of revenue 2015 $ 6,391 Fiscal Year 2014 12,223 $ 2013 $ 2,602 —% —% —% Restructuring charges decreased $5.8 million, or 48%, during fiscal 2015 as compared to fiscal 2014 and were primarily related to severance and other charges associated with our November 2014 restructuring plan. Remaining charges are associated with legacy restructuring plans approved in fiscal 2012 and 2011. Restructuring charges during fiscal 2014 increased $9.6 million as compared to fiscal 2013 and were primarily related to severance charges associated with our November 2014 restructuring plan. Remaining restructuring charges are associated with legacy restructuring plans approved in fiscal 2012 and 2011. See “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 9. Restructuring” for further information regarding our restructuring plans. 61 Other Expense, Net (In thousands) Interest income Interest expense Other, net Other expense, net As a percentage of revenue 2015 2,120 (43,796) 5,659 (36,017) $ $ Fiscal Year 2014 2,583 (69,658) 449 (66,626) $ $ 2013 6,017 (108,739) (14,604) (117,326) $ $ (2)% (2)% (5)% Other expense, net decreased $30.6 million, or 46%, in fiscal 2015 as compared to fiscal 2014 primarily driven by the $27.9 million gain recognized on the sale of a residential lease portfolio to 8point3 Energy Partners, a decrease in interest expense due to the maturity of the 4.50% debentures in March of fiscal 2015, as well as favorable changes in the fair value of foreign currency derivatives and other net expenses. Other expense, net decreased $50.7 million, or 43%, in fiscal 2014 as compared to fiscal 2013 primarily driven by a decrease in interest expense due to the expiration of the Liquidity Support Agreement and the maturity of the 4.75% debentures due in April 2014, as well as favorable changes in the fair value of foreign currency derivatives and other net expenses. Other net expenses declined primarily as a result of charges, such as $4.9 million related to impairment of investments in unconsolidated investees, which occurred in fiscal 2013 and did not recur in fiscal 2014. Income Taxes (In thousands) Provision for income taxes As a percentage of revenue 2015 (66,694) $ (4)% Fiscal Year 2014 (8,760) —% $ $ 2013 (11,905) —% In fiscal 2015, our income tax provision of $66.7 million on a loss before income taxes and equity in earnings of unconsolidated investees of $242.3 million was due to an increase in taxable income resulting from gains realized primarily on the sale of projects involving real estate and a coinciding utilization of carryforward tax attributes; however, revenue and margin on the transactions that generated tax gains were deferred due to real estate accounting guidelines. For further information on the accounting treatment of projects involving real estate, please see “Item 1. Financial Statements-Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements-Note 3. 8point3 Energy Partners LP” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Other factors contributing to the increase in provision for income taxes in fiscal 2015 were a shift in the geographic mix of taxable income to jurisdictions with higher statutory tax rates, prior year transfer pricing adjustments, intracompany profit deferral and accrual of unrecognized tax benefits, and deemed foreign dividends. If we continue to generate taxable income on gains, but defer revenue, on transactions such as those involving real estate accounting, we will continue to generate taxable income in excess of tax attributes, such as net operating losses and tax credits, that can be used to offset such taxable income. In fiscal 2014, our income tax provision of $8.8 million on income before income taxes and equity in earnings of unconsolidated investees of $184.6 million, was primarily due to tax expense in profitable foreign jurisdictions, prior period provision to return adjustments in the United States and foreign jurisdictions, valuation allowance release from an acquisition in the current period, as well as minimum taxes and adjustments to unrecognized tax benefits. A material amount of our total revenue is generated from customers located outside of the United States, and a substantial portion of our assets and employees are located outside of the United States. U.S. income taxes and foreign withholding taxes have not been provided on the undistributed earnings of our non-U.S. subsidiaries as such earnings are intended to be indefinitely reinvested in operations outside the United States to the extent that such earnings have not been currently or previously subjected to taxation of the United States. We record a valuation allowance to reduce our U.S. and French deferred tax assets to the amount that is more likely than not to be realized. In assessing the need for a valuation allowance, we consider historical levels of income, expectations and risks associated with the estimates of future taxable income and ongoing prudent and feasible tax planning strategies. In the event we determine that we would be able to realize additional deferred tax assets in the future in excess of the net recorded amount, or if we subsequently determine that realization of an amount previously recorded is unlikely, we would record an adjustment to the deferred tax asset valuation allowance, which would change income tax in the period of adjustment. As of January 3, 2016, we believe there is insufficient evidence to realize additional deferred tax assets in fiscal 2015. 62 Equity in Earnings (Loss) of Unconsolidated Investees (In thousands) Equity in earnings of unconsolidated investees As a percentage of revenue 2015 Fiscal Year 2014 2013 $ 9,569 $ 7,241 $ 3,872 1% —% —% In fiscal 2015, 2014 and 2013, our equity in earnings of unconsolidated investees was a net gain of $9.6 million, $7.2 million and $3.9 million, respectively, and was primarily due to increased activities at AUOSP during all three fiscal years. The $9.6 million net gain in fiscal 2015 also includes the activities of the 8point3 Group that took place during the last half of fiscal 2015 as described in “Item 1. Financial Statements—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 3. 8point3 Energy Partners LP.” Net Income (Loss) (In thousands) Net income (loss) 2015 (299,436) $ Fiscal Year 2014 183,095 $ 2013 33,550 $ Net income decreased by $482.5 million and changed from a net income to a net loss in fiscal 2015 as compared to fiscal 2014. The decrease in net income (loss) was primarily driven by: (i) a $380.5 million decrease in gross margin, primarily due to the substantial completion of revenue recognition on various large-scale solar power systems at the end of fiscal 2014 and the deferral of all profits on transactions with the 8point3 Group involving real estate in fiscal 2015; (ii) a $77.1 million increase in operating expenses due to increased headcount and marketing spend and costs incurred for acquisition-related diligence and the formation and IPO of 8point3 Energy Partners; and (iii) a $57.9 million increase in income tax due to an increase in taxable income resulting from gains realized primarily on the sale of projects involving real estate, on which revenue was deferred, and a coinciding utilization of carryforward tax attributes. The decrease in net income was partially offset by: (i) a $30.6 million decrease in Other expense, net driven by the gain recognized on the sale of a residential lease portfolio to 8point3 Energy Partners, a decrease in interest expense due to the maturity of the 4.50% debentures in March of fiscal 2015, as well as favorable changes in the fair value of foreign currency derivatives and other net expenses; and (ii) a $2.3 million increase in our equity in earnings of unconsolidated investees due to activities at AUOSP and the 8point3 Group during fiscal 2015. Net income increased $149.5 million in fiscal 2014 as compared to fiscal 2013. The increase in net income was primarily driven by: (i) a $134.1 million increase in gross margin due to favorable margins on various large utility-scale solar power systems recognized coupled with an overall decrease in material and installation costs, and (ii) a $50.7 million decrease in Other expense, net due to lower interest expense primarily as a result of the expiration of the Liquidity Support Agreement during the first quarter of fiscal 2014, but was partially offset by (iii) a $56.8 million legal accrual related to First Philec, as described in “Item 3. Legal Proceedings,” as well as (iv) a $41.7 million increase in operating expenses. Information about other significant variances in our results of operations is described above. Net Loss Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests and Redeemable Noncontrolling Interests (In thousands) Net loss attributable to noncontrolling interests and redeemable noncontrolling interests 2015 Fiscal Year 2014 2013 $ 112,417 $ 62,799 $ 62,043 We have entered into facilities with third-party investors under which the parties invest in entities that hold SunPower solar power systems and leases with residential customers. We determined that we hold controlling interests in these less-than-wholly- owned entities and have fully consolidated these entities as a result. We apply the hypothetical liquidation at book value method in allocating recorded net income (loss) to each investor based on the change in the reporting period, of the amount of net assets of the entity to which each investor would be entitled to under the governing contractual arrangements in a liquidation scenario. In fiscal 2015, 2014, and 2013, we attributed $112.4 million, $62.8 million, and $62.0 million, respectively, of net losses primarily to the third-party investors as a result of allocating certain assets, including tax credits and accelerated tax depreciation benefits, to the investors. The $49.6 million increase in net loss attributable to noncontrolling interests and redeemable 63 noncontrolling interests in fiscal 2015, as compared to fiscal 2014, is primarily attributable to additional leases placed in service under new facilities executed with third-party investors in fiscal 2015, whereas the $0.8 million increase in fiscal 2014, as compared to 2013, is due to additional leases placed in service under existing facilities in the period. Critical Accounting Estimates We prepare our consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, which requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues, and expenses recorded in our financial statements. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions and conditions. In addition to our most critical estimates discussed below, we also have other key accounting policies that are less subjective and, therefore, judgments involved in their application would not have a material impact on our reported results of operations (See “Note 1. The Company and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” under “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K). Revenue Recognition Solar Power Components We sell our solar panels and balance of system components primarily to dealers, system integrators and distributors, and recognize revenue, net of accruals for estimated sales returns, when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery of the product has occurred, title and risk of loss has passed to the customer, the sales price is fixed or determinable, collectability of the resulting receivable is reasonably assured and the risks and rewards of ownership have passed to the customer. Other than standard warranty obligations, there are no rights of return and there are no significant post-shipment obligations, including installation, training, or customer acceptance clauses, with any of our customers that could have an impact on revenue recognition. Our revenue recognition policy is consistent across all geographic areas and end-customer segments. Construction Contracts Revenue is also composed of EPC projects which are governed by customer contracts that require us to deliver functioning solar power systems and are generally completed within three to twelve months from commencement of construction. Construction on large projects may be completed within eighteen to thirty six months, depending on the size and location. We recognize revenue from fixed-price construction contracts, which do not include land or land rights, using the percentage-of- completion method of accounting. Under this method, revenue arising from fixed price construction contracts is recognized as work is performed based on the percentage of incurred costs to estimated total forecasted costs. Incurred costs used in our percentage-of-completion calculation include all direct material, labor and subcontract costs, and those indirect costs related to contract performance, such as indirect labor, supplies, and tools. Project material costs are included in incurred costs when the project materials have been installed by being permanently attached or fitted to the solar power system as required by the project’s engineering design. In addition to an EPC deliverable, a limited number of arrangements also include multiple deliverables such as post- installation systems monitoring and maintenance. For contracts with separately priced monitoring and maintenance, we recognize revenue related to such separately priced elements over the contract period. For contracts including monitoring and maintenance not separately priced, we determined that post-installation systems monitoring and maintenance qualify as separate units of accounting. Such post-installation monitoring and maintenance are deferred at the time the contract is executed based on the best estimate of selling price on a standalone basis and are recognized to revenue over the contractual term. The remaining EPC revenue is recognized on a percentage-of-completion basis. In addition, when arrangements include contingent revenue clauses, such as customer termination or put rights for non-performance, we defer the contingent revenue if there is a reasonable possibility that such rights or contingencies may be triggered. In certain limited cases, we could be required to buy-back a customer’s system at fair value on specified future dates if certain minimum performance thresholds are not met for specified periods. To date, no such repurchase obligations have been triggered (see “Note 10. Commitments and Contingencies” under “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K). 64 Provisions for estimated losses on uncompleted contracts, if any, are recognized in the period in which the loss first becomes probable and reasonably estimable. Contracts may include profit incentives such as milestone bonuses. These profit incentives are included in the contract value when their realization is reasonably assured. Development Projects We develop and sell solar power plants which generally include the sale or lease of related real estate. Revenue recognition for these solar power plants require adherence to specific guidance for real estate sales, which provides that if we execute a sale of land in conjunction with an EPC contract requiring the future development of the property, we recognize revenue and the corresponding costs under the full accrual method when all of the following requirements are met: the sale is consummated, the buyer’s initial and any continuing investments are adequate, the resulting receivables are not subject to subordination, the future costs to develop the property can be reasonably estimated, we have transferred the customary risk and rewards of ownership to the buyer, and we do not have prohibited continuing involvement with the property or the buyer. In general, a sale is consummated upon the execution of an agreement documenting the terms of the sale and receipt of a minimum initial payment by the buyer to substantiate the transfer of risk to the buyer. Depending on the value of the initial and continuing investment of the buyer, and provided the recovery of the costs of the solar power plant are assured if the buyer defaults, we may defer revenue and profit during construction by aligning our revenue recognition and release of deferred project costs to cost of sales with the receipt of payment from the buyer. At the time we have unconditionally received payment from the buyer, revenue is recognized and deferred project costs are released to cost of sales at the same rate of profit estimated throughout the construction of the project. Further, in situations where we have a noncontrolling equity interest in the buyer, we may defer all or a portion of our revenue or profit in accordance with specific guidance for partial sales of real estate. We have determined that our standard product and workmanship warranties do not represent prohibited forms of continuing involvement that would otherwise preclude revenue recognition as these warranties do not result in the retention of substantial risks or rewards of ownership or result in a seller guarantee as described in real estate accounting guidance. Similarly, we have determined that when we provide post-installation monitoring and maintenance services and associated system output performance warranties to customers of projects that include the sale or lease of real estate, these are not forms of prohibited continuing involvement since the terms and conditions of the post-installation monitoring and maintenance services are commensurate with market rates, control over the right to terminate the post-installation monitoring and maintenance contract and associated system output performance warranties rests with the customer since the customer has the right to terminate for convenience, and the terms and conditions for the system output performance warranties do not result in any additional services or efforts by us or in the retention of ownership risks outside of our control. Residential Leases We offer a solar lease program, in partnership with third-party financial institutions, which allows our residential customers to obtain SunPower systems under lease agreements for terms of up to 20 years. Leases are classified as either operating- or sales-type leases in accordance with the relevant accounting guidelines, which involve making a variety of estimates, including the fair value and residual value of leased solar power systems. Changes in these estimates can have a significant impact on the related accounting results, including the relative proportion of leases classified as operating- or sales-type leases. For those systems classified as sales-type leases, the net present value of the minimum lease payments, net of executory costs, is recognized as revenue when the lease is placed in service. This net present value as well as the net present value of the residual value of the lease at termination are recorded as receivables in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. The difference between the initial net amounts and the gross amounts are amortized to revenue over the lease term using the interest method. The residual values of our solar systems are determined at the inception of the lease by applying an estimated system fair value at the end of the lease term. For those systems classified as operating leases, rental revenue is recognized, net of executory costs, on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease. Allowance for Doubtful Accounts and Sales Returns We maintain allowances for doubtful accounts for estimated losses resulting from the inability of our customers to make required payments. A considerable amount of judgment is required to assess the likelihood of the ultimate realization of accounts receivable. We make our estimates of the collectability of our accounts receivable by analyzing historical bad debts, specific customer creditworthiness and current economic trends. In addition, at the time revenue is recognized from the sale of solar panels and balance of system components, we record estimates for sales returns which reduce revenue. These estimates are based on historical sales returns and analysis of credit memo data, among other known factors. 65 Warranty Reserves We generally provide a 25-year standard warranty for our solar panels that we manufacture for defects in materials and workmanship. The warranty provides that we will repair or replace any defective solar panels during the warranty period. In addition, we pass through to customers long-term warranties from the original equipment manufacturers of certain system components, such as inverters. Warranties of 25 years from solar panel suppliers are standard in the solar industry, while certain system components carry warranty periods ranging from five to 20 years. In addition, we generally warrant our workmanship on installed systems for periods ranging up to 25 years and also provide a separate system output performance warranty to customers that have subscribed to our post-installation monitoring and maintenance services which expires upon termination of the post-installation monitoring and maintenance services related to the system. The warrantied system output performance level varies by system depending on the characteristics of the system and the negotiated agreement with the customer, and the level declines over time to account for the expected degradation of the system. Actual system output is typically measured annually for purposes of determining whether warrantied performance levels have been met. The warranty excludes system output shortfalls attributable to force majeure events, customer curtailment, irregular weather, and other similar factors. In the event that the system output falls below the warrantied performance level during the applicable warranty period, and provided that the shortfall is not caused by a factor that is excluded from the performance warranty, the warranty provides that we will pay the customer a liquidated damage based on the value of the shortfall of energy produced relative to the applicable warrantied performance level. We maintain reserves to cover the expected costs that could result from these warranties. Our expected costs are generally in the form of product replacement or repair. Warranty reserves are based on our best estimate of such costs and are recognized as a cost of revenue. We continuously monitor product returns for warranty failures and maintain a reserve for the related warranty expenses based on various factors including historical warranty claims, results of accelerated lab testing, field monitoring, vendor reliability estimates, and data on industry averages for similar products. Due to the potential for variability in these underlying factors, the difference between our estimated costs and our actual costs could be material to our consolidated financial statements. If actual product failure rates or the frequency or severity of reported claims differ from our estimates or if there are delays in our responsiveness to outages, we may be required to revise our estimated warranty liability. Historically, warranty costs have been within management’s expectations. Valuation of Inventories Inventories are valued at the lower of cost or market value. We evaluate the recoverability of our inventories, including future purchase commitments under fixed-price long-term supply agreements, based on assumptions about expected demand and market conditions. Our assumption of expected demand is developed based on our analysis of bookings, sales backlog, sales pipeline, market forecast and competitive intelligence. Our assumption of expected demand is compared to available inventory, production capacity, future polysilicon purchase commitments, available third-party inventory and growth plans. Our factory production plans, which drive materials requirement planning, are established based on our assumptions of expected demand. We respond to reductions in expected demand by temporarily reducing manufacturing output and adjusting expected valuation assumptions as necessary. In addition, expected demand by geography has changed historically due to changes in the availability and size of government mandates and economic incentives. We evaluate the terms of our long-term inventory purchase agreements with suppliers, including joint ventures, for the procurement of polysilicon, ingots, wafers, and solar cells and establish accruals for estimated losses on adverse purchase commitments as necessary, such as lower of cost or market value adjustments, forfeiture of advanced deposits and liquidated damages. Obligations related to non-cancellable purchase orders for inventories match current and forecasted sales orders that will consume these ordered materials and actual consumption of these ordered materials are compared to expected demand regularly. We anticipate total obligations related to long-term supply agreements for inventories will be recovered because quantities are less than management’s expected demand for its solar power products. Other market conditions that could affect the realizable value of our inventories and are periodically evaluated by management include the aging of inventories on hand, historical inventory turnover ratio, anticipated sales price, new product development schedules, the effect new products might have on the sale of existing products, product obsolescence, customer concentrations, the current market price of polysilicon as compared to the price in our fixed-price arrangements, and product merchantability, among other factors. If, based on assumptions about expected demand and market conditions, we determine that the cost of inventories exceeds its estimated market value or inventory is excess or obsolete, we record a write-down or accrual, which may be material, equal to the difference between the cost of inventories and the estimated market value. If actual market conditions are less favorable than those projected by management, additional inventory write-downs may be required that could negatively affect our gross margin and operating results. If actual market conditions are more favorable, we may have higher gross margin when products that have been previously written down are sold in the normal course of business. 66 Stock-Based Compensation We provide stock-based awards to our employees, executive officers and directors through various equity compensation plans including our employee stock option and restricted stock plans. We measure and record compensation expense for all stock- based payment awards based on estimated fair values. The fair value of restricted stock awards and units is based on the market price of our common stock on the date of grant. We have not granted stock options since fiscal 2008. We are required under current accounting guidance to estimate forfeitures at the date of grant. Our estimate of forfeitures is based on our historical activity, which we believe is indicative of expected forfeitures. In subsequent periods if the actual rate of forfeitures differs from our estimate, the forfeiture rates are required to be revised, as necessary. Changes in the estimated forfeiture rates can have a significant effect on stock-based compensation expense since the effect of adjusting the rate is recognized in the period the forfeiture estimate is changed. We also grant performance share units to executive officers and certain employees that require us to estimate expected achievement of performance targets over the performance period. This estimate involves judgment regarding future expectations of various financial performance measures. If there are changes in our estimate of the level of financial performance measures expected to be achieved, the related stock-based compensation expense may be significantly increased or reduced in the period that our estimate changes. Variable Interest Entities (“VIE”) We regularly evaluate our relationships and involvement with unconsolidated VIEs, including our AUOSP joint venture, our investments in the 8point3 Group, and our other equity and cost method investments, to determine whether we have a controlling financial interest in them or have become the primary beneficiary, thereby requiring us to consolidate their financial results into our financial statements. In connection with the sale of the equity interests in the entities that hold solar power plants, we also consider whether we retain a variable interest in the entity sold, either through retaining a financial interest or by contractual means. If we determine that the entity sold is a VIE and that we hold a variable interest, we then evaluate whether we are the primary beneficiary. If we determine that we are the primary beneficiary, we will consolidate the VIE. The determination of whether we are the primary beneficiary is based upon whether we have the power to direct the activities that most directly impact the economic performance of the VIE and whether we absorb any losses or benefits that would be potentially significant to the VIE. Accounting for Business Combinations We record all acquired assets and liabilities, including goodwill, other intangible assets and in-process research and development, at fair value. The initial recording of goodwill, other intangible assets and in-process research and development requires certain estimates and assumptions concerning the determination of the fair values and useful lives. The judgments made in the context of the purchase price allocation can materially affect our future results of operations. Accordingly, for significant acquisitions, we obtain assistance from third-party valuation specialists. The valuations calculated from estimates are based on information available at the acquisition date. Goodwill is not amortized, but is subject to annual tests for impairment or more frequent tests if events or circumstances indicate it may be impaired. Other intangible assets are amortized over their estimated useful lives and are subject to impairment if events or circumstances indicate a possible inability to realize the carrying amount. For additional details see “Note 4. Business Combinations” and “Note 5. Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets” under “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Valuation of Long-Lived Assets Our long-lived assets include property, plant and equipment, solar power systems, and project assets. We evaluate our long-lived assets for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of such assets may not be recoverable. Factors considered important that could result in an impairment review include significant under-performance relative to expected historical or projected future operating results, significant changes in the manner of use of acquired assets and significant negative industry or economic trends. Our impairment evaluation of long-lived assets includes an analysis of estimated future undiscounted net cash flows expected to be generated by the assets over their remaining estimated useful lives. If our estimate of future undiscounted net cash flows is insufficient to recover the carrying value of the assets over the remaining estimated useful lives, we record an impairment loss in the amount by which the carrying value of the assets exceeds the fair value. Fair value is generally measured based on either quoted market prices, if available, or discounted cash flow analyses. 67 Fair Value of Financial Instruments Certain of our financial assets and financial liabilities, including our cash and cash equivalents, foreign currency derivatives, and convertible debenture derivatives are carried at fair value in our Consolidated Financial Statements. Current accounting guidance provides a hierarchy for inputs used in measuring fair value that maximizes the use of observable inputs and minimizes the use of unobservable inputs by requiring that the observable inputs be used when available: • Level 1 — Valuations based on quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that we have the ability to access. Since valuations are based on quoted prices that are readily and regularly available in an active market, valuation of these products does not entail a significant degree of judgment. Financial assets utilizing Level 1 inputs include money market funds. • Level 2 — Measurements are inputs that are observable for assets or liabilities, either directly or indirectly, other than quoted prices included within Level 1. Financial assets utilizing Level 2 inputs include foreign currency option contracts, forward exchange contracts and convertible debenture derivatives. The selection of a particular technique to value a derivative depends upon the contractual term of, and specific risks inherent with, the instrument as well as the availability of pricing information in the market. We generally use similar techniques to value similar instruments. Valuation techniques utilize a variety of inputs, including contractual terms, market prices, yield curves, credit curves and measures of volatility. For derivatives that trade in liquid markets, such as generic forward and option contracts, inputs can generally be verified and selections do not involve significant management judgment. • Level 3 — Prices or valuations that require management inputs that are both significant to the fair value measurement and unobservable. We did not have any assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis requiring Level 3 inputs. Accounting for Income Taxes Our global operations involve manufacturing, research and development, and selling and project development activities. Profit from non-U.S. activities is subject to local country taxation, but not subject to U.S. tax until repatriated to the United States. It is our intention to indefinitely reinvest these earnings outside the United States. We record a valuation allowance to reduce our U.S. and French deferred tax assets to the amount that is more likely than not to be realized. In assessing the need for a valuation allowance, we consider historical levels of income, expectations and risks associated with the estimates of future taxable income and ongoing prudent and feasible tax planning strategies. In the event we determine that we would be able to realize additional deferred tax assets in the future in excess of the net recorded amount, or if we subsequently determine that realization of an amount previously recorded is unlikely, we would record an adjustment to the deferred tax asset valuation allowance, which would change income tax in the period of adjustment. As of January 3, 2016, we believe there is insufficient evidence to realize additional deferred tax assets, although it is possible that a reversal of the valuation allowance, which could be material, could occur in a future period. The calculation of tax expense and liabilities involves dealing with uncertainties in the application of complex global tax regulations, including in the tax valuation of projects sold to tax equity partnerships and other third parties. We recognize potential liabilities for anticipated tax audit issues in the United States and other tax jurisdictions based on our estimate of whether, and the extent to which, additional taxes will be due. If payment of these amounts ultimately proves to be unnecessary, the reversal of the liabilities would result in tax benefits being recognized in the period in which we determine the liabilities are no longer necessary. If the estimate of tax liabilities proves to be less than the ultimate tax assessment, a further charge to expense would result. We accrue interest and penalties on tax contingencies which are classified as “Provision for income taxes” in our Consolidated Statements of Operations and are not considered material. Pursuant to the Tax Sharing Agreement with Cypress, our former parent company, we are obligated to indemnify Cypress upon current utilization of carryforward tax attributes generated while we were part of the Cypress consolidated or combined group. Further, to the extent Cypress experiences any tax examination assessments attributable to our operations while part of the Cypress consolidated or combined group, Cypress will require an indemnification from us for those aspects of the assessment that relate to our operations. See also “Item 1A. Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Operations—Our agreements with Cypress require us to indemnify Cypress for certain tax liabilities. These indemnification obligations and related contractual restrictions may limit our ability to pursue certain business initiatives.” In addition, foreign exchange gains (losses) may result from estimated tax liabilities which are expected to be realized in currencies other than the U.S. dollar. 68 Liquidity and Capital Resources Cash Flows A summary of the sources and uses of cash and cash equivalents is as follows: (In thousands) Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities Net cash provided by financing activities Operating Activities 2015 (726,231) 109,399 619,967 $ $ $ Fiscal Year 2014 $ $ $ 8,360 (309,239) 498,566 2013 162,429 (153,178) 294,068 $ $ $ Net cash used in operating activities in fiscal 2015 was $726.2 million and was primarily the result of: (i) a net loss of $299.4 million; (ii) a $763.1 million increase in project assets primarily related to our Henrietta, Hooper and Quinto Solar Energy Projects; (iii) a $237.8 million increase in inventories driven by project assets for construction of solar power systems for Commercial and Power Plant projects in North America and purchases of polysilicon; (iv) a $143.0 million increase in long- term financing receivables related to our net investment in sales-type leases; (v) a $87.0 million increase in prepaid expenses and other assets; (vi) a $39.4 million excess tax benefit from stock-based compensation; (vii) a $27.9 million gain on the sale of a residential lease portfolio to 8point3 Energy Partners; (viii) a $20.8 million increase in customer advances; and (ix) a $9.6 million increase in equity in earnings of unconsolidated investees. This was partially offset by: (i) a $311.7 million decrease in accounts receivable, primarily driven by the collection of retainage related to Solar Star Projects; (ii) other net non-cash charges of $205.7 million related to depreciation, non-cash interest charges and stock-based compensation; (iii) a $148.4 million decrease in costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings driven by a decrease related to the Solar Star Projects; (iv) a $90.9 million increase in accounts payable and other accrued liabilities; (v) a $63.7 million increase in deferred income taxes and income tax liabilities; (vi) a $50.6 million decrease in advance payment made to suppliers; and (vii) a $30.7 million increase in billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings driven by an increase related to Solar Star and other projects. Net cash provided by operating activities in fiscal 2014 was $8.4 million and was primarily the result of: (i) a net income of $183.1 million; (ii) a $205.5 million decrease in prepaid expenses and other assets driven by a decline in deferred costs related to the Solar Star Projects; (iii) net non-cash charges of $186.0 million related to depreciation, non-cash interest charges, and stock based compensation; (iv) a $45.8 million increase in accounts payable and other accrued liabilities; and (v) a $21.7 million net increase in deferred income taxes and other liabilities. This was partially offset by: (i) a $225.2 million decrease in billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings driven by a decline related to the Solar Star Projects; (ii) a $155.3 million increase in costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings driven by an increase related to the Solar Star Projects; (iii) a $94.3 million increase in long-term financing receivables related to our net investment in sales-type leases; (iv) a $68.2 million increase in project assets primarily related to our Quinto Solar Energy project; (v) a $26.3 million increase in advance payments made to suppliers; (vi) a $31.5 million increase in accounts receivable; (vii) a $23.5 million decrease in customer advances; and (viii) a $9.4 million net change in other operating assets. Net cash provided by operating activities in fiscal 2013 was $162.4 million and was primarily the result of: (i) a net income of $33.6 million; (ii) a $120.6 million increase in accounts payable and other accrued liabilities; (iii) an $83.1 million increase in billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings; (iv) other net non-cash charges of $142.6 million primarily related to depreciation, non-cash interest charges, and stock based compensation, which includes a gain of $52.0 million on contract termination; and (v) other net changes in operating assets and liabilities of $4.1 million. This was partially offset by: (i) an increase of $107.5 million in long-term financing receivables, net related to our net investment in sales-type leases; (ii) a $28.3 million increase in inventory and project assets for construction of future and current projects primarily in North America; (iii) an increase in accounts receivable of $53.8 million; and (iv) an increase of $31.9 million in additional advance payments made to suppliers. Investing Activities Net cash provided by investing activities in fiscal 2015 was $109.4 million, which included $539.8 million in proceeds from 8point3 Energy Partners. This was partially offset by (i) $328.4 million in capital expenditures primarily related to the expansion of our solar cell manufacturing capacity and costs associated with solar power systems, leased and to be leased; (ii) $64.8 million paid for acquisitions; (iii) a $23.2 million increase in restricted cash; (iv) $9.9 million paid for intangibles; and (v) $4.1 million paid for investments in unconsolidated investees. 69 Net cash used in investing activities in fiscal 2014 was $309.2 million, which included: (i) $166.9 million related to capital expenditures primarily related to the expansion of our solar cell manufacturing capacity and costs associated with solar power systems, leased and to be leased; (ii) $97.0 million paid for investments in unconsolidated investees driven by a $72.0 million equity contribution to AUOSP; (iii) $35.1 million paid for acquisitions; and (iv) a $11.6 million increase in restricted cash. This was partially offset by $1.4 million proceeds from maturities of marketable securities. Net cash used in investing activities in fiscal 2013 was $153.2 million, which included: (i) $99.9 million in purchases of marketable securities; (ii) $97.2 million related to costs associated with solar power systems leased and to be leased; (iii) $34.1 million of capital expenditures primarily associated with improvements to our current generation solar cell manufacturing technology; (iv) $21.3 million related to costs associated with solar power systems under the financing method; and (v) $17.8 million paid for investments in unconsolidated investees. This was partially offset by (i) $100.9 million in proceeds from sales or maturities of marketable securities; (ii) $15.5 million of restricted cash released back to us due to expirations of fully cash- collateralized letters of credit under the September 2011 Letter of Credit Facility with Deutsche Bank Trust and transition of outstanding letters of credit into the August 2011 Deutsche Bank facility under which payment of obligations is uncollateralized and guaranteed by Total S.A; and (iii) $0.6 million in proceeds from the sale of equipment to a third-party. Financing Activities Net cash provided by financing activities in fiscal 2015 was $620.0 million, which included: (i) $416.3 million in proceeds from issuance of our 4.00% convertible debentures due 2023; (ii) $424.6 million in proceeds from the issuance of project loans, net of issuance costs; (iii) $170.6 million of net contributions from noncontrolling interests and redeemable noncontrolling interests related to the residential lease program; (iv) $90.6 million in net proceeds from the issuance of non- recourse debt financing, net of issuance costs; (v) $39.9 million in proceeds from exercise of stock options and excess tax benefit from stock-based compensation; (vi) $29.3 million in proceeds from 8point3 Energy Partners; (vii) $15.0 million in net proceeds from sale-leaseback financing; and (viii) $12.4 million in contributions from noncontrolling interests related to real estate projects. This was partially offset by: (i) $250.3 million in net payment to settle the 4.50% debentures due 2015, and the 4.50% Bond Hedge and Warrant (defined below); (ii) $252.6 million in repayments of bank loans, project loans and other debt, primarily the Quinto Credit Facility; (iii) $43.8 million in purchases of treasury stock for tax withholding obligations on vested restricted stock; and (iv) $32.0 million of net repayments of residential lease financing. Net cash provided by financing activities in fiscal 2014 was $498.6 million, which included: (i) $395.3 million in net proceeds from the issuance of our 0.875% convertible debentures due 2021; (ii) $100.7 million of contributions from noncontrolling interests and redeemable noncontrolling interests related to the residential lease program; (iii) $81.9 million of proceeds from issuance of non-recourse debt financing to finance solar power systems and leases under our residential lease program; (iv) $61.5 million in proceeds from issuance of project loans; (v) $46.4 million in net proceeds from sale-leaseback financing arrangements; and (vi) $3.4 million in proceeds from exercise of stock options and excess tax benefit from stock-based compensation. This was partially offset by: (i) $57.5 million in purchases of stock for tax withholding obligations on vested restricted stock; (ii) $42.3 million cash paid to repurchase convertible debt; (iii) a $40.7 million assumption of a project loan by a customer; (iv) $17.1 million in repayments of bank loans, project loans and other debt; (v) $15.7 million of repayments of residential lease financing; (vi) a $12.2 million net payment to settle the 4.75% Bond Hedge and Warrant; and (vii) $5.1 million of distributions to noncontrolling interests and redeemable noncontrolling interests. Net cash provided by financing activities in fiscal 2013 was $294.1 million, which included: (i) $296.3 million of proceeds, net of issuance costs, from the issuance of our 0.75% debentures during the second quarter of fiscal 2013 (“the 0.75% debentures due 2018”); (ii) $82.4 million from project loans; (iii) $96.4 million of financing proceeds associated with our residential lease program; (iv) $100.0 million of contributions from noncontrolling interests; and (v) $73.1 million of proceeds associated with sale leaseback financing arrangements. This was partially offset by: (i) $290.5 million repayments of our outstanding borrowings primarily under the Credit Agricole revolving credit facility, project loans and other debt; (ii) $34.9 million in assumption of project loans by customers; (iii) $19.8 million in purchases of stock for tax withholding obligations on vested restricted stock; and (iv) 8.8 million in repayments of sale leaseback financing. Debt and Credit Sources Convertible Debentures As of January 3, 2016, an aggregate principal amount of $425.0 million of the 4.00% debentures due 2023 remained issued and outstanding. The 4.00% debentures due 2023 were issued on December 15, 2015. Interest on the 4.00% debentures due 2023 is payable on January 15 and July 15 of each year, beginning on July 15, 2016. Holders are able to exercise their right 70 to convert the debentures at any time into shares of our common stock at an initial conversion price approximately equal to $30.53 per share, subject to adjustment in certain circumstances. If not earlier repurchased or converted, the 4.00% debentures due 2023 mature on January 15, 2023. Holders may require us to repurchase all or a portion of their 4.00% debentures due 2023, upon a fundamental change, as described in the related indenture, at a cash repurchase price equal to 100% of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest. If we undergo a non-stock change of control fundamental change, as described in the related indenture, the 4.00% debentures due 2023 will be subject to redemption at our option, in whole but not in part, for a period of 30 calendar days following a repurchase date relating to the non-stock change of control fundamental change, at a cash redemption price equal to 100% of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest. Otherwise, the 4.00% debentures due 2023 are not redeemable at our option prior to the maturity date. In the event of certain events of default, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association (“Wells Fargo”), the trustee, or the holders of a specified amount of then-outstanding 4.00% debentures due 2023 will have the right to declare all amounts then outstanding due and payable. As of January 3, 2016, an aggregate principal amount of $400.0 million of the 0.875% debentures due 2021 remained issued and outstanding. The 0.875% debentures due 2021 were issued on June 11, 2014. Interest on the 0.875% debentures due 2021 is payable on June 1 and December 1 of each year. Holders are able to exercise their right to convert the debentures at any time into shares of our common stock at an initial conversion price approximately equal to $48.76 per share, subject to adjustment in certain circumstances. If not earlier repurchased or converted, the 0.875% debentures due 2021 mature on June 1, 2021. Holders may require us to repurchase all or a portion of their 0.875% debentures due 2021, upon a fundamental change, as described in the related indenture, at a cash repurchase price equal to 100% of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest. If we undergo a non-stock change of control fundamental change, as described in the related indenture, the 0.875% debentures due 2021 will be subject to redemption at our option, in whole but not in part, for a period of 30 calendar days following a repurchase date relating to the non-stock change of control fundamental change, at a cash redemption price equal to 100% of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest. Otherwise, the 0.875% debentures due 2021 are not redeemable at our option prior to the maturity date. In the event of certain events of default, Wells Fargo, the trustee, or the holders of a specified amount of then-outstanding 0.875% debentures due 2021 will have the right to declare all amounts then outstanding due and payable. As of January 3, 2016, an aggregate principal amount of $300.0 million of the 0.75% debentures due 2018 remained issued and outstanding. The 0.75% debentures due 2018 were issued on May 29, 2013. Interest on the 0.75% debentures due 2018 is payable on June 1 and December 1 of each year. Holders are able to exercise their right to convert the debentures at any time into shares of our common stock at an initial conversion price equal to $24.95 per share. The applicable conversion rate may be subject to adjustment in certain circumstances. If not earlier converted, the 0.75% debentures due 2018 mature on June 1, 2018. Holders may require us to repurchase all or a portion of their 0.75% debentures due 2018, upon a fundamental change, as described in the related indenture, at a cash repurchase price equal to 100% of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest. If we undergo a non-stock change of control fundamental change, as described in the related indenture, the 0.75% debentures due 2018 will be subject to redemption at our option, in whole but not in part, for a period of 30 calendar days following a repurchase date relating to the non-stock change of control fundamental change, at a cash redemption price equal to 100% of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest. Otherwise, the 0.75% debentures due 2018 are not redeemable at our option prior to the maturity date. In the event of certain events of default, Wells Fargo, the trustee, or the holders of a specified amount of then-outstanding 0.75% debentures due 2018 will have the right to declare all amounts then outstanding due and payable. Please see “Item 1A. Risk Factors—Risks Related to our Debt and Equity Securities—Conversion of our outstanding 0.75% debentures, 0.875% debentures, 4.00% debentures, and future substantial issuances or dispositions of our common stock or other securities, could dilute ownership and earnings per share or cause the market price of our stock to decrease”. Mortgage Loan Agreement with IFC On May 6, 2010, we entered into a mortgage loan agreement with IFC. Under the loan agreement, we borrowed $75.0 million and are required to repay the amount borrowed starting two years after the date of borrowing, in 10 equal semiannual installments over the following 5 years. We are required to pay interest of LIBOR plus 3% per annum on outstanding borrowings; a front-end fee of 1% on the principal amount of borrowings at the time of borrowing; and a commitment fee of 0.5% per annum on funds available for borrowing and not borrowed. We may prepay all or a part of the outstanding principal, subject to a 1% prepayment premium. We have pledged certain assets as collateral supporting repayment obligations. 71 As of January 3, 2016, we had $32.5 million outstanding under the mortgage loan agreement. Additionally, in accordance with the terms of the mortgage loan agreement, we are required to establish a debt service reserve account which shall contain the amount, as determined by IFC, equal to the aggregate principal and interest due on the next succeeding interest payment date after such date. As of January 3, 2016, we had restricted cash and cash equivalents of $9.2 million related to the IFC debt service reserve. Loan Agreement with California Enterprise Development Authority (“CEDA”) On December 29, 2010, we borrowed from CEDA the proceeds of the $30.0 million aggregate principal amount of CEDA’s tax-exempt Recovery Zone Facility Revenue Bonds (SunPower Corporation - Headquarters Project) Series 2010 (the “Bonds”) maturing April 1, 2031 under a loan agreement with CEDA. Certain of our obligations under the loan agreement were contained in a promissory note dated December 29, 2010 issued by us to CEDA, which assigned the promissory note, along with all right, title and interest in the loan agreement, to Wells Fargo, as trustee, with respect to the Bonds for the benefit of the holders of the Bonds. The Bonds bear interest at a fixed-rate of 8.50% per annum. As of January 3, 2016, the $30.0 million aggregate principal amount of the Bonds was classified as “Long-term debt” in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. Revolving Credit Facility with Credit Agricole On July 3, 2013, we entered into a revolving credit agreement with Credit Agricole, as administrative agent, and certain financial institutions, under which we may borrow up to $250.0 million. On August 26, 2014, we entered into an amendment to the revolving credit facility that extends, among other things, the maturity date of the facility from July 3, 2016 to August 26, 2019 (the “Maturity Date”). Amounts borrowed may be repaid and reborrowed until the Maturity Date. On February 17, 2016, the Company entered into an amendment to the credit agreement, expanding the available borrowings under the revolving credit facility to $300.0 million and adding a $200.0 million letter of credit subfacility, subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions. The revolving credit facility includes representations, covenants, and events of default customary for financing transactions of this type. The revolving credit facility was entered into in conjunction with the delivery by Total S.A. of a guarantee of our obligations under the facility. On January 31, 2014, (i) our obligations under the revolving credit facility became secured by a pledge of certain accounts receivable and inventory, (ii) certain of our subsidiaries entered into guaranties of the revolving credit facility, and (iii) Total S.A.’s guarantee of our obligations under the revolving credit facility expired (collectively, the “Restructuring”). We are required to pay (a) interest on outstanding borrowings under the facility of (i) with respect to any LIBOR rate loan, an amount ranging from 1.50% to 2.00% (depending on our leverage ratio from time to time) plus the LIBOR rate divided by a percentage equal to one minus the stated maximum rate of all reserves required to be maintained against “Eurocurrency liabilities” as specified in Regulation D; and (ii) with respect to any alternate base rate loan, an amount ranging from 0.50% to 1.00% (depending on our leverage ratio from time to time) plus the greater of (1) the prime rate, (2) the Federal Funds rate plus 0.50%, and (3) the one-month LIBOR rate plus 1%; and (b) a commitment fee ranging from 0.25% to 0.35% (depending on our leverage ratio from time to time) per annum on funds available for borrowing and not borrowed. As of January 3, 2016, the Company had no outstanding borrowings under the revolving credit facility. August 2011 Letter of Credit Facility with Deutsche Bank On August 9, 2011, we entered into a letter of credit facility agreement with Deutsche Bank, as issuing bank and as administrative agent, and certain financial institutions. Payment of obligations under the letter of credit facility is guaranteed by Total S.A. pursuant to the Credit Support Agreement between us and Total S.A. The letter of credit facility provides for the issuance, upon our request, of letters of credit by the issuing banks thereunder in order to support certain of our obligations. Aggregate letter of credit amounts may be increased upon the agreement of the parties but, otherwise, may not exceed (i) $936.0 million for the period from January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015, and (ii) $1.0 billion for the period from January 1, 2016 through June 28, 2016. Each letter of credit issued under the letter of credit facility must have an expiration date no later than the second anniversary of the issuance of that letter of credit, provided that up to 15% of the outstanding value of the letters of credit may have an expiration date of between two and three years from the date of issuance. As of January 3, 2016, letters of credit issued under the August 2011 letter of credit facility with Deutsche Bank totaled $294.5 million. 72 September 2011 Letter of Credit Facility with Deutsche Bank and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas (together, “Deutsche Bank Trust”) On September 27, 2011, we entered into a letter of credit facility with Deutsche Bank Trust which provides for the issuance, upon request by us, of letters of credit to support our obligations in an aggregate amount not to exceed $200.0 million. Each letter of credit issued under the facility is fully cash-collateralized and we have entered into a security agreement with Deutsche Bank Trust, granting them a security interest in a cash collateral account established for this purpose. As of January 3, 2016 letters of credit issued under the Deutsche Bank Trust facility amounted to $8.6 million, which were fully collateralized with restricted cash as classified on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Quinto Credit Facility On October 17, 2014, we, through a wholly-owned subsidiary (the “Project Company”), entered into an approximately $377.0 million credit facility with Santander Bank, N.A., Mizuho Bank, Ltd. and Credit Agricole (the “Quinto Credit Facility”) in connection with the planned construction of the approximately 135 MW Quinto Solar Energy Project, located in Merced County, California (the “Quinto Project”). On June 24, 2015, in connection with the closing of 8point3 Energy Partners’ IPO and the concurrent transfer of the Quinto Project to an affiliate of 8point3 Energy Partners, the Quinto Project Company repaid the full amount outstanding under the Quinto Credit Facility and terminated the agreement early. Immediately before termination, there were outstanding borrowings of $224.3 million under the Quinto Credit Facility. The Quinto Project Company did not incur any material penalties for early repayment of the Quinto Credit Facility. Project Financing and Other Debt In order to facilitate the construction, sale or ongoing operation of certain solar projects, we regularly obtain project financing, typically in the form of loans from third-party institutions. These financings are secured by the assets of the specific project being financed and do not have recourse to the general assets of SunPower for repayment of such debt obligations, and hence are referred to as non-recourse. We classify non-recourse financings in the Consolidated Balance Sheets in accordance with their terms; however, in certain circumstances, we may repay or refinance these financings prior to stated maturity dates in connection with the sale of the related project or similar such circumstances. In addition, the customer may assume the loans at the time that the project entity is sold to the customer. In these instances, subsequent debt assumption is reflected as a financing outflow and operating inflow in the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows to reflect the substance of the assumption as a facilitation of customer financing from a third party. During fiscal 2015, we entered into a long-term non-recourse credit facility to finance the 128 MW Henrietta utility-scale power plant in California. The outstanding borrowings under this facility amounted to $216.7 million as of January 3, 2016. In addition, we entered into a long-term non-recourse credit facility to finance the 60 MW Hooper utility-scale power plant in Colorado. The outstanding borrowings under this facility amounted to $37.3 million as of January 3, 2016. During fiscal 2014 and 2015, we entered into several long-term non-recourse loans to finance solar power systems and leases under our residential lease program. In fiscal 2015, we drew down $92.1 million of proceeds, net of issuance costs, under the loan agreements. The loans are repaid over their terms of between 17 and 18 years, and may be prepaid without penalty at our option beginning seven years after the original issuance of the loan. As of January 3, 2016, the short-term and long-term balances of the loans were $4.1 million and $167.6 million, respectively. During fiscal 2013, we entered into a project loan with a consortium of lenders to facilitate the development of a 10 MW utility and power plant project under construction in Israel. During the first quarter of fiscal 2014, we sold the Israeli project. The related loan, amounting to ILS 141.8 million (approximately $40.7 million based on the exchange rate at the time of sale), and accrued and unpaid interest was assumed by the customer. During fiscal 2013, we entered into a long-term non-recourse loan agreement to finance a 5.4 MW utility and power plant operating in Arizona. The outstanding balance of the loan as of January 3, 2016 was $8.1 million. Other debt is further composed of non-recourse project loans in EMEA, which are scheduled to mature through 2028. 73 Liquidity As of January 3, 2016, we had unrestricted cash and cash equivalents of $954.5 million as compared to $956.2 million as of December 28, 2014. Our cash balances are held in numerous locations throughout the world and as of January 3, 2016, we had approximately $137.6 million held outside of the United States. This offshore cash is used to fund operations of our business in the Europe and Asia Pacific regions as well as non-U.S. manufacturing operations, which require local payment for product materials and other expenses. The amounts held outside of the United States represent the earnings of our foreign subsidiaries which, if repatriated to the United States under current law, would be subject to United States federal and state tax less applicable foreign tax credits. Repatriation of earnings that have not been subjected to U.S. or foreign withholding tax and that have been indefinitely reinvested outside the U.S. could result in additional United States federal income tax or foreign withholding tax payments in future years. On July 5, 2010, we formed AUOSP, our joint venture with AUO. Under the terms of the joint venture agreement, we and AUO each own 50% of AUOSP. We are each obligated to provide additional funding to AUOSP in the future. Under the joint venture agreement, each shareholder agreed to contribute additional amounts to the joint venture amounting to $169.0 million, or such lesser amount as the parties may mutually agree (see the Contractual Obligations table below). In addition, if AUOSP, or either shareholder requests additional equity financing for AUOSP, then the shareholders will each be required to make additional cash contributions of up to $50.0 million in the aggregate. See also “Part I. Item 1A. Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Operations—If we experience interruptions in the operation of our solar cell production lines, or we are not successful in operating our joint venture AUOSP, our revenue and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected.” We expect total capital expenditures related to purchases of property, plant and equipment in the range of $210 million to $240 million in fiscal 2016 in order to increase our manufacturing capacity, improve our current and next generation solar cell manufacturing technology, and other projects. In addition, we expect to invest a significant amount of capital to develop solar power systems and plants for sale to customers. The development of solar power plants can require long periods of time and substantial initial investments. Our efforts in this area may consist of all stages of development, including land acquisition, permitting, financing, construction, operation and the eventual sale of the projects. We often choose to bear the costs of such efforts prior to the final sale to a customer, which involves significant upfront investments of resources (including, for example, large transmission deposits or other payments, which may be non-refundable), land acquisition, permitting, legal and other costs, and in some cases the actual costs of constructing a project, in advance of the signing of PPAs and EPC contracts and the receipt of any revenue, much of which is not recognized for several additional months or years following contract signing. Any delays in disposition of one or more projects could have a negative impact on our liquidity. Certain of our customers also require performance bonds issued by a bonding agency or letters of credit issued by financial institutions, which are returned to us upon satisfaction of contractual requirements. If there is a contractual dispute with the customer, the customer may withhold the security or make a draw under such security, which could have an adverse impact on our liquidity. Obtaining letters of credit may require adequate collateral. All letters of credit issued under our August 2011 Deutsche Bank facility are guaranteed by Total S.A. pursuant to the Credit Support Agreement. Our September 2011 letter of credit facility with Deutsche Bank Trust is fully collateralized by restricted cash, which reduces the amount of cash available for operations. As of January 3, 2016, letters of credit issued under the Deutsche Bank Trust facility amounted to $8.6 million which were fully collateralized with restricted cash on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. In fiscal 2011, we launched our residential lease program with dealers in the United States, in partnership with a third- party financial institution, which allows customers to obtain SunPower systems under lease agreements up to 20 years, subject to financing availability. We have entered into facilities with financial institutions that will provide financing to support additional residential solar lease projects. Under the terms of certain programs we receive upfront payments for periods under which the third-party financial institution has agreed to assume collection risk for certain residential leases. Changes in the amount or timing of upfront payments received from the financial institutions may have an impact on our cash position within the next twelve months. The normal collection of monthly rent payments for leases placed in service is not expected to have a material impact on our cash position within the next twelve months. We have entered into multiple facilities with third-party investors under which both parties will invest in entities that hold SunPower solar power systems and leases with residential customers. We determined that we hold a controlling interest in these less-than-wholly-owned entities and have fully consolidated these entities as a result (see “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements— Note 7. Leasing”). As of January 3, 2016, we received $180.9 million in contributions from investors under the related facility agreements. Additionally, during fiscal 2014 and 2015, we entered into several long-term non-recourse loans to finance solar power systems and leases under our residential lease program. In fiscal 2015, we drew down $92.1 million of proceeds, net of issuance costs, under the loan agreements. The loans have 17- and 18-year terms and as of January 3, 2016, the short-term and 74 long-term balances of the loans were $4.1 million and $167.6 million, respectively. We are actively arranging additional third- party financing for our residential lease program; however, the credit markets are unpredictable, and if they become challenging, we may be unable to arrange additional financing partners for our residential lease program in future periods, which could have a negative impact on our sales. In the unlikely event that we enter into a material number of additional leases without promptly obtaining corresponding third-party financing, our cash and working capital could be negatively affected. Solar power plant projects often require significant up-front investments. These include payments for preliminary engineering, permitting, legal, and other expenses before we can determine whether a project is feasible. We often make arrangements with third-party financiers to acquire and build solar power systems or to fund project construction. As of January 3, 2016, outstanding amounts related to our project financing were $433.9 million. We believe that our current cash, cash equivalents and cash expected to be generated from operations will be sufficient to meet our working capital and fund our committed capital expenditures over the next 12 months, including the development and construction of solar power systems and plants. We expect to be able to supplement this short-term liquidity, if necessary, with broad access to capital markets and credit facilities, including non-recourse debt, made available by various domestic and foreign financial institutions. However, there can be no assurance that our liquidity will be adequate over time. A significant portion of our revenue is generated from a limited number of customers and large projects and our inability to execute these projects, or to collect from these customers or for these projects, would have a significant negative impact on our business. Our capital expenditures and use of working capital may be greater than we expect if we decide to make additional investments in the development and construction of solar power plants and sales of power plants and associated cash proceeds are delayed, or if we decide to accelerate increases in our manufacturing capacity internally or through capital contributions to joint ventures. We require project financing in connection with the construction of solar power plants, which financing may not be available on terms acceptable to us. In addition, we could in the future make additional investments in our joint ventures or guarantee certain financial obligations of our joint ventures, which could reduce our cash flows, increase our indebtedness and expose us to the credit risk of our joint ventures. See also “Risks Related to Our Sales Channels—A limited number of customers and large projects are expected to continue to comprise a significant portion of our revenues and any decrease in revenues from those customers or projects, payment of liquidated damages, or an increase in related expenses, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition,” and “Risks Related to Our Liquidity—We may be unable to generate sufficient cash flows or obtain access to external financing necessary to fund our operations and make adequate capital investments as planned due to the general economic environment and the continued market pressure driving down the average selling prices of our solar power products,” among other factors in Part I. “Item 1A. Risk Factors”. As of January 3, 2016, we had $250.0 million available to us under our revolving credit facility with Credit Agricole and on February 17, 2016, we entered into an amendment to the credit agreement to expand the available borrowings under the revolving credit facility to $300.0 million and to add a $200.0 million letter of credit subfacility, subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions. Proceeds from our revolving credit facility with Credit Agricole may be used for general corporate purposes. However, there are no assurances that we will have sufficient available cash to repay our indebtedness or we will be able to refinance such indebtedness on similar terms to the expiring indebtedness. If our capital resources are insufficient to satisfy our liquidity requirements, we may seek to sell additional equity securities or debt securities or obtain other debt financing. The current economic environment, however, could limit our ability to raise capital by issuing new equity or debt securities on acceptable terms, and lenders may be unwilling to lend funds on acceptable terms that would be required to supplement cash flows to support operations. The sale of additional equity securities or convertible debt securities would result in additional dilution to our stockholders (and the potential for further dilution upon the exercise of warrants or the conversion of convertible debt) and may not be available on favorable terms or at all, particularly in light of the current conditions in the financial and credit markets. Additional debt would result in increased expenses and would likely impose new restrictive covenants which may be similar or different than those restrictions contained in the covenants under our current loan agreements and debentures. In addition, financing arrangements, including project financing for our solar power plants and letters of credit facilities, may not be available to us, or may not be available in amounts or on terms acceptable to us. 75 Contractual Obligations The following table summarizes our contractual obligations as of January 3, 2016: (In thousands) Convertible debt, including interest1 IFC mortgage loan, including interest2 CEDA loan, including interest3 Other debt, including interest4 Future financing commitments5 Operating lease commitments6 Sale-leaseback financing7 Capital lease commitments8 Non-cancellable purchase orders9 Purchase commitments under agreements10 Total Total $ 1,269,110 33,467 68,888 586,271 179,590 135,082 103,503 5,816 290,954 1,606,906 $ 4,279,587 Payments Due by Fiscal Period 2016 $ 22,750 15,734 2,550 20,839 179,590 17,651 7,983 1,401 290,954 723,914 $ 1,283,366 $ 2017-2018 344,194 17,733 5,100 61,139 — 27,921 15,735 1,940 — 542,464 $ 1,016,226 2019-2020 41,000 — 5,100 84,078 — 24,576 13,706 1,133 — 337,528 507,121 $ $ Beyond 2020 861,166 $ — 56,138 420,215 — 64,934 66,079 1,342 — 3,000 $ 1,472,874 1 Convertible debt, including interest, relates to the aggregate of $1,125.0 million in outstanding principal amount of our senior convertible debentures on January 3, 2016. For the purpose of the table above, we assume that all holders of the outstanding debentures will hold the debentures through the date of maturity, and upon conversion, the values of the senior convertible debentures will be equal to the aggregate principal amount with no premiums. 2 IFC mortgage loan, including interest, relates to the $32.5 million borrowed as of January 3, 2016. Under the loan agreement, we are required to repay the amount borrowed, starting 2 years after the date of borrowing, in 10 equal semiannual installments over the following 5 years. We are required to pay interest of LIBOR plus 3% per annum on outstanding borrowings; a front-end fee of 1% on the principal amount of borrowings at the time of borrowing; and a commitment fee of 0.5% per annum on funds available for borrowing and not borrowed. 3 CEDA loan, including interest, relates to the proceeds of the $30.0 million aggregate principal amount of the Bonds. The Bonds mature on April 1, 2031 and bear interest at a fixed rate of 8.50% through maturity. 4 Other debt, including interest, primarily relates to non-recourse finance projects and solar power systems and leases under our residential lease program as described in “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 10. Commitments and Contingencies.” 5 We and AUO agreed in the joint venture agreement to contribute additional amounts to AUOSP through 2016 amounting to $169.0 million by each shareholder, or such lesser amount as the parties may mutually agree. Further, in connection with purchase and joint venture agreements with non-public companies, we will be required to provide additional financing to such parties of up to $10.6 million, subject to certain conditions. 6 Operating lease commitments primarily relate to certain solar power systems leased from unaffiliated third parties over minimum lease terms of up to 20 years and various facility lease agreements. 7 Sale-leaseback financing relates to future minimum lease obligations for solar power systems under sale-leaseback arrangements which were determined to include integral equipment and accounted for under the financing method. 8 Capital lease commitments primarily relate to certain buildings, manufacturing and equipment under capital leases in Europe for terms of up to 12 years. 9 Non-cancellable purchase orders relate to purchases of raw materials for inventory and manufacturing equipment from a variety of vendors. 10 Purchase commitments under agreements relate to arrangements entered into with several suppliers, including joint ventures, for polysilicon, ingots, wafers, and Solar Renewable Energy Credits, among others. These agreements specify future quantities and pricing of products to be supplied by the vendors for periods up to 10 years and there are certain consequences, such as forfeiture of advanced deposits and liquidated damages relating to previous purchases, in the event that we terminate the arrangements. During fiscal 2015, we did not fulfill all of the purchase commitments we were otherwise obligated to take by December 31, 2015, as specified in related contracts with a supplier. As of January 3, 2016, the Company has recorded an offsetting asset, recorded within “Prepaid expenses and other current assets,” and liability, recorded within “Accrued liabilities,” totaling $50.6 million. This amount represents the unfulfilled amount as of that date as the Company expects to satisfy the obligation via purchases of inventory in fiscal 2016, within the applicable contractual cure period. 76 Liabilities Associated with Uncertain Tax Positions Due to the complexity and uncertainty associated with our tax positions, we cannot make a reasonably reliable estimate of the period in which cash settlement will be made for our liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions in other long-term liabilities. Therefore, they have been excluded from the table above. As of January 3, 2016, total liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions were $41.0 million and are included in “Other long-term liabilities” in our Consolidated Balance Sheets as they are not expected to be paid within the next twelve months. Off-Balance-Sheet Arrangements As of January 3, 2016, we did not have any significant off-balance-sheet arrangements, as defined in Item 303(a)(4)(ii) of SEC Regulation S-K. ITEM 7A: QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURE ABOUT MARKET RISK Foreign Currency Exchange Risk Our exposure to movements in foreign currency exchange rates is primarily related to sales to European customers that are denominated in Euros. Revenue generated from European customers represented 8%, 10% and 18% of our total revenue in fiscal 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. A 10% change in the Euro exchange rate would have impacted our revenue by approximately $12.2 million, $28.9 million and $45.1 million in fiscal 2015, 2014, and 2013, respectively. In the past, we have experienced an adverse impact on our revenue, gross margin and profitability as a result of foreign currency fluctuations. When foreign currencies appreciate against the U.S. dollar, inventories and expenses denominated in foreign currencies become more expensive. Strengthening of the Malaysian Ringgit against the U.S. dollar would increase AUOSP’s liability under the facility agreement with the Malaysian government which in turn would negatively impact our equity in earnings (loss) of the unconsolidated investee. An increase in the value of the U.S. dollar relative to foreign currencies could make our solar power products more expensive for international customers, thus potentially leading to a reduction in demand, our sales and profitability. Furthermore, many of our competitors are foreign companies that could benefit from such a currency fluctuation, making it more difficult for us to compete with those companies. We currently conduct hedging activities which involve the use of option and forward currency contracts that are designed to address our exposure to changes in the foreign exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and other currencies. As of January 3, 2016, we had outstanding hedge option currency contracts and forward currency contracts with aggregate notional values of zero and $35.7 million, respectively. As of December 28, 2014, we held option and forward contracts totaling $26.6 million and $134.7 million, respectively, in notional value. Because we hedge some of our expected future foreign exchange exposure, if associated revenues do not materialize we could experience a reclassification of ineffective gains or losses into earnings. Such a reclassification could adversely impact our revenue, margins and results of operations. We cannot predict the impact of future exchange rate fluctuations on our business and operating results. Credit Risk We have certain financial and derivative instruments that subject us to credit risk. These consist primarily of cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash and cash equivalents, investments, accounts receivable, notes receivable, advances to suppliers, foreign currency option contracts, foreign currency forward contracts, bond hedge and warrant transactions. We are exposed to credit losses in the event of nonperformance by the counterparties to our financial and derivative instruments. Our investment policy requires cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash and cash equivalents, and investments to be placed with high-quality financial institutions and limits the amount of credit risk from any one issuer. We additionally perform ongoing credit evaluations of our customers’ financial condition whenever deemed necessary and generally do not require collateral. We enter into agreements with vendors that specify future quantities and pricing of polysilicon to be supplied for periods up to 10 years. Under certain agreements, we are required to make prepayments to the vendors over the terms of the arrangements. As of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, advances to suppliers totaled $359.1 million and $409.7 million, respectively. Two suppliers accounted for 82% and 16% of total advances to suppliers as of January 3, 2016, and 82% and 17% as of December 28, 2014. We enter into foreign currency derivative contracts and convertible debenture hedge transactions with high-quality financial institutions and limit the amount of credit exposure to any single counterparty. The foreign currency derivative contracts are limited to a time period of 15 months or less. We regularly evaluate the credit standing of our counterparty financial institutions. 77 Interest Rate Risk We are exposed to interest rate risk because many of our customers depend on debt financing to purchase our solar power systems. An increase in interest rates could make it difficult for our customers to obtain the financing necessary to purchase our solar power systems on favorable terms, or at all, and thus lower demand for our solar power products, reduce revenue and adversely impact our operating results. An increase in interest rates could lower a customer’s return on investment in a system or make alternative investments more attractive relative to solar power systems, which, in each case, could cause our customers to seek alternative investments that promise higher returns or demand higher returns from our solar power systems, reduce gross margin and adversely impact our operating results. This risk is significant to our business because our sales model is highly sensitive to interest rate fluctuations and the availability of credit, and would be adversely affected by increases in interest rates or liquidity constraints. Our interest expense would increase to the extent interest rates rise in connection with our variable interest rate borrowings. As of January 3, 2016, the outstanding principal balance of our variable interest borrowings was $294.6 million. We do not believe that an immediate 10% increase in interest rates would have a material effect on our financial statements. In addition, lower interest rates would have an adverse impact on our interest income. Our investment portfolio primarily consists of $540.0 million in money market funds as of January 3, 2016 which exposes us to interest rate risk. Due to the relatively short- term nature of our investment portfolio, we do not believe that an immediate 10% increase in interest rates would have a material effect on the fair market value of our money market funds. Since we believe we have the ability to liquidate substantially all of this portfolio, we do not expect our operating results or cash flows to be materially affected to any significant degree by a sudden change in market interest rates on our investment portfolio. Equity Price Risk Involving Minority Investments in Joint Ventures and Other Non-Public Companies Our investments held in joint ventures and other non-public companies expose us to equity price risk. As of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, investments of $186.4 million and $210.9 million, respectively, are accounted for using the equity method, and $36.4 million and $32.3 million, respectively, are accounted for using the cost method. These strategic investments in third parties are subject to risk of changes in market value, which if determined to be other-than-temporary, could result in realized impairment losses. We generally do not attempt to reduce or eliminate our market exposure in equity and cost method investments. We monitor these investments for impairment and record reductions in the carrying values when necessary. Circumstances that indicate an other-than-temporary decline include the valuation ascribed to the issuing company in subsequent financing rounds, decreases in quoted market prices and declines in operations of the issuer. There can be no assurance that our equity and cost method investments will not face risks of loss in the future. Interest Rate Risk and Market Price Risk Involving Convertible Debt The fair market value of our outstanding convertible debentures is subject to interest rate risk, market price risk and other factors due to the convertible feature of the debentures. The fair market value of the debentures will generally increase as interest rates fall and decrease as interest rates rise. In addition, the fair market value of the debentures will generally increase as the market price of our common stock increases and decrease as the market price of our common stock falls. The interest and market value changes affect the fair market value of the debentures, but do not impact our financial position, cash flows or results of operations due to the fixed nature of the debt obligations, except to the extent increases in the value of our common stock may provide the holders of our 4.00% debentures due 2023, 0.875% debentures due 2021, or 0.75% debentures due 2018 the right to convert such debentures into cash in certain instances. The aggregate estimated fair value of our outstanding convertible debentures was $1,253.2 million as of January 3, 2016. The aggregate estimated fair value of our outstanding convertible debentures was $1,019.4 million as of December 28, 2014. Estimated fair values are based on quoted market prices as reported by an independent pricing source. A 10% increase in quoted market prices would increase the estimated fair value of our then- outstanding debentures to $1,378.5 million and $1,121.4 million as of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, respectively, and a 10% decrease in the quoted market prices would decrease the estimated fair value of our then-outstanding debentures to $1,127.9 million and $917.5 million as of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, respectively. 78 ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA SUNPOWER CORPORATION INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS REPORTS OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS) CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF EQUITY CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Page 80 82 83 84 85 86 88 79 Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm The Board of Directors and Stockholders of SunPower Corporation We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of SunPower Corporation as of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income, equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended January 3, 2016. These financial statements are the responsibility of the company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of SunPower Corporation at January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, and the consolidated results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended January 3, 2016, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), SunPower Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as of January 3, 2016, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (2013 framework) and our report dated February 18, 2016 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon. /s/ Ernst & Young LLP San Jose, California February 18, 2016 80 Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm The Board of Directors and Stockholders of SunPower Corporation We have audited SunPower Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as of January 3, 2016, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (2013 framework) (the COSO criteria). SunPower Corporation’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements. Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. In our opinion, SunPower Corporation maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of January 3, 2016, based on the COSO criteria. We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the 2015 consolidated financial statements of SunPower Corporation and our report dated February 18, 2016 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon. /s/ Ernst & Young LLP San Jose, California February 18, 2016 81 SunPower Corporation Consolidated Balance Sheets (In thousands, except share data) January 3, 2016 December 28, 2014 Assets Current assets: Cash and cash equivalents Restricted cash and cash equivalents, current portion Accounts receivable, net1 Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings1 Inventories Advances to suppliers, current portion Project assets - plants and land, current portion1 Prepaid expenses and other current assets1 Total current assets Restricted cash and cash equivalents, net of current portion Restricted long-term marketable securities Property, plant and equipment, net Solar power systems leased and to be leased, net Project assets - plants and land, net of current portion Advances to suppliers, net of current portion Long-term financing receivables, net Goodwill and other intangible assets, net Other long-term assets1 Total assets Liabilities and Equity Current liabilities: Accounts payable1 Accrued liabilities1 Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings Short-term debt Convertible debt, current portion Customer advances, current portion1 Total current liabilities Long-term debt Convertible debt, net of current portion1 Customer advances, net of current portion1 Other long-term liabilities1 Total liabilities Commitments and contingencies (Note 10) Redeemable noncontrolling interests in subsidiaries Equity: Preferred stock, $0.001 par value; 10,000,000 shares authorized; none issued and outstanding as of both January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014 Common stock, $0.001 par value, 367,500,000 shares authorized; 145,242,705 shares issued, and 136,712,339 outstanding as of January 3, 2016; 138,616,252 shares issued, and 131,466,777 outstanding as of December 28, 2014 Additional paid-in capital Accumulated deficit Accumulated other comprehensive loss Treasury stock, at cost; 8,530,366 shares of common stock as of January 3, 2016; 7,149,475 shares of common stock as of December 28, 2014 Total stockholders’ equity Noncontrolling interests in subsidiaries Total equity Total liabilities and equity $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 954,528 24,488 190,448 38,685 382,390 85,012 479,452 359,517 2,514,520 41,748 6,475 731,230 531,520 5,072 274,085 334,791 119,577 297,975 4,856,993 514,654 313,497 115,739 21,041 — 33,671 998,602 478,948 1,110,960 126,183 564,557 3,279,250 69,104 956,175 18,541 504,316 187,087 208,573 98,129 101,181 328,845 2,402,847 24,520 7,158 585,344 390,913 15,475 311,528 269,587 37,981 300,229 4,345,582 419,919 331,034 83,440 18,105 245,325 31,788 1,129,611 214,181 692,955 148,896 555,344 2,740,987 28,566 — — 137 2,359,917 (747,617) (8,023) (155,265) 1,449,149 59,490 1,508,639 4,856,993 $ 131 2,219,581 (560,598) (13,455) (111,485) 1,534,174 41,855 1,576,029 4,345,582 1 The Company has related-party balances for transactions made with Total and its affiliates as well as unconsolidated entities in which the Company has a direct equity investment. These related-party balances are recorded within the “Accounts Receivable, net,” “Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings,” “Project assets - plants and land, current portion,” “Prepaid expenses and other current assets,” “Other long-term assets,” “Accounts payable,” “Accrued Liabilities”, “Customer advances, current portion,” “Convertible debt, net of current portion,” and “Customer advances, net of current portion” financial statement line items in the Consolidated Balance Sheets (see Note 2, Note 3, Note 8, Note 11, Note 12, and Note 13). The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements. 82 SunPower Corporation Consolidated Statements of Operations (In thousands, except per share data) Revenue Solar power systems, components, and other Residential leasing Cost of revenue Solar power systems, components, and other Residential leasing Gross margin Operating expenses: Research and development Sales, general and administrative Restructuring charges Total operating expenses Operating income (loss) Other income (expense), net: Interest income Interest expense Other, net Other expense, net Income (loss) before income taxes and equity in earnings (loss) of unconsolidated investees Provision for income taxes Equity in earnings of unconsolidated investees Net income (loss) Net loss attributable to noncontrolling interests and redeemable noncontrolling interests Net income (loss) attributable to stockholders Net income (loss) per share attributable to stockholders: Basic Diluted Weighted-average shares: Basic Diluted January 3, 2016 Fiscal Year December 28, 2014 December 29, 2013 $ $ 1,389,660 186,813 1,576,473 $ $ 2,897,305 129,960 3,027,265 $ $ 2,370,148 137,055 2,507,203 1,192,535 139,292 1,331,827 244,646 2,315,894 86,244 2,402,138 625,127 1,908,577 107,554 2,016,131 491,072 99,063 345,486 6,391 450,940 (206,294) 2,120 (43,796) 5,659 (36,017) (242,311) (66,694) 9,569 (299,436) 112,417 (187,019) (1.39) (1.39) 134,884 134,884 $ $ $ 73,343 288,321 12,223 373,887 251,240 2,583 (69,658) 449 (66,626) 184,614 (8,760) 7,241 183,095 62,799 245,894 1.91 1.55 128,635 162,751 $ $ $ 58,080 271,481 2,602 332,163 158,909 6,017 (108,739) (14,604) (117,326) 41,583 (11,905) 3,872 33,550 62,043 95,593 0.79 0.70 120,819 138,980 $ $ $ The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements. 83 SunPower Corporation Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss) (In thousands) Net income (loss) Components of comprehensive income (loss): Translation adjustment Net unrealized gain (loss) on derivatives (Note 13) Net gain (loss) on long-term pension liability adjustment Income taxes Net change in accumulated other comprehensive gain (loss) Total comprehensive income (loss) Comprehensive loss attributable to noncontrolling interests and redeemable noncontrolling interests Comprehensive income (loss) attributable to stockholders January 3, 2016 (299,436) $ Fiscal Year December 28, 2014 183,095 $ December 29, 2013 $ 33,550 (2,452) 7,385 823 (324) 5,432 (294,004) (4,946) (638) (2,878) (675) (9,137) 173,958 (1,447) (562) — 212 (1,797) 31,753 112,417 (181,587) $ $ 62,799 236,757 $ 62,043 93,796 The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements. 84 SunPower Corporation Consolidated Statements of Equity (In thousands) Common Stock Redeemable Noncontrolling Interests Shares Value $ $ — 119,234 — — — — — — — — — — — 48 3,583 — (1,329) — — — $ — — — 121,536 — — (27,089) — $ — — — — — — — — 34,102 106 4,431 7,131 — — — — — — (2,438) — — (1,738) 119 — — — 3 — — — — — — 122 — — — 2 7 — — — — — — — — Additional Paid-in Capital $ 1,931,947 — — Treasury Stock $ (34,108) — — 155 — (3) 46,215 — 1,408 1,056 — — — (19,829) — — — Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) $ (2,521) — (1,797) Retained Earnings (Accumulated Deficit) $ (902,085) 95,593 — Total Stockholders’ Equity $ 993,352 95,593 (1,797) Noncontrolling Interests Total Equity $ — $ (62,043) — 993,352 33,550 (1,797) 155 — 46,215 (19,829) 1,408 1,056 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 155 — 46,215 (19,829) 1,408 1,056 — — — — — — — 100,008 100,008 — $ 1,980,778 — — — $ (53,937) — — $ — (4,318) — (9,137) — $ (806,492) 245,894 — — $ 1,116,153 245,894 (9,137) $ (335) 37,630 (35,710) — (335) $ 1,153,783 210,184 (9,137) 1,052 (2) 188,256 68,842 (81,077) 55,592 3,761 2,379 — — — — — — — — — — — — — (57,548) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,052 — 188,263 68,842 (81,077) 55,592 3,761 2,379 — — — — — — — — 1,052 — 188,263 68,842 (81,077) 55,592 3,761 2,379 — 66,581 66,581 — (57,548) (2,655) — (2,655) (57,548) $ 23,991 28,566 (13,689) — — 131,466 — — $ — 131 — — — $ 2,219,581 — — — $ (111,485) — — $ — (13,455) — 5,432 — $ (560,598) (187,019) — — $ 1,534,174 (187,019) 5,432 $ (23,991) 41,855 (98,728) — (23,991) $ 1,576,029 (285,747) 5,432 — — — — — — 57,064 58 3,560 3,008 — — — — — 3 3 — — — — 514 (3) (577) 61,481 39,546 39,375 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 514 — (574) 61,481 39,546 39,375 — — — — 514 — (574) 61,481 39,546 — 39,375 — 123,817 123,817 (2,837) — 69,104 — (1,381) 136,711 — — 137 $ — — $ 2,359,917 — (43,780) $ (155,265) $ $ — — (8,023) — — $ (747,617) — (43,780) $ 1,449,149 $ (7,454) — 59,490 (7,454) (43,780) $ 1,508,639 Balances at December 30, 2012 Net income (loss) Other comprehensive loss Issuance of common stock upon exercise of options Issuance of restricted stock to employees, net of cancellations Stock-based compensation expense Purchases of treasury stock Tax benefit from convertible debt interest deduction Tax benefit from stock-based compensation Contributions from noncontrolling interests Distributions to noncontrolling interests Balances at December 29, 2013 Net income (loss) Other comprehensive loss Issuance of common stock upon exercise of options Issuance of restricted stock to employees, net of cancellations Issuance of common stock upon conversion of convertible debt Settlement of the 4.75% Bond hedge Settlement of the 4.75% Warrants Stock-based compensation expense Tax benefit from convertible debt interest deduction Tax benefit from stock-based compensation Contributions from noncontrolling interests and redeemable noncontrolling interests Distributions to noncontrolling interests and redeemable noncontrolling interests Purchases of treasury stock Transfer of redeemable noncontrolling interests Balances at December 28, 2014 Net loss Other comprehensive income Issuance of common stock upon exercise of options Issuance of restricted stock to employees, net of cancellations Settlement of the 4.5% Warrants Stock-based compensation expense Tax benefit from convertible debt interest deduction Tax benefit from stock-based compensation Contributions from noncontrolling interests Distributions to noncontrolling interests Purchases of treasury stock Balances at January 3, 2016 The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements. 85 SunPower Corporation Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows (In thousands) Cash flows from operating activities: Net income (loss) Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities: Depreciation and amortization Stock-based compensation Non-cash interest expense Gain from contract termination Equity in earnings of unconsolidated investees Excess tax benefit from stock-based compensation Deferred income taxes and other tax liabilities Gain on sale of residential lease portfolio to 8point3 Energy Partners LP Other, net Changes in operating assets and liabilities, net of effect of acquisitions: Accounts receivable Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings Inventories Project assets Prepaid expenses and other assets Long-term financing receivables, net Advances to suppliers Accounts payable and other accrued liabilities Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings Customer advances Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities Cash flows from investing activities: Decrease (increase) in restricted cash and cash equivalents Purchases of property, plant and equipment Cash paid for solar power systems, leased and to be leased Cash paid for solar power systems Proceeds from sales or maturities of marketable securities Proceeds from 8point3 Energy Partners LP attributable to real estate projects and residential lease portfolio Proceeds from sale of equipment to third parties Purchases of marketable securities Cash paid for acquisitions, net of cash acquired Cash paid for investments in unconsolidated investees Cash paid for intangibles Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities Cash flows from financing activities: Proceeds from issuance of convertible debt, net of issuance costs Cash paid for repurchase of convertible debt Proceeds from settlement of 4.75% Bond Hedge Payments to settle 4.75% Warrants Proceeds from settlement of 4.50% Bond Hedge January 3, 2016 Fiscal Year December 28, 2014 December 29, 2013 $ (299,436) $ 183,095 $ 33,550 138,007 58,960 6,184 — (9,569) (39,375) 63,672 (27,915) 2,589 311,743 148,426 (237,764) (763,065) (87,010) (142,973) 50,560 90,904 30,661 (20,830) (726,231) (23,174) (230,051) (88,376) (10,007) — 539,791 — — (64,756) (4,092) (9,936) 109,399 416,305 (324,352) — — 74,628 108,795 55,592 21,585 — (7,241) (2,379) 21,656 — 5,278 (31,505) (155,300) (1,247) (68,247) 201,858 (94,314) (26,343) 45,768 (225,210) (23,481) 8,360 (11,562) (102,505) (50,974) (13,457) 1,380 — — (30) (35,078) (97,013) — (309,239) 395,275 (42,250) 68,842 (81,077) 131 98,191 45,678 49,016 (51,988) (3,872) — 1,138 — 9,372 (53,756) 4,608 (6,243) (22,094) 34,147 (107,531) (31,909) 120,599 83,100 (39,577) 162,429 15,465 (34,054) (97,235) (21,257) 100,947 — 645 (99,928) — (17,761) — (153,178) 296,283 — — — — The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements. 86 Payments to settle 4.50% Warrants Proceeds from issuance of non-recourse debt financing, net of issuance costs Repayment of non-recourse debt financing Proceeds from issuance of project loans, net of issuance costs Assumption of project loan by customer Repayment of bank loans, project loans and other debt Proceeds from residential lease financing Repayment of residential lease financing Proceeds from sale-leaseback financing Repayment of sale-leaseback financing Proceeds from 8point3 Energy Partners LP attributable to operating leases and unguaranteed sales-type lease residual values Contributions from noncontrolling interests attributable to real estate projects Contributions from noncontrolling interests and redeemable noncontrolling interests Distributions to noncontrolling interests and redeemable noncontrolling interests Proceeds from exercise of stock options Excess tax benefit from stock-based compensation Purchases of stock for tax withholding obligations on vested restricted stock Net cash provided by financing activities Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period Cash and cash equivalents, end of period Non-cash transactions: Assignment of residential lease receivables to third parties Costs of solar power systems, leased and to be leased, sourced from existing inventory Costs of solar power systems, leased and to be leased, funded by liabilities Costs of solar power systems under sale-leaseback financing arrangements, sourced from project assets Property, plant and equipment acquisitions funded by liabilities Issuance of common stock upon conversion of convertible debt Sale of residential lease portfolio in exchange for non-controlling equity interests in the 8point3 Group Net reclassification of cash proceeds offset by project assets in connection with the deconsolidation of assets sold to the 8point3 Group Supplemental cash flow information: Cash paid for interest, net of amount capitalized Cash paid for income taxes $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ January 3, 2016 (574) Fiscal Year December 28, 2014 December 29, 2013 — — 92,129 (1,528) 424,556 — (252,595) 7,979 (39,975) 17,219 (2,237) 29,300 12,410 81,926 (244) 61,537 (40,672) (17,073) — (15,686) 50,600 (4,216) — — — — 82,394 (34,850) (290,486) 96,392 — 73,139 (8,804) — — 180,881 100,683 100,008 (10,291) 517 39,375 (43,780) 619,967 (4,782) (1,647) 956,175 954,528 3,315 66,604 10,972 $ $ $ $ (5,093) 1,052 2,379 (57,548) 498,566 (4,023) 193,664 762,511 956,175 8,023 41,204 3,786 6,076 28,950 $ $ — $ 28,259 11,461 188,263 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ (335) 156 — (19,829) 294,068 1,705 305,024 457,487 762,511 93,013 53,721 5,884 30,442 5,288 — — — 68,273 102,333 34,909 29,509 $ $ $ $ — $ — $ 39,857 8,765 $ $ 46,026 1,338 The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements. 87 Note 1. THE COMPANY AND SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES The Company SunPower Corporation (together with its subsidiaries, the “Company” or “SunPower”) is a vertically integrated solar energy products and solutions company that designs, manufactures and delivers high-performance solar systems worldwide, serving as a one-stop shop for residential, commercial, and utility-scale power plant customers. SunPower Corporation is a majority owned subsidiary of Total Energies Nouvelles Activités USA (“Total”), a subsidiary of Total S.A. (“Total S.A.”) (see Note 2). In the first quarter of fiscal 2015, in connection with a realignment of its internal organizational structure, the Company changed its segment reporting from its Americas, EMEA and APAC Segments to three end-customer segments: (i) Residential Segment, (ii) Commercial Segment and (iii) Power Plant Segment. The Residential and Commercial Segments combined are referred to as Distributed Generation. Historically, the Americas Segment included both North and South America, the EMEA Segment included European countries as well as the Middle East and Africa, and the APAC Segment included all Asia-Pacific countries. Under the new segmentation, the Company’s Residential Segment refers to sales of solar energy solutions to residential end customers through a variety of means, including cash sales and long-term leases directly to end customers, sales to resellers, including the Company’s third-party global dealer network, and sales of the Company’s operations and maintenance (“O&M”) services. The Company’s Commercial Segment refers to sales of solar energy solutions to commercial and public entity end customers through a variety of means, including direct sales of turn-key engineering, procurement and construction (“EPC”) services, sales to the Company’s third-party global dealer network, sales of energy under power purchase agreements (“PPAs”), and sales of the Company’s O&M services. The Power Plant Segment refers to the Company’s large-scale solar products and systems business, which includes power plant project development and project sales, EPC services for power plant construction, power plant O&M services and component sales for power plants developed by third parties, sometimes on a multi-year, firm commitment basis. The Company’s President and Chief Executive Officer, as the chief operating decision maker (“CODM”), reviews the Company’s business and manages resource allocations and measures performance of the Company’s activities among these three end-customer segments. Reclassifications of prior period segment information have been made to conform to the current period presentation. These changes do not affect the Company’s previously reported Consolidated Financial Statements. Basis of Presentation and Preparation Principles of Consolidation The consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“United States” or “U.S.”) and include the accounts of the Company, all of its subsidiaries and special purpose entities, as appropriate under consolidation accounting guidelines. Intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation. The assets of the special purpose entities that the Company establishes in connection with certain project financing arrangements for customers are not designed to be available to service the general liabilities and obligations of the Company. Reclassifications Certain prior period balances, including prior period segment information, have been reclassified to conform to the current period presentation in the Company’s consolidated financial statements and the accompanying notes. Such reclassifications had no effect on previously reported results of operations or accumulated deficit. Fiscal Years The Company has a 52-to-53-week fiscal year that ends on the Sunday closest to December 31. Accordingly, every fifth or sixth year will be a 53-week fiscal year. Fiscal 2015 was a 53-week fiscal year; while fiscal 2014 and 2013 were 52-week fiscal years. Fiscal 2015 ended on January 3, 2016, fiscal 2014 ended on December 28, 2014, and fiscal 2013 ended on December 29, 2013. 88 Management Estimates The preparation of the consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”) requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes. Significant estimates in these consolidated financial statements include percentage-of-completion for construction projects; allowances for doubtful accounts receivable and sales returns; inventory and project asset write-downs; stock-based compensation; estimates for future cash flows and economic useful lives of property, plant and equipment, goodwill, valuations for business combinations, other intangible assets and other long-term assets; the fair value and residual value of solar power systems; fair value of financial instruments; valuation of contingencies and certain accrued liabilities such as accrued warranty; and income taxes and tax valuation allowances and indemnities. Actual results could materially differ from those estimates. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies Fair Value of Financial Instruments The fair value of a financial instrument is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The carrying values of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, and accounts payable approximate their respective fair values due to their short-term maturities. Investments in available-for-sale securities are carried at fair value based on quoted market prices or estimated based on market conditions and risks existing at each balance sheet date. Derivative financial instruments are carried at fair value based on quoted market prices for financial instruments with similar characteristics. Unrealized gains and losses of the Company’s available-for-sale securities and the effective portion of derivative financial instruments are excluded from earnings and reported as a component of “Accumulated other comprehensive loss” in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Additionally, the Company assesses whether an other-than-temporary impairment loss on its available-for-sale securities has occurred due to declines in fair value or other market conditions. Declines in fair value that are considered other-than-temporary and the ineffective portion of derivatives financial instruments are included in “Other, net” in the Consolidated Statements of Operations. Comprehensive Income (Loss) Comprehensive income (loss) is defined as the change in equity during a period from non-owner sources. The Company’s comprehensive income (loss) for each period presented is comprised of (i) the Company’s net income (loss); (ii) foreign currency translation adjustment of the Company’s foreign subsidiaries whose assets and liabilities are translated from their respective functional currencies at exchange rates in effect at the balance sheet date, and revenues and expenses are translated at average exchange rates prevailing during the applicable period; and (iii) changes in unrealized gains or losses, net of tax, for the effective portion of derivatives designated as cash flow hedges (see Note 13) and available-for-sale securities carried at their fair value. Cash Equivalents Highly liquid investments with original or remaining maturities of ninety days or less at the date of purchase are considered cash equivalents. Cash in Restricted Accounts The Company maintains cash and cash equivalents in restricted accounts pursuant to various letters of credit, surety bonds, loan agreements, and other agreements in the normal course of business. The Company also holds debt securities, consisting of Philippine government bonds, which are classified as “Restricted long-term marketable securities” on the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets as they are maintained as collateral for present and future business transactions within the country (see Note 6). Short-Term and Long-Term Investments The Company invests in money market funds and debt securities. In general, investments with original maturities of greater than ninety days and remaining maturities of one year or less are classified as short-term investments, and investments with maturities of more than one year are classified as long-term investments. Investments with maturities beyond one year may be classified as short-term based on their highly liquid nature and because such investments represent the investment of cash 89 that is available for current operations. Despite the long-term maturities, the Company has the ability and intent, if necessary, to liquidate any of these investments in order to meet the Company’s working capital needs within its normal operating cycles. The Company has classified these investments as available-for-sale securities. Inventories Inventories are valued at the lower of cost or market value. The Company evaluates the recoverability of its inventories, including purchase commitments under fixed-price long-term supply agreements, based on assumptions about expected demand and market conditions. The Company’s assumption of expected demand is developed based on its analysis of bookings, sales backlog, sales pipeline, market forecast, and competitive intelligence. The Company’s assumption of expected demand is compared to available inventory, production capacity, future polysilicon purchase commitments, available third-party inventory, and growth plans. The Company’s factory production plans, which drive materials requirement planning, are established based on its assumptions of expected demand. The Company responds to reductions in expected demand by temporarily reducing manufacturing output and adjusting expected valuation assumptions as necessary. In addition, expected demand by geography has changed historically due to changes in the availability and size of government mandates and economic incentives. The Company evaluates the terms of its long-term inventory purchase agreements with suppliers, including joint ventures, for the procurement of polysilicon, ingots, wafers, and solar cells and establishes accruals for estimated losses on adverse purchase commitments as necessary, such as lower of cost of market value adjustments, forfeiture of advanced deposits and liquidated damages. Obligations related to non-cancellable purchase orders for inventories match current and forecasted sales orders that will consume these ordered materials and actual consumption of these ordered materials are compared to expected demand regularly. The Company anticipates total obligations related to long-term supply agreements for inventories will be recovered because quantities are less than management’s expected demand for its solar power products. Other market conditions that could affect the realizable value of the Company’s inventories and are periodically evaluated by management include historical inventory turnover ratio, anticipated sales price, new product development schedules, the effect new products might have on the sale of existing products, product obsolescence, customer concentrations, the current market price of polysilicon as compared to the price in our fixed-price arrangements, and product merchantability, among other factors. If, based on assumptions about expected demand and market conditions, we determine that the cost of inventories exceeds its estimated market value or inventory is excess or obsolete, we record a write-down or accrual, which may be material, equal to the difference between the cost of inventories and the estimated market value. If actual market conditions are more favorable, the Company may have higher gross margin when products that have been previously written down are sold in the normal course of business (see Note 6). Solar Power Systems Leased and to be Leased Solar power systems leased to residential customers under operating leases are stated at cost, less accumulated depreciation and are amortized to their estimated residual value over the life of the lease term of up to 20 years. Solar power systems to be leased represents systems that are under installation or which have not been interconnected, which will be depreciated as solar power systems leased to customers when the respective systems are completed, interconnected and subsequently leased to residential customers under operating leases. Initial direct costs for operating leases are capitalized and amortized over the term of the related customer lease agreements. Financing Receivables Leases are classified as either operating or sales-type leases in accordance with the relevant accounting guidelines. Financing receivables are generated by solar power systems leased to residential customers under sales-type leases. Financing receivables represents gross minimum lease payments to be received from customers over a period commensurate with the remaining lease term of up to 20 years and the systems estimated residual value, net of unearned income and allowance for estimated losses. Initial direct costs for sales-type leases are recognized as cost of sales when the solar power systems are placed in service. Due to the homogeneous nature of its leasing transactions, SunPower manages its financing receivables on an aggregate basis when assessing credit risk. SunPower also considers the credit risk profile for its lease customers to be homogeneous due to the criteria the Company uses to approve customers for its residential leasing program, which among other things, requires a minimum “fair” FICO credit quality. Accordingly, the Company does not regularly categorize its financing receivables by credit risk. 90 The Company recognizes an allowance for losses on financing receivables in an amount equal to the probable losses net of recoveries. SunPower maintains reserve percentages on past-due receivable aging buckets and bases such percentages on several factors, including consideration of historical credit losses and information derived from industry benchmarking. To date, the allowance for losses has not comprised a material portion of the Company’s financing receivables. Property, Plant and Equipment Property, plant and equipment are stated at cost, less accumulated depreciation. Depreciation, excluding solar power systems leased to residential customers and those associated with sale-leaseback transactions under the financing method, is computed using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets as presented below. Solar power systems leased to residential customers and those associated with sale-leaseback transactions under the financing method are depreciated using the straight-line method to their estimated residual values over the lease terms of up to 20 years. Leasehold improvements are amortized over the shorter of the estimated useful lives of the assets or the remaining term of the lease. Repairs and maintenance costs are expensed as incurred. Buildings Leasehold improvements Manufacturing equipment Computer equipment Solar power systems Furniture and fixtures Interest Capitalization Useful Lives in Years 20 1 to 20 8 to 15 2 to 7 30 3 to 5 The interest cost associated with major development and construction projects is capitalized and included in the cost of the property, plant and equipment or project assets. Interest capitalization ceases once a project is substantially complete or no longer undergoing construction activities to prepare it for its intended use. When no debt is specifically identified as being incurred in connection with a construction project, the Company capitalizes interest on amounts expended on the project at the Company’s weighted average cost of borrowed money. Long-Lived Assets The Company evaluates its long-lived assets, including property, plant and equipment and other intangible assets with finite lives, for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of such assets may not be recoverable. Factors considered important that could result in an impairment review include significant under-performance relative to expected historical or projected future operating results, significant changes in the manner of use of acquired assets, and significant negative industry or economic trends. The Company’s impairment evaluation of long-lived assets includes an analysis of estimated future undiscounted net cash flows expected to be generated by the assets over their remaining estimated useful lives. If the Company’s estimate of future undiscounted net cash flows is insufficient to recover the carrying value of the assets over the remaining estimated useful lives, it records an impairment loss in the amount by which the carrying value of the assets exceeds the fair value. Fair value is generally measured based on either quoted market prices, if available, or discounted cash flow analysis. Project Assets - Plant and Land Project assets consist primarily of capitalized costs relating to solar power system projects in various stages of development that the Company incurs prior to the sale of the solar power system to a third-party. These costs include costs for land and costs for developing and constructing a solar power system. Development costs can include legal, consulting, permitting, and other similar costs. Once the Company enters into a definitive sales agreement, it reclassifies these project asset costs to deferred project costs within “Prepaid expenses and other current assets” in its Consolidated Balance Sheet until the Company has met the criteria to recognize the sale of the project asset or solar power project as revenue. The Company releases these project costs to cost of revenue as each respective project asset or solar power system is sold to a customer, since the project is constructed for a customer (matching the underlying revenue recognition method). 91 The Company reviews project assets for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount may not be recoverable. The Company considers the project commercially viable if it is anticipated to be sellable for a profit once it is either fully developed or fully constructed. The Company examines a number of factors to determine if the project will be profitable, including whether there are any environmental, ecological, permitting, or regulatory conditions that have changed for the project since the start of development. Such changes could cause the cost of the project to increase or the selling price of the project to decrease. Due to the development, construction, and sale timeframe of the Company’s larger solar projects, it classifies project assets which are not expected to be sold within the next 12 months as “Project assets - plants and land, net of current portion” on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Once specific milestones have been achieved, the Company determines if the sale of the project assets will occur within the next 12 months from a given balance sheet date and, if so, it then reclassifies the project assets as current. Product Warranties The Company generally provides a 25-year standard warranty for the solar panels that it manufactures for defects in materials and workmanship. The warranty provides that the Company will repair or replace any defective solar panels during the warranty period. In addition, the Company passes through to customers long-term warranties from the original equipment manufacturers of certain system components, such as inverters. Warranties of 25 years from solar panel suppliers are standard in the solar industry, while certain system components carry warranty periods ranging from five to 20 years. In addition, the Company generally warrants its workmanship on installed systems for periods ranging up to 25 years and also provides a separate system output performance warranty to customers that have subscribed to the Company’s post-installation monitoring and maintenance services which expires upon termination of the post-installation monitoring and maintenance services related to the system. The warrantied system output performance level varies by system depending on the characteristics of the system and the negotiated agreement with the customer, and the level declines over time to account for the expected degradation of the system. Actual system output is typically measured annually for purposes of determining whether warrantied performance levels have been met. The warranty excludes system output shortfalls attributable to force majeure events, customer curtailment, irregular weather, and other similar factors. In the event that the system output falls below the warrantied performance level during the applicable warranty period, and provided that the shortfall is not caused by a factor that is excluded from the performance warranty, the warranty provides that the Company will pay the customer a liquidated damage based on the value of the shortfall of energy produced relative to the applicable warrantied performance level. The Company maintains reserves to cover the expected costs that could result from these warranties. The Company’s expected costs are generally in the form of product replacement or repair. Warranty reserves are based on the Company’s best estimate of such costs and are recognized as a cost of revenue. The Company continuously monitors product returns for warranty failures and maintains a reserve for the related warranty expenses based on various factors including historical warranty claims, results of accelerated lab testing, field monitoring, vendor reliability estimates, and data on industry averages for similar products. Due to the potential for variability in these underlying factors, the difference between the Company’s estimated costs and its actual costs could be material to the Company’s consolidated financial statements. If actual product failure rates or the frequency or severity of reported claims differ from the Company’s estimates or if there are delays in the Company’s responsiveness to outages, the Company may be required to revise its estimated warranty liability. Historically, warranty costs have been within management’s expectations (see Note 10). Revenue Recognition Solar Power Components The Company sells its solar panels and balance of system components primarily to dealers, system integrators and distributors, and recognizes revenue, net of accruals for estimated sales returns, when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery of the product has occurred, title and risk of loss has passed to the customer, the sales price is fixed or determinable, collectability of the resulting receivable is reasonably assured, and the risks and rewards of ownership have passed to the customer. Other than standard warranty obligations, there are no rights of return and there are no significant post-shipment obligations, including installation, training or customer acceptance clauses with any of the Company’s customers that could have an impact on revenue recognition. The Company’s revenue recognition policy is consistent across all geographic areas. The provision for estimated sales returns on product sales is recorded in the same period the related revenues are recorded. These estimates are based on historical sales returns, analysis of credit memo data, and other known factors. Actual returns could differ from these estimates. 92 Construction Contracts Revenue is also composed of EPC projects which are governed by customer contracts that require the Company to deliver functioning solar power systems and are generally completed within three to twelve months from commencement of construction. Construction on large projects may be completed within eighteen to thirty-six months, depending on the size and location. The Company recognizes revenue from fixed price construction contracts, which do not include land or land rights, using the percentage-of-completion method of accounting. Under this method, revenue arising from fixed-price construction contracts is recognized as work is performed based on the percentage of incurred costs to estimated total forecasted costs. Incurred costs used in the Company’s percentage-of-completion calculation include all direct material, labor and subcontract costs, and those indirect costs related to contract performance, such as indirect labor, supplies, and tools. Project material costs are included in incurred costs when the project materials have been installed by being permanently attached or fitted to the solar power system as required by the project’s engineering design. In addition to an EPC deliverable, many arrangements also include multiple deliverables such as post-installation systems monitoring and maintenance. For contracts with separately priced monitoring and maintenance, the Company recognizes revenue related to such separately priced elements over the contract period. For contracts including monitoring and maintenance not separately priced, the Company determined that post-installation systems monitoring and maintenance qualify as separate units of accounting. Such post-installation monitoring and maintenance are deferred at the time the contract is executed based on the best estimate of selling price on a standalone basis and are recognized to revenue over the contractual term. The remaining EPC revenue is recognized on a percentage-of-completion basis. In addition, when arrangements include contingent revenue clauses, such as customer termination or put rights for non- performance, the Company defers the contingent revenue if there is a reasonable possibility that such rights or contingencies may be triggered. In certain limited cases, the Company could be required to buy back a customer’s system at fair value on specified future dates if certain minimum performance thresholds are not met for periods of up to two years. To date, no such repurchase obligations have been required. Provisions for estimated losses on uncompleted contracts, if any, are recognized in the period in which the loss first becomes probable and reasonably estimable. Contracts may include profit incentives such as milestone bonuses. These profit incentives are included in the contract value when their realization is reasonably assured. Development Projects The Company develops and sells solar power plants which generally include the sale or lease of related real estate. Revenue recognition for these solar power plants require adherence to specific guidance for real estate sales, which provides that if the Company executes a sale of land in conjunction with an EPC contract requiring the future development of the property, it recognizes revenue and the corresponding costs under the full accrual method when all of the following requirements are met: the sale is consummated, the buyer’s initial and any continuing investments are adequate, the resulting receivables are not subject to subordination, the future costs to develop the property can be reasonably estimated, it has transferred the customary risk and rewards of ownership to the buyer, and it does not have prohibited continuing involvement with the property or the buyer. In general, a sale is consummated upon the execution of an agreement documenting the terms of the sale and receipt of a minimum initial payment by the buyer to substantiate the transfer of risk to the buyer. Depending on the value of the initial and continuing investment of the buyer, and provided the recovery of the costs of the solar power plant are assured if the buyer defaults, it may defer revenue and profit during construction by aligning its revenue recognition and release of deferred project costs to cost of sales with the receipt of payment from the buyer. At the time the Company has unconditionally received payment from the buyer, revenue is recognized and deferred project costs are released to cost of sales at the same rate of profit estimated throughout the construction of the project. Further, in situations where we have a noncontrolling equity interest in the buyer, we may defer all or a portion of our revenue or profit in accordance with specific guidance for partial sales of real estate. The Company has determined that its standard product and workmanship warranties do not represent prohibited forms of continuing involvement that would otherwise preclude revenue recognition as these warranties do not result in the retention of substantial risks or rewards of ownership or result in a seller guarantee as described in real estate accounting guidance. Similarly, the Company has determined that when it provides post-installation monitoring and maintenance services and associated system output performance warranties to customers of projects that include the sale or lease of real estate, these are not forms of prohibited continuing involvement since the terms and conditions of the post-installation monitoring and maintenance services are commensurate with market rates, control over the right to terminate the post-installation monitoring and maintenance contract 93 and associated system output performance warranties rests with the customer since the customer has the right to terminate for convenience, and the terms and conditions for the system output performance warranties do not result in any additional services or efforts by the Company or in the retention of ownership risks outside of the Company’s control. Residential Leases The Company offers a solar lease program, in partnership with third-party financial institutions, which allows its residential customers to obtain SunPower systems under lease agreements for terms of up to 20 years. Leases are classified as either operating or sales-type leases in accordance with the relevant accounting guidelines. For those systems classified as sales-type leases, the net present value of the minimum lease payments, net of executory costs, is recognized as revenue when the lease is placed in service. This net present value as well as the net present value of the residual value of the lease at termination are recorded as financing receivables in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The difference between the initial net amounts and the gross amounts are amortized to revenue over the lease term using the interest method. The residual values of our solar systems are determined at the inception of the lease applying an estimated system fair value at the end of the lease term. For those systems classified as operating leases, rental revenue is recognized, net of executory costs, on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease. Shipping and Handling Costs The Company records costs related to shipping and handling in cost of revenue. Stock-Based Compensation The Company measures and records compensation expense for all stock-based payment awards based on estimated fair values. The Company provides stock-based awards to its employees, executive officers, and directors through various equity compensation plans including its employee stock option and restricted stock plans. The fair value of restricted stock units is based on the market price of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant. The Company has not granted stock options since fiscal 2008. The Company estimates forfeitures at the date of grant. The Company’s estimate of forfeitures is based on its historical activity, which it believes is indicative of expected forfeitures. In subsequent periods if the actual rate of forfeitures differs from the Company’s estimate, the forfeiture rates are required to be revised, as necessary. Changes in the estimated forfeiture rates can have a significant effect on stock-based compensation expense since the effect of adjusting the rate is recognized in the period the forfeiture estimate is changed. The Company also grants performance share units to executive officers and certain employees that require it to estimate expected achievement of performance targets over the performance period. This estimate involves judgment regarding future expectations of various financial performance measures. If there are changes in the Company’s estimate of the level of financial performance measures expected to be achieved, the related stock-based compensation expense may be significantly increased or reduced in the period that its estimate changes. Advertising Costs Advertising costs are expensed as incurred. Advertising expense totaled approximately $23.4 million, $11.9 million and $11.8 million, in fiscal 2015, 2014, and 2013, respectively. Research and Development Expense Research and development expense consists primarily of salaries and related personnel costs, depreciation and the cost of solar cell and solar panel materials and services used for the development of products, including experiments and testing. All research and development costs are expensed as incurred. Research and development expense is reported net of contributions under the R&D Agreement with Total and contracts with governmental agencies because such contracts are considered collaborative arrangements. 94 Translation of Foreign Currency The Company and certain of its subsidiaries use their respective local currency as their functional currency. Accordingly, foreign currency assets and liabilities are translated using exchange rates in effect at the end of the period. Aggregate exchange gains and losses arising from the translation of foreign assets and liabilities are included in “Accumulated other comprehensive loss” in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Foreign subsidiaries that use the U.S. dollar as their functional currency remeasure monetary assets and liabilities using exchange rates in effect at the end of the period. Exchange gains and losses arising from the remeasurement of monetary assets and liabilities are included in “Other, net” in the Consolidated Statements of Operations. Non- monetary assets and liabilities are carried at their historical values. The Company includes gains or losses from foreign currency transactions in “Other, net” in the Consolidated Statements of Operations with the other hedging activities described in Note 13. Concentration of Credit Risk The Company is exposed to credit losses in the event of nonperformance by the counterparties to its financial and derivative instruments. Financial and derivative instruments that potentially subject the Company to concentrations of credit risk are primarily cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash and cash equivalents, investments, accounts receivable, notes receivable, advances to suppliers, foreign currency option contracts, foreign currency forward contracts, bond hedge and warrant transactions, and purchased options. The Company’s investment policy requires cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash and cash equivalents, and investments to be placed with high-quality financial institutions and to limit the amount of credit risk from any one issuer. Similarly, the Company enters into foreign currency derivative contracts and convertible debenture hedge transactions with high- quality financial institutions and limits the amount of credit exposure to any one counterparty. The foreign currency derivative contracts are limited to a time period of less than 15 months, while the bond hedge and warrant transactions expired in fiscal 2015. The Company regularly evaluates the credit standing of its counterparty financial institutions. The Company performs ongoing credit evaluations of its customers’ financial condition whenever deemed necessary and generally does not require collateral. The Company maintains an allowance for doubtful accounts based on the expected collectability of all accounts receivable, which takes into consideration an analysis of historical bad debts, specific customer creditworthiness and current economic trends. Qualified customers under our residential lease program are generally required to have a minimum credit score. We believe that our concentration of credit risk is limited because of our large number of customers, credit quality of the customer base, small account balances for most of these customers, and customer geographic diversification. As of January 3, 2016, the Company had no customers that accounted for 10% of accounts receivable. As of December 28, 2014, one customer accounted for 57.8% of accounts receivable. In addition, one customer accounted for approximately 59% of the Company’s “Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings” balance as of January 3, 2016 on the Consolidated Balance Sheets as compared to one customer that accounted for approximately 85% of the balance as of December 28, 2014. The Company has entered into agreements with vendors that specify future quantities and pricing of polysilicon to be supplied for periods up to 10 years. Under certain agreements, the Company is required to make prepayments to the vendors over the terms of the arrangements. Income Taxes Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for temporary differences between financial statement and income tax bases of assets and liabilities. Valuation allowances are provided against deferred tax assets when management cannot conclude that it is more likely than not that some portion or all deferred tax assets will be realized. As applicable, interest and penalties on tax contingencies are included in “Provision for income taxes” in the Consolidated Statements of Operations and such amounts were not material for any periods presented. In addition, foreign exchange gains (losses) may result from estimated tax liabilities, which are expected to be settled in currencies other than the U.S. dollar. Investments in Equity Interests Investments in entities in which the Company can exercise significant influence, but does not own a majority equity interest or otherwise control, are accounted for under the equity method. The Company records its share of the results of these entities as “Equity in earnings of unconsolidated investees” on the Consolidated Statements of Operations. The Company monitors its investments for other-than-temporary impairment by considering factors such as current economic and market conditions and the operating performance of the entities and records reductions in carrying values when necessary. The fair value of privately held investments is estimated using the best available information as of the valuation date, including current earnings trends, undiscounted cash flows, and other company specific information, including recent financing rounds (see Notes 6 and 8). 95 Noncontrolling Interests Noncontrolling interests represents the portion of net assets in consolidated subsidiaries that are not attributable, directly or indirectly, to the Company. Beginning in the first quarter of fiscal 2013, the Company has entered into facilities with third-party investors under which the investors are determined to hold noncontrolling interests in entities fully consolidated by the Company. The net assets of the shared entities are attributed to the controlling and noncontrolling interests based on the terms of the governing contractual arrangements. The Company further determined the hypothetical liquidation at book value method (“HLBV Method”) to be the appropriate method for attributing net assets to the controlling and noncontrolling interests as this method most closely mirrors the economics of the governing contractual arrangements. Under the HLBV Method, the Company allocates recorded income (loss) to each investor based on the change, during the reporting period, of the amount of net assets each investor is entitled to under the governing contractual arrangements in a liquidation scenario. Business Combinations The Company records all acquired assets and liabilities, including goodwill, other intangible assets, and in-process research and development, at fair value. The initial recording of goodwill, other intangible assets, and in-process research and development requires certain estimates and assumptions concerning the determination of the fair values and useful lives. The judgments made in the context of the purchase price allocation can materially impact the Company’s future results of operations. Accordingly, for significant acquisitions, the Company obtains assistance from third-party valuation specialists. The valuations calculated from estimates are based on information available at the acquisition date (see Notes 4 and 5). The Company charges acquisition related costs that are not part of the consideration to general and administrative expense as they are incurred. These costs typically include transaction and integration costs, such as legal, accounting, and other professional fees. The Company initially records receipts of net assets or equity interests between entities under common control at their carrying amounts in the accounts of the transferring entity. Financial statements and financial information presented for prior years are retrospectively adjusted to effect the transfer as of the first date for which the entities were under common control. If the carrying amounts of the assets and liabilities transferred differ from the historical cost of the parent of the entities under common control then amounts recognized in the Company’s financial statements reflect the transferred assets and liabilities at the historical cost of the parent of the entities under common control. Financial statements and financial information presented for prior years are also retrospectively adjusted to furnish comparative information as though the assets and liabilities had been transferred at that date. Recent Accounting Pronouncements In November 2015, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued an update to the standards for the balance sheet classification of deferred taxes. The updated standard requires all deferred tax assets and liabilities, and any related valuation allowance, to be classified as non-current on the balance sheet. The classification eliminates the need to separately identify the net current and net non-current deferred tax asset or liability in each jurisdiction and allocate valuation allowances. The new guidance is effective for the Company no later than the first quarter of fiscal 2017 and requires either a retrospective or a prospective approach to adoption. The Company elected to early adopt the updated accounting standard, effective in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2015. As the new standard was applied prospectively, prior periods in the Company’s financial statements were not retrospectively adjusted. In September 2015, the FASB issued an update to the business combination standards to eliminate the requirement for an acquirer in a business combination to account for measurement-period adjustments retrospectively. Instead, acquirers must recognize measurement-period adjustments during the period in which it determines the amounts, including the effect on earnings of any amounts that would have been recorded in previous periods if the accounting had been completed at the acquisition date. The new guidance is effective for the Company no later than the first quarter of fiscal 2016 and requires a prospective approach to adoption. The Company elected early adoption of the updated accounting standard, effective in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2015. The impact of the measurement period adjustments recognized in accordance with the updated accounting standard did not have a material impact to the Company’s consolidated financial statements. In July 2015, the FASB issued an update to the standards to simplify the measurement of inventory. The updated standard more closely aligns the measurement of inventory with that of International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) and amends the measurement standard from lower of cost or market to lower of cost or net realizable value. The new guidance is effective for the Company no later than the first quarter of fiscal 2017 and requires a prospective approach to adoption. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is evaluating the potential impact of this standard on its consolidated financial statements and disclosures. 96 In April 2015, the FASB issued an update to the standards to provide a practical expedient for the measurement date of defined benefit obligation and plan assets for reporting entities with fiscal year-ends that do not coincide with a month-end. The updated standard allows such entities to measure defined benefit plan assets and obligations using the month-end that is closest to the entity’s fiscal year-end and apply that practical expedient consistently from year to year and to all plans, if an entity has more than one plan. The new practical expedient guidance is effective for the Company no later than the first quarter of fiscal 2016 and requires a prospective approach to adoption. The Company elected early adoption of the updated accounting standard, effective in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2015, and measured its defined benefit plan assets and obligations as of December 31, 2015, the calendar month-end closest to the Company’s fiscal year-end. The adoption of this updated accounting standard did not have a significant impact to the Company’s consolidated financial statements. In April 2015, the FASB issued an update to the standards for the presentation of debt issuance costs to reduce complexity in accounting standards and to align with IFRS. The updated standard requires debt issuance costs to be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying value of the associated debt liability. U.S. GAAP previously required debt issuance costs to be reflected as an asset on the Company’s balance sheet. The new debt issuance cost guidance is effective for the Company no later than the first quarter of fiscal 2016 and requires a retrospective approach to adoption. The Company elected early adoption of the updated accounting standard, effective in the first quarter of fiscal 2015, resulting in a one-time reclassification of $11.6 million of debt issuance costs from “Other long-term assets” to “Long-term debt” and “Convertible debt, net of current portion” in the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 28, 2014. In February 2015, the FASB issued a new standard that modifies existing consolidation guidance for reporting organizations that are required to evaluate whether they should consolidate certain legal entities. The new consolidation guidance is effective for the Company in the first quarter of fiscal 2016 and requires either a retrospective or a modified retrospective approach to adoption. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is evaluating the available methods and the potential impact of this standard on its consolidated financial statements and disclosures. In May 2014, the FASB issued a new revenue recognition standard based on the principle that revenue is recognized to depict the transfer of goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods and services. The new revenue recognition standard becomes effective for the Company in the first quarter of fiscal 2018 and is to be applied retrospectively using one of two prescribed methods. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is evaluating the available methods and the potential impact of this standard on its consolidated financial statements and disclosures. Other than as described above, there has been no issued accounting guidance not yet adopted by the Company that it believes is material or potentially material to its consolidated financial statements. Note 2. TRANSACTIONS WITH TOTAL AND TOTAL S.A. In June 2011, Total completed a cash tender offer to acquire 60% of the Company’s then outstanding shares of common stock at a price of $23.25 per share, for a total cost of approximately $1.4 billion. In December 2011, the Company entered into a Private Placement Agreement with Total, under which Total purchased, and the Company issued and sold, 18.6 million shares of the Company’s common stock for a purchase price of $8.80 per share, thereby increasing Total’s ownership to approximately 66% of the Company’s outstanding common stock as of that date. As of January 3, 2016, through the increase of the Company’s total outstanding common stock due to the exercise of warrants and issuance of restricted and performance stock units, Total’s ownership of the Company’s outstanding common stock has decreased to approximately 57%. Credit Support Agreement On April 28, 2011, the Company and Total S.A. entered into a Credit Support Agreement (the “Credit Support Agreement”) under which Total S.A. agreed to enter into one or more guarantee agreements (each a “Guaranty”) with banks providing letter of credit facilities to the Company. Total S.A. will guarantee the Company’s obligation to reimburse the applicable issuing bank for a draw on a letter of credit and pay interest thereon in accordance with the letter of credit facility between such bank and the Company. Under the Credit Support Agreement, the Company may also request that Total S.A. provide a Guaranty in support of the Company’s payment obligations with respect to a letter of credit facility. The Company is required to pay Total S.A. a guarantee fee for each letter of credit that is the subject of a Guaranty under the Credit Support Agreement and was outstanding for all or part of the preceding calendar quarter. The Credit Support Agreement was amended on June 7, 2011, it became effective on June 28, 2011 in connection with the completion of the Tender Offer (the “CSA Effective Date”), and it was further amended on each of December 12, 2011 and December 14, 2012. 97 The Credit Support Agreement will terminate following the fifth anniversary of the CSA Effective Date, after the later of the payment in full of all obligations thereunder and the termination or expiration of each Guaranty provided thereunder. Affiliation Agreement The Company and Total have entered into an Affiliation Agreement that governs the relationship between Total and the Company (the “Affiliation Agreement”). Until the expiration of a standstill period specified in the Affiliation Agreement (the “Standstill Period”), and subject to certain exceptions, Total, Total S.A., any of their respective affiliates and certain other related parties (collectively the “Total Group”) may not effect, seek, or enter into discussions with any third-party regarding any transaction that would result in the Total Group beneficially owning shares of the Company in excess of certain thresholds, or request the Company or the Company’s independent directors, officers or employees, to amend or waive any of the standstill restrictions applicable to the Total Group. The Affiliation Agreement imposes certain limitations on the Total Group’s ability to seek to effect a tender offer or merger to acquire 100% of the outstanding voting power of the Company and imposes certain limitations on the Total Group’s ability to transfer 40% or more of the outstanding shares or voting power of the Company to a single person or group that is not a direct or indirect subsidiary of Total S.A. During the Standstill Period, no member of the Total Group may, among other things, solicit proxies or become a participant in an election contest relating to the election of directors to the Company’s Board of Directors. The Affiliation Agreement provides Total with the right to maintain its percentage ownership in connection with any new securities issued by the Company, and Total may also purchase shares on the open market or in private transactions with disinterested stockholders, subject in each case to certain restrictions. The Affiliation Agreement also imposes certain restrictions with respect to the Company’s and its Board of Directors’ ability to take certain actions, including specifying certain actions that require approval by the directors other than the directors appointed by Total and other actions that require stockholder approval by Total. Research & Collaboration Agreement Total and the Company have entered into a Research & Collaboration Agreement (the “R&D Agreement”) that establishes a framework under which the parties engage in long-term research and development collaboration (“R&D Collaboration”). The R&D Collaboration encompasses a number of different projects, with a focus on advancing the Company’s technology position in the crystalline silicon domain, as well as ensuring the Company’s industrial competitiveness. The R&D Agreement enables a joint committee to identify, plan and manage the R&D Collaboration. Compensation and Funding Agreement In February 2012, the Company entered into a Compensation and Funding Agreement (the “Compensation and Funding Agreement”) with Total S.A. that established the parameters for the terms of liquidity injections that may be required to be provided by Total S.A. to the Company from time to time. During the term of the Compensation and Funding Agreement, the Company is required to pay Total S.A. a guarantee fee in an amount equal to 2.75% per annum of the average amount of the Company’s indebtedness that is guaranteed by Total S.A. pursuant to any guaranty issued in accordance with the terms of the Compensation and Funding Agreement during such quarter. Any payment obligations of the Company to Total S.A. under the Compensation and Funding Agreement that are not paid when due accrue interest until paid in full at a rate equal to 6-month U.S. LIBOR as in effect from time to time plus 5.00% per annum. Upfront Warrant In February 2012, the Company issued a warrant (the “Upfront Warrant”) to Total S.A. to purchase 9,531,677 shares of the Company’s common stock with an exercise price of $7.8685, subject to adjustment for customary anti-dilution and other events. The Upfront Warrant, which is governed by the Private Placement Agreement and the Compensation and Funding Agreement, is exercisable at any time for seven years after its issuance, provided that, so long as at least $25.0 million in aggregate of the Company’s convertible debt remains outstanding, such exercise will not cause “any person,” including Total S.A., to, directly or indirectly, including through one or more wholly-owned subsidiaries, become the “beneficial owner” (as such terms are defined in Rule 13d-3 and Rule 13d-5 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended), of more than 74.99% of the voting power of the Company’s common stock at such time, a circumstance which would trigger the repurchase or conversion of the Company’s existing convertible debt. 98 0.75% Debentures Due 2018 In May 2013, the Company issued $300.0 million in principal amount of its 0.75% senior convertible debentures due 2018 (the “0.75% debentures due 2018”). $200.0 million in aggregate principal amount of the 0.75% debentures due 2018 were acquired by Total. The 0.75% debentures due 2018 are convertible into shares of the Company’s common stock at any time based on an initial conversion price equal to $24.95 per share, which provides Total the right to acquire up to 8,017,420 shares of the Company’s common stock. The applicable conversion rate may adjust in certain circumstances, including a fundamental change, as described in the indenture governing the 0.75% debentures due 2018 (see Note 12). 0.875% Debentures Due 2021 In June 2014, the Company issued $400.0 million in principal amount of its 0.875% senior convertible debentures due 2021 (the “0.875% debentures due 2021”). An aggregate principal amount of $250.0 million of the 0.875% debentures due 2021 were acquired by Total. The 0.875% debentures due 2021 are convertible into shares of the Company’s common stock at any time based on an initial conversion price equal to $48.76 per share, which provides Total the right to acquire up to 5,126,775 shares of the Company’s common stock. The applicable conversion rate may adjust in certain circumstances, including a fundamental change, as described in the indenture governing the 0.875% debentures due 2021 (see Note 12). 4.00% Debentures Due 2023 In December 2015, the Company issued $425.0 million in principal amount of its 4.00% senior convertible debentures due 2023 (the “4.00% debentures due 2023”). An aggregate principal amount of $100.0 million of the 4.00% debentures due 2023 were acquired by Total. The 4.00% debentures due 2023 are convertible into shares of the Company’s common stock at any time based on an initial conversion price equal to $30.53 per share, which provides Total the right to acquire up to 3,275,680 shares of the Company’s common stock. The applicable conversion rate may adjust in certain circumstances, including a fundamental change, as described in the indenture governing the 4.00% debentures due 2023 (see Note 12). Joint Projects with Total and its Affiliates: The Company enters into various EPC and O&M agreements relating to solar projects, including EPC and O&M services agreements relating to projects owned or partially owned by Total and its affiliates. As of January 3, 2016, the Company had $24.6 million of “Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings” and $6.7 million of “Accounts receivable, net” on its Consolidated Balance Sheets related to projects in which Total and its affiliates have a direct or indirect material interest. State Income Taxes with Total and its Affiliates: The Company has determined that it is unitary with Total S.A. in certain U.S. states for income tax filing purposes. The Company continues to calculate its income tax liabilities on a separate company basis as agreed with Total S.A. Related-Party Transactions with Total and its Affiliates: (In thousands) Revenue: EPC, O&M, and components revenue under joint projects Research and development expense: Offsetting contributions received under the R&D Agreement Interest expense: Guarantee fees incurred under the Credit Support Agreement Fees incurred under the Compensation and Funding Agreement Interest expense incurred on the 0.75% debentures due 2018 Interest expense incurred on the 0.875% debentures due 2021 Interest expense incurred on the 4.00% debentures due 2023 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 99 2015 Fiscal Year 2014 2013 56,772 (1,620) $ $ 155,568 (1,612) $ $ 602 (1,661) 11,227 $ — $ $ $ $ 1,500 2,188 167 12,035 1,200 1,604 1,209 $ $ $ $ — $ 8,890 5,533 883 — — Note 3. 8POINT3 ENERGY PARTNERS LP In June 2015, 8point3 Energy Partners LP (“8point3 Energy Partners”), a joint YieldCo vehicle formed by the Company and First Solar, Inc. (“First Solar” and, together with the Company, the “Sponsors”) to own, operate and acquire solar energy generation assets, completed an initial public offering (“IPO”) of Class A shares representing limited partner interests in 8point3 Energy Partners. The IPO was consummated on June 24, 2015 (the “IPO Closing Date”) whereupon the Class A shares were listed on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the trading symbol “CAFD.” Immediately after the IPO, the Company contributed a portfolio of 170 MW AC of its solar generation assets (the “SPWR Projects”) to 8point3 Operating Company, LLC (“OpCo”), 8point3 Energy Partners’ primary operating subsidiary. In exchange for the SPWR Projects, the Company received cash proceeds of $371 million as well as equity interests in several 8point3 Energy Partners affiliated entities: primarily common and subordinated units representing a 40.7% stake in OpCo and a 50.0% economic and management stake in 8point3 Holding Company, LLC (“Holdings”), the parent company of the general partner of 8point3 Energy Partners and the owner of incentive distribution rights (“IDRs”) in OpCo. Holdings, OpCo, 8point3 Energy Partners and their respective subsidiaries are referred to herein as the “8point3 Group.” Additionally, pursuant to a Right of First Offer Agreement between the Company and OpCo, the 8point3 Group has rights of first offer on interests in an additional 513 MW AC of the Company’s solar energy projects that are currently contracted or are expected to be contracted before being sold by the Company to other parties (the “ROFO Projects”). In connection with the IPO, the Company also entered into O&M, asset management and management services agreements with the 8point3 Group. The services the Company provides under these agreements are priced consistently with market rates for such services and the agreements are terminable by the 8point3 Group for convenience. The Company accounts for its investments in the 8point3 Group using the equity method, whereby the book value of the Company’s investments is recorded as a non-current asset and the Company’s portion of the 8point3 Group’s earnings is recorded in the Consolidated Statements of Operations under the caption “Equity in earnings (loss) of unconsolidated investees.” Refer to Note 11 for further discussion of the Company’s equity method investments in the 8point3 Group. The Company’s agreements with the 8point3 Group include substantive, non-standard guarantees of minimum cash flows in respect of each project among the SPWR Projects that had not yet reached its commercial operations date (“COD”) before the IPO Closing Date. The Company’s guarantees relating to each such project expire when the project reaches COD. The Company therefore determined that the risks and rewards of ownership in these projects are not transferred until COD and, accordingly, the Company continues to record the projects on its Consolidated Balance Sheet until that time. Projects that had not reached COD by June 28, 2015 totaled 131 MW of the SPWR Projects and the Company recorded $302 million of IPO proceeds attributable to those projects as a current liability within “Accrued liabilities” in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The projects discussed in the previous paragraph, which had not reached COD by June 28, 2015, are projects that include the sale or lease of real estate. Accordingly, each of these projects will be evaluated under relevant guidance for real estate transactions after COD and the concomitant expiration of the Company’s non-standard guarantees (and associated risks of ownership) in respect of the project. The Company determined that the subordination of certain of its OpCo units until such time that the 8point3 Group achieves certain cash distribution targets in respect of the OpCo common and subordinated units (the “subordination period”) constituted a form of support to the operations of the SPWR Projects that also survived the sale of the projects. Accordingly, the Company will defer recognition of any profit on the sale of any such project until unconditional cash proceeds from the sale exceed the Company’s total costs incurred in connection with the project. The Company has reflected the $302 million of IPO cash proceeds attributable to these assets as an investing cash inflow in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows. The balance of the SPWR Projects was composed of a portfolio of residential leases (the “residential lease portfolio”) which included both sales-type and operating leases. The Company evaluated the sale of the residential lease portfolio, excluding the portion related to operating leases and unguaranteed residual values accounted for under lease guidance in the following paragraph, under relevant accounting guidance for consolidations and determined that this portion of the residential lease portfolio met the definition of a business and that deconsolidation criteria were met. The Company received cash proceeds of $39 million and equity proceeds of $68 million attributable to the sale of this portion of the residential lease portfolio and recorded a resulting $28 million gain upon deconsolidation, reflected in “Other, net” in the Consolidated Statements of Operations. The equity proceeds were valued using the income approach which utilized a discounted cash flow model based on forecasted cash flows, indexed to 8point3 Energy Partners’ IPO price of $21 per Class A share. The Company has reflected the $39 million of IPO cash proceeds attributable to this portion of the residential lease portfolio as an investing cash inflow in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows. 100 The Company evaluated the sale of the portion of the residential lease portfolio that was composed of operating leases and unguaranteed sales-type lease residual values under relevant guidance for leasing transactions and determined that the Company retained significant risks of ownership as defined in such guidance due, in part, to the subordination of certain of the Company’s OpCo units during the subordination period. Accordingly, the Company accounted for the sale of the operating leases and the unguaranteed sales-type lease residual values as a borrowing and reflected the $29 million of IPO cash proceeds attributable to this portion of the residential lease portfolio as a financing cash inflow in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows and as liabilities recorded within “Accrued liabilities” and “Other long-term liabilities” in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. As of January 3, 2016 the operating leases and the unguaranteed sales-type lease residual values which were sold to the 8point3 Group had an aggregate carrying value of $78 million. During the third and fourth quarter of fiscal 2015, the Company received $199 million of additional cash proceeds from the 8point3 Group, primarily associated with the pass-through of tax equity proceeds, which were classified as an investing cash inflow in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows. In addition, all SPWR Projects reached COD during fiscal 2015 and, pursuant to the accounting treatment discussed in the preceding paragraphs, the Company derecognized the associated project assets and current liability. No profit on the sale of the projects was recognized, and the derecognition resulted in a net $102 million reduction in the carrying value of the Company’s investments in the 8point3 Group. Note 4. BUSINESS COMBINATIONS In fiscal 2015, the Company acquired two entities that qualified as business combinations, Cogenra Solar, Inc., a panel technology innovator, and Solaire Generation Inc., a solar carport specialist. These business combinations were accounted for by the acquisition method for a total cash consideration, net of cash acquired, of approximately $65 million, of which $37 million was attributed to goodwill, $40 million to intangible assets, and $12 million to net liabilities assumed, which includes an estimate of contingent consideration that may be paid in a future period. The composition of the intangible assets acquired is presented in Note 5. These acquisitions enhance the breadth and depth of our expertise in our technologies and our product offerings. The total goodwill of $37 million is primarily attributable to synergies expected to arise out of the acquisitions and has been allocated to reportable business segments using specific identification or relative fair value approaches based on the facts and circumstances of each acquisition. Goodwill is expected to be amortized over 15 years for tax purposes. Pro forma results of operations for the acquisitions have not been presented as the impact of each acquisition is not material to the Company’s consolidated results of operations for the current or prior periods. The actual results of operations of these acquisitions have been included in the Company’s consolidated results of operations from the date of the respective acquisition. Note 5. GOODWILL AND OTHER INTANGIBLE ASSETS Goodwill The following table presents the changes in the carrying amount of goodwill under the Company’s reportable business segments: (In thousands) As of December 28, 2014 Goodwill arising from business combinations As of January 3, 2016 Other Intangible Assets Residential 20,780 $ 11,400 32,180 $ Commercial $ — $ 10,314 10,314 $ Power Plant 440 15,201 15,641 $ Total 21,220 36,915 58,135 $ $ The following tables present details of the Company’s acquired other intangible assets: (In thousands) As of January 3, 2016 Patents and purchased technology Project pipeline assets Purchased in-process research and development Other Gross Accumulated Amortization Net $ $ $ 53,499 9,446 3,700 500 67,145 $ $ $ (5,328) — — (375) (5,703) $ $ $ 48,171 9,446 3,700 125 61,442 101 (In thousands) As of December 28, 2014 Patents and purchased technology Purchased in-process research and development Gross Accumulated Amortization $ $ $ 13,675 3,700 17,375 $ $ $ (615) $ — $ $ (615) Net 13,060 3,700 16,760 Aggregate amortization expense for intangible assets totaled $5.1 million, $0.6 million and $0.7 million for fiscal 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. As of January 3, 2016, the estimated future amortization expense related to intangible assets with finite useful lives is as follows: (In thousands) Fiscal Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Thereafter Note 6. BALANCE SHEET COMPONENTS (In thousands) Accounts receivable, net: Accounts receivable, gross1,2 Less: allowance for doubtful accounts Less: allowance for sales returns Amount $ $ 16,506 12,056 12,191 9,107 6,520 1,362 57,742 As of January 3, 2016 December 28, 2014 $ $ 207,860 (15,505) (1,907) 190,448 $ $ 523,613 (18,152) (1,145) 504,316 1 Includes short-term financing receivables associated with solar power systems leased of $12.5 million and $9.1 million as of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, respectively (see Note 7). 2 Includes short-term retainage of $11.8 million and $213.0 million as of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, respectively. Retainage refers to the earned, but unbilled, portion of a construction and development project for which payment is deferred by the customer until certain contractual milestones are met. (In thousands) Allowance for doubtful accounts: Year ended January 3, 2016 Year ended December 28, 2014 Year ended December 29, 2013 Allowance for sales returns: Year ended January 3, 2016 Year ended December 28, 2014 Year ended December 29, 2013 Valuation allowance for deferred tax assets: Year ended January 3, 2016 Year ended December 28, 2014 Year ended December 29, 2013 Balance at Beginning of Period Charges (Releases) to Expenses / Revenues $ $ 18,152 26,463 26,773 1,145 2,095 5,054 118,748 90,571 182,322 1,163 (1,023) 8,258 762 (950) (2,959) 149,923 28,177 (91,751) 102 Deductions Balance at End of Period $ $ (3,810) (7,288) (8,568) — — — — — — 15,505 18,152 26,463 1,907 1,145 2,095 268,671 118,748 90,571 (In thousands) Inventories: Raw materials Work-in-process Finished goods (In thousands) Prepaid expenses and other current assets: Deferred project costs Bond hedge derivative VAT receivables, current portion Deferred costs for solar power systems to be leased Derivative financial instruments Prepaid inventory Other receivables Other prepaid expenses Other current assets (In thousands) Project assets - plants and land: Project assets — plants Project assets — land Project assets - plants and land, current portion Project assets - plants and land, net of current portion (In thousands) Property, plant and equipment, net: Manufacturing equipment3 Land and buildings Leasehold improvements Solar power systems4 Computer equipment Furniture and fixtures Construction-in-process Less: accumulated depreciation As of January 3, 2016 December 28, 2014 124,297 131,258 126,835 382,390 $ $ 46,848 67,903 93,822 208,573 As of January 3, 2016 December 28, 2014 67,479 — 14,697 40,988 8,734 50,615 78,824 98,180 — 359,517 $ $ 64,784 51,951 7,554 22,537 7,018 — 79,927 47,448 47,626 328,845 As of January 3, 2016 December 28, 2014 104,328 12,328 116,656 101,181 15,475 479,108 5,416 484,524 479,452 5,072 $ $ $ $ As of January 3, 2016 December 28, 2014 556,963 32,090 244,098 141,075 103,443 10,640 247,511 1,335,820 (604,590) 731,230 $ $ 554,124 26,138 236,867 124,848 88,257 9,436 75,570 1,115,240 (529,896) 585,344 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 3 The Company’s mortgage loan agreement with International Finance Corporation (“IFC”) is collateralized by certain manufacturing equipment with a net book value of $85.1 million and $111.9 million as of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, respectively. 4 Includes $110.4 million and $94.4 million of solar power systems associated with sale-leaseback transactions under the financing method as of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, respectively, which are depreciated using the straight-line method to their estimated residual values over the lease terms of up to 20 years (see Note 7). 103 (In thousands) Property, plant and equipment, net by geography5: Philippines United States Mexico Europe Other 5 Property, plant and equipment, net by geography is based on the physical location of the assets. (In thousands) Other long-term assets: Equity method investments Cost method investments Other (In thousands) Accrued liabilities: Bond hedge derivatives Employee compensation and employee benefits Deferred revenue Short-term residential lease financing Interest payable Short-term warranty reserves Restructuring reserve VAT payables Derivative financial instruments Inventory payable Liability due to 8point3 Energy Partners Other (In thousands) Other long-term liabilities: Deferred revenue Long-term warranty reserves Long-term sale-leaseback financing Long-term residential lease financing Long-term residential lease financing with 8point3 Energy Partners Unrecognized tax benefits Long-term pension liability Derivative financial instruments Other 104 As of January 3, 2016 December 28, 2014 460,420 201,419 44,164 22,962 2,265 731,230 $ $ 335,643 183,631 40,251 24,748 1,071 585,344 As of January 3, 2016 December 28, 2014 186,405 36,369 75,201 297,975 $ $ 210,898 32,308 57,023 300,229 As of January 3, 2016 December 28, 2014 — $ 59,476 19,887 7,395 8,165 16,639 1,823 4,225 2,316 50,615 9,952 133,004 313,497 $ 51,951 47,667 33,412 1,489 10,575 13,278 13,477 6,073 1,345 — — 151,767 331,034 As of January 3, 2016 December 28, 2014 179,779 147,488 125,286 — 29,389 43,297 12,014 1,033 26,271 564,557 $ $ 176,804 141,370 111,904 27,122 — 31,764 9,980 3,712 52,688 555,344 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ (In thousands) Accumulated other comprehensive loss: Cumulative translation adjustment Net unrealized gain (loss) on derivatives Net loss on long-term pension liability adjustment Deferred taxes Note 7. LEASING Residential Lease Program As of January 3, 2016 December 28, 2014 $ $ (11,164) 5,942 (2,055) (746) (8,023) $ $ (8,712) (1,443) (2,878) (422) (13,455) The Company offers a solar lease program, in partnership with third-party investors, which provides U.S. residential customers SunPower systems under 20-year lease agreements that include system maintenance and warranty coverage. Leases are classified as either operating or sales-type leases in accordance with the relevant accounting guidelines. Operating Leases The following table summarizes “Solar power systems leased and to be leased, net” under operating leases on the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets as of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014: (In thousands) Solar power systems leased and to be leased, net1,2: Solar power systems leased Solar power systems to be leased Less: accumulated depreciation As of January 3, 2016 December 28, 2014 $ $ 543,358 34,319 577,677 (46,157) 531,520 $ $ 396,704 21,202 417,906 (26,993) 390,913 1 Solar power systems leased and to be leased, net are physically located exclusively in the United States. 2 As of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, the Company had pledged solar assets with an aggregate book value of zero and $140.1 million, respectively, to third-party investors as security for the Company’s contractual obligations. The following table presents the Company’s minimum future rental receipts on operating leases placed in service as of January 3, 2016: (In thousands) Minimum future rentals on operating leases placed in service1 Fiscal 2016 Fiscal 2017 Fiscal 2018 Fiscal 2019 Fiscal 2020 Thereafter Total $ 18,132 17,428 17,464 17,499 17,537 245,648 $ 333,708 1 Minimum future rentals on operating leases placed in service does not include contingent rentals that may be received from customers under agreements that include performance-based incentives nor does it include rent receivables on operating leases sold to the 8point3 Group. 105 Sales-Type Leases As of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, the Company’s net investment in sales-type leases presented in “Accounts receivable, net” and “Long-term financing receivables, net” on the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets was as follows: (In thousands) Financing receivables: Minimum lease payments receivable1 Unguaranteed residual value Unearned income Net financing receivables Current Long-term 1 Net of allowance for doubtful accounts. As of January 3, 2016 December 28, 2014 $ $ $ $ 366,759 50,722 (70,155) 347,326 12,535 334,791 $ $ $ $ 319,244 34,343 (74,859) 278,728 9,141 269,587 As of January 3, 2016, future maturities of net financing receivables for sales-type leases are as follows: (In thousands) Scheduled maturities of minimum lease payments receivable1 Fiscal 2016 Fiscal 2017 Fiscal 2018 Fiscal 2019 Fiscal 2020 Thereafter Total $ 18,337 18,186 18,340 18,500 18,663 274,733 $ 366,759 1 Minimum future rentals on sales-type leases placed in service does not include contingent rentals that may be received from customers under agreements that include performance-based incentives. Third-Party Financing Arrangements The Company has entered into multiple facilities under which solar power systems are financed by third-party investors. Under the terms of certain arrangements the investors make an upfront payment to the Company, which the Company recognizes as a non-recourse liability that will be reduced over the term of the arrangement as customer receivables and government incentives are received by the third-party investors. As the non-recourse liability is reduced over time, the Company makes a corresponding reduction in customer and government incentive receivables on its balance sheet. The Company uses this approach to account for both operating and sales-type leases with its residential lease customers in the consolidated financial statements. These arrangements were terminated in the first half of fiscal 2015. The Company entered into a new arrangement in the third quarter of fiscal 2015 that is similarly accounted for as a borrowing. As of January 3, 2016, and December 28, 2014, the remaining liability to third-party investors under these arrangements presented in “Accrued liabilities” and “Other long-term liabilities” on the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets, was $7.4 million and $28.6 million, respectively (see Note 6). The Company has entered into multiple financing facilities with third-party investors under which the investors invest in entities that hold SunPower solar power systems and leases with residential customers. The Company holds controlling interests in these less-than-wholly-owned entities and therefore fully consolidates these entities. The Company accounts for the portion of net assets in the consolidated entities attributable to the investors as “Redeemable noncontrolling interests” and “Noncontrolling interests” in its consolidated financial statements. Noncontrolling interests in subsidiaries that are redeemable at the option of the noncontrolling interest holder are classified as “Redeemable noncontrolling interests in subsidiaries,” between liabilities and equity on the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. During the years ended January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014 the Company received $180.9 million and $100.7 million, respectively, in contributions from investors under the related facilities and attributed losses of $111.5 million and $64.3 million, respectively, to third-party investors corresponding principally to certain assets, including tax credits, that were allocated to the investors during the periods. 106 Sale-Leaseback Arrangements The Company enters into sale-leaseback arrangements under which solar power systems are sold to third parties and subsequently leased back by the Company over minimum lease terms of up to 20 years. Separately, the Company enters into PPAs with end customers, who host the leased solar power systems and buy the electricity directly from the Company under PPAs with terms of up to 25 years. At the end of the lease term, the Company has the option to purchase the systems at fair value or may be required to remove the systems and return them to the third parties. The Company has classified its sale-leaseback arrangements of solar power systems not involving integral equipment as operating leases. The deferred profit on the sale of these systems is recognized over the term of the lease. As of January 3, 2016, future minimum lease obligations associated with these systems was $85.8 million, which will be recognized over the minimum lease terms. Future minimum payments to be received from customers under PPAs associated with the solar power systems under sale-leaseback arrangements classified as operating leases will be recognized over the lease terms of up to 20 years and are contingent upon the amounts of energy produced by the solar power systems. The Company enters into certain sale-leaseback arrangements under which the systems subject to the sale-leaseback arrangements have been determined to be integral equipment as defined under the accounting guidance for such transactions. The Company has continuing involvement with the solar power systems throughout the lease due to purchase option rights in the arrangements. As a result of such continuing involvement, the Company accounts for each of these transactions as a financing. Under the financing method, the proceeds received from the sale of the solar power systems are recorded by the Company as financing liabilities and presented within “Other long-term liabilities” in the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets (see Note 6). The financing liabilities are subsequently reduced by the Company’s payments to lease back the solar power systems, less interest expense calculated based on the Company’s incremental borrowing rate adjusted to the rate required to prevent negative amortization. The solar power systems under the sale-leaseback arrangements remain on the Company’s balance sheet and are classified within “Property, plant and equipment, net” (see Note 6). As of January 3, 2016, future minimum lease obligations for the sale-leaseback arrangements accounted for under the financing method were $103.5 million, which will be recognized over the lease terms of up to 20 years. Note 8. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS Fair value is estimated by applying the following hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value into three levels and bases the categorization within the hierarchy upon the lowest level of input that is available and significant to the fair value measurement (observable inputs are the preferred basis of valuation): • Level 1 — Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. • Level 2 — Measurements are inputs that are observable for assets or liabilities, either directly or indirectly, other than quoted prices included within Level 1. • Level 3 — Prices or valuations that require management inputs that are both significant to the fair value measurement and unobservable. Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis The Company measures certain assets and liabilities at fair value on a recurring basis. There were no transfers between fair value measurement levels during any presented period. The Company did not have any assets or liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis requiring Level 3 inputs as of January 3, 2016 or December 28, 2014. 107 The following table summarizes the Company’s assets and liabilities measured and recorded at fair value on a recurring basis as of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014: (In thousands) Assets Cash and cash equivalents1: Money market funds Prepaid expenses and other current assets: Debt derivatives (Note 12) Derivative financial instruments (Note 13) Total assets Liabilities Accrued liabilities: Debt derivatives (Note 12) Derivative financial instruments (Note 13) Other long-term liabilities: Derivative financial instruments (Note 13) Total liabilities Total January 3, 2016 Level 1 Level 2 Total December 28, 2014 Level 1 Level 2 $ 540,000 $ 540,000 $ — $ 375,000 $ 375,000 $ — — — — 51,951 — 51,951 8,734 548,734 — 540,000 $ $ 8,734 8,734 7,018 433,969 $ — $ — $ — $ 51,951 2,316 — 2,316 1,345 1,033 3,349 $ — — $ 1,033 3,349 3,712 57,008 $ $ $ $ — 375,000 7,018 58,969 $ — $ 51,951 — 1,345 — — $ 3,712 57,008 $ $ $ 1 The Company’s cash equivalents consist of money market fund instruments and commercial paper that are classified as available- for-sale and are highly liquid investments with original maturities of 90 days or less. The Company’s money market fund instruments are categorized within Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy because they are valued using quoted market prices for identical instruments in active markets. Other financial instruments, including the Company’s accounts receivable, accounts payable and accrued liabilities, are carried at cost, which generally approximates fair value due to the short-term nature of these instruments. Debt Derivatives The 4.50% Bond Hedge (as described in Note 12) and the embedded cash conversion option within the 4.50% debentures due 2015 (as described in Note 12), which both matured in the first quarter of 2015, were classified as derivative instruments that required mark-to-market treatment with changes in fair value reported in the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Operations. The fair values of these derivative instruments were determined utilizing the following Level 1 and Level 2 inputs: Stock price Exercise price Interest rate Stock volatility Credit risk adjustment Maturity date As of 1 December 28, 2014 $ $ 26.32 22.53 0.19% 61.7% 0.65% February 18, 2015 1 The valuation model utilizes these inputs to value the right but not the obligation to purchase one share of the Company’s common stock at $22.53. The Company utilized a Black-Scholes valuation model to value the 4.50% Bond Hedge and embedded cash conversion option. The underlying input assumptions were determined as follows: (i) Stock price. The closing price of the Company’s common stock on the last trading day of the quarter. (ii) Exercise prices. The exercise price of the 4.50% Bond Hedge and the embedded cash conversion option. (iii) Interest rate. The Treasury Strip rate associated with the life of the 4.50% Bond Hedge and the embedded cash conversion option. 108 (iv) Stock volatility. The volatility of the Company’s common stock over the life of the 4.50% Bond Hedge and the embedded cash conversion option. (v) Credit risk adjustment. Represents the weighted average of the credit default swap rate of the counterparties. Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value on a Non-Recurring Basis The Company measures certain investments and non-financial assets (including project assets, property, plant and equipment, and other intangible assets) at fair value on a non-recurring basis in periods after initial measurement in circumstances when the fair value of such asset is impaired below its recorded cost. Held-to-Maturity Debt Securities The Company’s debt securities, classified as held-to-maturity, are Philippine government bonds that the Company maintains as collateral for business transactions within the Philippines. These bonds have various maturity dates and are classified as “Restricted long-term marketable securities” on the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. As of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, these bonds had a carrying value of $6.5 million and $7.2 million, respectively. The Company records such held-to-maturity investments at amortized cost based on its ability and intent to hold the securities until maturity. The Company monitors for changes in circumstances and events that would affect its ability and intent to hold such securities until the recorded amortized costs are recovered. No other-than-temporary impairment loss was incurred during any presented period. The held-to- maturity debt securities were categorized in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy. Equity and Cost Method Investments The Company holds equity investments in non-consolidated entities that are accounted for under both the equity and cost method. The Company monitors these investments, which are included in “Other long-term assets” in its Consolidated Balance Sheets, for impairment and records reductions in the carrying values when necessary. Circumstances that indicate an other-than- temporary decline include Level 2 and Level 3 measurements such as the valuation ascribed to the issuing company in subsequent financing rounds, decreases in quoted market prices, and declines in the results of operations of the issuer. As of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, the Company had $186.4 million and $210.9 million, respectively, in investments accounted for under the equity method (see Note 11). As of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, the Company had $36.4 million and $32.3 million, respectively, in investments accounted for under the cost method. Related-Party Transactions with Investees: (In thousands) Accounts receivable Other long-term assets Accounts payable Accrued liabilities Customer advances Other long-term liabilities (In thousands) Payments made to investees for products/services Revenue from sales to investees of products/services 2015 444,121 47,019 $ $ Cost Method Investment in Tendril Networks, Inc. As of January 3, 2016 December 28, 2014 32,389 1,455 42,080 9,952 710 29,389 $ $ $ $ $ $ 22,425 1,623 50,039 — 4,210 — Fiscal Year 2014 462,596 $ — $ 2013 480,802 — $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ In November 2014, the Company purchased $20.0 million of preferred stock for a minority stake in Tendril Networks, Inc. (“Tendril”), accounted for under the cost method because the preferred stock was deemed not to be in-substance common stock. In connection with the investment, the Company acquired warrants to purchase up to approximately 14 million shares 109 of Tendril common stock through November 23, 2024. The number of shares of Tendril common stock that may be purchased pursuant to the warrants is subject to the Company’s and Tendril’s achievement of certain financial and operational milestones and other conditions. In connection with the initial investment in Tendril, the Company also entered into commercial agreements with Tendril under a Master Services Agreement and related Statements of Work. Under these commercial agreements, Tendril will use up to $13.0 million of the Company’s initial investment to develop, jointly with the Company, certain solar software solution products. Note 9. RESTRUCTURING November 2014 Restructuring Plan On November 14, 2014, the Company announced a reorganization plan intended to realign resources consistent with the Company’s global strategy and improve its overall operating efficiency and cost structure. These restructuring activities were substantially complete as of January 3, 2016; however, the Company expects to continue to incur costs as it finalizes previous estimates and actions in connection with this plan, primarily due to other costs, such as legal and accounting services. Legacy Restructuring Plans During fiscal 2012 and 2011, the Company implemented approved restructuring plans, related to all segments, to align with changes in the global solar market which included the consolidation of the Company’s Philippine manufacturing operations as well as actions to accelerate operating cost reduction and improve overall operating efficiency. These restructuring activities were substantially complete as of January 3, 2016, however, the Company expects to continue to incur costs as it finalizes previous estimates and actions in connection with these plans, primarily due to other costs, such as legal services. The following table summarizes the restructuring charges recognized in the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Operations: (In thousands) November 2014 Plan: Non-cash impairment charges Severance and benefits Lease and related termination costs Other costs1 Legacy Restructuring Plans: Non-cash impairment charges Severance and benefits Lease and related termination costs Other costs1 Total restructuring charges Fiscal Year 2015 2014 2013 Cumulative To Date $ $ 5 2,710 1,208 3,066 6,989 — — 2 (600) (598) 6,391 $ $ 719 12,180 — 213 13,112 — (1,645) 244 512 (889) 12,223 $ $ — $ — — — — 443 (535) 610 2,084 2,602 2,602 $ 724 14,890 1,208 3,277 20,099 60,596 46,709 5,776 10,260 123,341 143,440 110 The following table summarizes the restructuring reserve activity during the fiscal year ended January 3, 2016: (In thousands) November 2014 Plan: Severance and benefits Lease and related termination costs Other costs1 Legacy Restructuring Plans: Severance and benefits Lease and related termination costs Other costs1 Total restructuring liability Fiscal Year 2014 Charges (Benefits) Payments 2015 $ $ 12,075 — 145 12,220 421 390 446 1,257 13,477 $ $ 2,710 1,208 3,066 6,984 — 2 (600) (598) 6,386 $ $ (14,390) (782) (2,565) (17,737) (421) (75) 193 (303) (18,040) $ $ 395 426 646 1,467 — 317 39 356 1,823 1 Other costs primarily represent associated legal services and costs of relocating employees. Note 10. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Facility and Equipment Lease Commitments The Company leases certain facilities under non-cancellable operating leases from unaffiliated third parties. As of January 3, 2016, future minimum lease payments for facilities under operating leases were $49.3 million, to be paid over the remaining contractual terms of up to 8 years. The Company also leases certain buildings, machinery and equipment under non-cancellable capital leases. As of January 3, 2016, future minimum lease payments for assets under capital leases were $5.8 million, to be paid over the remaining contractual terms of up to 7 years. Purchase Commitments The Company purchases raw materials for inventory and manufacturing equipment from a variety of vendors. During the normal course of business, in order to manage manufacturing lead times and help assure adequate supply, the Company enters into agreements with contract manufacturers and suppliers that either allow them to procure goods and services based on specifications defined by the Company, or that establish parameters defining the Company’s requirements. In certain instances, these agreements allow the Company the option to cancel, reschedule or adjust the Company’s requirements based on its business needs before firm orders are placed. Consequently, not all of the Company’s disclosed purchase commitments arising from these agreements are firm, non-cancellable, and unconditional commitments. The Company also has agreements with several suppliers, including some of its non-consolidated investees, for the procurement of polysilicon, ingots, wafers, and Solar Renewable Energy Credits, among others, which specify future quantities and pricing of products to be supplied by the vendors for periods up to 10 years and provide for certain consequences, such as forfeiture of advanced deposits and liquidated damages relating to previous purchases, in the event that the Company terminates the arrangements. Future purchase obligations under non-cancellable purchase orders and long-term supply agreements as of January 3, 2016 are as follows: (In thousands) Future purchase obligations Fiscal 2016 Fiscal 2017 Fiscal 2018 Fiscal 2019 Fiscal 2020 Thereafter Total1,2,3 $ 1,014,868 342,844 199,620 175,696 161,832 3,000 $ 1,897,860 1 Total future purchase obligations as of January 3, 2016 include $278.2 million to related parties. 2 Total future purchase obligations were composed of $291.0 million related to non-cancellable purchase orders and $1.6 billion related to long-term supply agreements. 111 3 During fiscal 2015, we did not fulfill all of the purchase commitments we were otherwise obligated to take by December 31, 2015, as specified in related contracts with a supplier. As of January 3, 2016, the Company has recorded an offsetting asset, recorded within “Prepaid expenses and other current assets,” and liability, recorded within “Accrued liabilities,” totaling $50.6 million. This amount represents the unfulfilled amount as of that date as the Company expects to satisfy the obligation via purchases of inventory in fiscal 2016, within the applicable contractual cure period. The Company expects that all obligations related to non-cancellable purchase orders for manufacturing equipment will be recovered through future cash flows of the solar cell manufacturing lines and solar panel assembly lines when such long-lived assets are placed in service. Factors considered important that could result in an impairment review include significant under- performance relative to expected historical or projected future operating results, significant changes in the manner of use of acquired assets, and significant negative industry or economic trends. Obligations related to non-cancellable purchase orders for inventories match current and forecasted sales orders that will consume these ordered materials and actual consumption of these ordered materials are compared to expected demand regularly. The Company anticipates total obligations related to long-term supply agreements for inventories will be recovered because quantities are less than management’s expected demand for its solar power products. The terms of the long-term supply agreements are reviewed by management and the Company assesses the need for any accruals for estimated losses on adverse purchase commitments, such as lower of cost or market value adjustments that will not be recovered by future sales prices, forfeiture of advanced deposits and liquidated damages, as necessary. Advances to Suppliers As noted above, the Company has entered into agreements with various vendors, some of which are structured as “take or pay” contracts, that specify future quantities and pricing of products to be supplied. Certain agreements also provide for penalties or forfeiture of advanced deposits in the event the Company terminates the arrangements. Under certain agreements, the Company is required to make prepayments to the vendors over the terms of the arrangements. During fiscal 2014 the Company made additional advance payments totaling $65.7 million, in accordance with the terms of existing long-term supply agreements. The Company does not expect to make additional advance payments as it is no longer contractually required to do so. As of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, advances to suppliers totaled $359.1 million and $409.7 million, respectively, of which $85.0 million and $98.1 million, respectively, is classified as short-term in the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. Two suppliers accounted for 82% and 16% of total advances to suppliers, respectively, as of January 3, 2016, and 82% and 17%, respectively, as of December 28, 2014. Advances from Customers The Company has entered into other agreements with customers who have made advance payments for solar power products and systems. These advances will be applied as shipments of product occur or upon completion of certain project milestones. The estimated utilization of advances from customers as of January 3, 2016 is as follows: (In thousands) Estimated utilization of advances from customers Fiscal 2016 Fiscal 2017 Fiscal 2018 Fiscal 2019 Fiscal 2020 Thereafter Total $ 33,671 27,039 27,039 28,842 43,263 — $ 159,854 In fiscal 2010, the Company and its joint venture, AUO SunPower Sdn. Bhd. (“AUOSP”), entered into an agreement under which the Company resells to AUOSP polysilicon purchased from a third-party supplier. Advance payments provided by AUOSP related to such polysilicon are then made by the Company to the third-party supplier. These advance payments are applied as a credit against AUOSP’s polysilicon purchases from the Company. Such polysilicon is used by AUOSP to manufacture solar cells that are sold to the Company on a “cost-plus” basis. As of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, outstanding advance payments received from AUOSP totaled $148.9 million and $167.2 million, respectively, of which $22.7 million and $18.3 million, respectively, was classified as short-term in the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets, based on projected product shipment dates. 112 Product Warranties The following table summarizes accrued warranty activity for fiscal 2015, 2014, and 2013, respectively: (In thousands) Balance at the beginning of the period Accruals for warranties issued during the period Settlements and adjustments during the period Balance at the end of the period Contingent Obligations 2015 154,648 25,561 (16,082) 164,127 $ $ Fiscal Year 2014 149,372 24,942 (19,666) 154,648 $ $ 2013 117,172 40,259 (8,059) 149,372 $ $ Project agreements entered into with the Company’s Commercial and Power Plant customers often require the Company to undertake obligations including: (i) system output performance warranties; (ii) system maintenance; (iii) penalty payments or customer termination rights if the system the Company is constructing is not commissioned within specified timeframes or other milestones are not achieved; and (iv) system put-rights whereby the Company could be required to buy back a customer’s system at fair value on specified future dates if certain minimum performance thresholds are not met for specified periods. Historically, the Company’s systems have performed significantly above the performance warranty thresholds, and there have been no cases in which the Company has had to buy back a system. Future Financing Commitments The Company is required to provide certain funding under the joint venture agreement with AU Optronics Singapore Pte. Ltd. (“AUO”) and other unconsolidated investees, subject to certain conditions (see Note 11). As of January 3, 2016, the Company has future financing obligations through fiscal 2016 totaling $179.6 million. Liabilities Associated with Uncertain Tax Positions Total liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions were $41.0 million and $31.8 million as of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, respectively. As of January 3, 2016, $43.3 million of uncertain tax positions are included in “Other long-term liabilities” in the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets as they are not expected to be paid within the next 12 months. As of December 28, 2014, total liabilities of $31.8 million associated with uncertain tax positions were included in “Other long-term liabilities” as they were not expected to be paid within the next 12 months. The increase in liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions from December 28, 2014, was primarily due to additional accruals in the United States in the last half of fiscal 2015, partially offset by tax settlements in certain foreign jurisdictions in the fiscal quarter ended June 28, 2015. Due to the complexity and uncertainty associated with its tax positions, the Company cannot make a reasonably reliable estimate of the period in which cash settlement, if any, would be made for its liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions in other long-term liabilities. Indemnifications The Company is a party to a variety of agreements under which it may be obligated to indemnify the counterparty with respect to certain matters. Typically, these obligations arise in connection with contracts and license agreements or the sale of assets, under which the Company customarily agrees to hold the other party harmless against losses arising from a breach of warranties, representations and covenants related to such matters as title to assets sold, negligent acts, damage to property, validity of certain intellectual property rights, non-infringement of third-party rights, and certain tax related matters including indemnification to customers under §48(c) solar commercial investment tax credit (“ITC”) and Treasury Grant payments under Section 1603 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (“Cash Grant”). In each of these circumstances, payment by the Company is typically subject to the other party making a claim to the Company that is contemplated by and valid under the indemnification provisions of the particular contract, which provisions are typically contract-specific, as well as bringing the claim under the procedures specified in the particular contract. These procedures usually allow the Company to challenge the other party’s claims or, in case of breach of intellectual property representations or covenants, to control the defense or settlement of any third party claims brought against the other party. Further, the Company’s obligations under these agreements may be limited in terms of activity (typically to replace or correct the products or terminate the agreement with a refund to the other party), duration and/or amounts. In some instances, the Company may have recourse against third parties and/or insurance covering certain payments made by the Company. 113 In certain limited circumstances the Company has provided indemnification to customers and investors under which the Company is contractually obligated to compensate these parties for losses they may suffer as a result of reductions in benefits received under ITC and Treasury Cash Grant programs. The Company applies for ITC and Cash Grant incentives based on guidance provided by the IRS and the Treasury Department, which include assumptions regarding the fair value of the qualified solar power systems, among others. Certain of the Company’s development agreements, sale-leaseback arrangements, and financing arrangements with tax equity investors, incorporate assumptions regarding the future level of incentives to be received, which in some instances may be claimed directly by its customers and investors. Since the Company cannot determine future revisions to the U.S. Treasury guidelines governing system values or how the IRS will evaluate system values used in claiming ITCs, the Company is unable to reliably estimate the maximum potential future payments that it could have to make under the Company’s contractual investor obligation as of each reporting date. Defined Benefit Pension Plans The Company maintains defined benefit pension plans for the majority of its non-U.S. employees. Benefits under these plans are generally based on an employee’s years of service and compensation. Funding requirements are determined on an individual country and plan basis and are subject to local country practices and market circumstances. The funded status of the pension plans, which represents the difference between the benefit obligation and fair value of plan assets, is calculated on a plan- by-plan basis. The benefit obligation and related funded status are determined using assumptions as of the end of each fiscal year. The Company recognizes the overfunded or underfunded status of its pension plans as an asset or liability on its Consolidated Balance Sheets. As of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, the underfunded status of the Company’s pension plans, presented in “Other long-term liabilities” on the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets, was $12.0 million and $10.0 million, respectively. The impact of transition assets and obligations and actuarial gains and losses are recorded in “Accumulated other comprehensive loss”, and are generally amortized as a component of net periodic cost over the average remaining service period of participating employees. Total other comprehensive gain related to the Company’s benefit plans was $0.8 million for the year ended January 3, 2016. Legal Matters Tax Benefit Indemnification Litigation On March 19, 2014, a lawsuit was filed by NRG Solar LLC, now known as NRG Renew LLC (“NRG”), against SunPower Corporation, Systems, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company (“SunPower Systems”), in the Superior Court of Contra Costa County, California. The complaint asserts that, according to the indemnification provisions in the contract pertaining to SunPower Systems’ sale of a large California solar project to NRG, SunPower Systems owes NRG $75.0 million in connection with certain tax benefits associated with the project that were approved by the Treasury Department for an amount that was less than expected. The Company does not believe that the facts support NRG’s claim under the operative indemnification provisions and is vigorously contesting the claim. Additionally, SunPower Systems filed a cross-complaint against NRG seeking damages in excess of $7.5 million for breach of contract and related claims arising from NRG’s failure to fulfill its obligations under the contract, including its obligation to take “reasonable, available steps” to engage Treasury. The Company is currently unable to determine if the resolution of this matter will have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated financial statements. First Philec Arbitration On January 28, 2015, an arbitral tribunal of the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce issued a first partial award in the matter of an arbitration between First Philippine Electric Corporation (“FPEC”) and First Philippine Solar Corporation (“FPSC”) against SunPower Philippines Manufacturing, Ltd. (“SPML”), our wholly-owned subsidiary. FPSC is a joint venture of FPEC and SPML for the purpose of slicing silicon wafers from ingots. The tribunal found SPML in breach of its obligations under its supply agreement with FPSC, and in breach of its joint venture agreement with FPEC. In its first partial award, the tribunal ordered that (i) SPML must purchase FPEC’s interests in FPSC for an aggregate of $30.3 million, and (ii) after completing the purchase of FPEC’s controlling interest in FPSC, SPML must pay FPSC damages in the amount of $25.2 million. The arbitral tribunal issued its second partial award dated July 14, 2015, which ordered that (i) the price payable by SPML to FPEC for its interests in FPSC be reduced from $30.3 million to $23.2 million, (ii) FPEC’s request for interest is refused, and (iii) the payment and transfer of shares between FPEC and SPML is to take place in accordance with the procedure agreed between the parties. The tribunal issued its final award dated September 30, 2015, which ordered that (i) each side should bear its own costs and attorneys’ fees, and (ii) the arbitration costs should be split between the parties evenly. 114 SPML has filed a challenge to both the first and second partial awards with the High Court in Hong Kong. The hearing on the challenge is scheduled for June 14 and 15, 2016 in Hong Kong. SPML has also filed applications to the Court in the Philippines to: (i) prevent FPSC or FPEC from enforcing the awards pending the outcome of the challenge in Hong Kong; and (ii) gain access to FPSC’s books and records. The application to prevent enforcement of the award has not been ruled on. The application for access was granted, and the inspection of FPSC’s books is ongoing. As of January 3, 2016, the Company recorded an accrual of $48.4 million related to this matter based on the Company’s best estimate of probable loss. AUO Arbitration On April 17, 2015, SunPower Technology Ltd. (“SPTL”), a wholly-owned subsidiary, commenced an arbitration before the ICC International Court of Arbitration against AUO and AU Optronics Corporation, the ultimate parent company of AUO (“AUO Corp.,” and together with AUO, the “AUO Group”), for breaches of the AUOSP Joint Venture Agreement and associated agreements (the “JVA”). SPTL’s claim alleges that, among other things, the AUO Group has sold solar modules containing cells manufactured by AUOSP in violation of provisions in the JVA that set geographical restrictions on sales activities as well as provisions that restrict each party’s use of the other’s confidential information. SPTL seeks approximately $23.0 million in damages, as well as the right to purchase AUO’s shares in SPTL at 70% of “fair market value” determined as provided under the JVA. On June 23, 2015, the AUO Group filed and served its formal Memorial of Claim and Counterclaims against SPTL and the Company (collectively, the “SunPower Group”). In its counterclaim, the AUO Group alleges breach of contract, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, several tort causes of action, and improper use of the AUO Group’s proprietary manufacturing expertise. On October 12, 2015, SPTL filed and served its formal Reply Memorial and Defence to Counterclaims. The AUO Group seeks $20.0 million in lost profits and $48.0 million in disgorgement from the SunPower Group, and an order requiring SPTL to purchase AUO’s shares in SPTL at 150% of fair market value. The hearing for the arbitration has not been set. The Company is currently unable to determine whether the resolution of this matter will have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated financial statements. Other Litigation The Company is also a party to various other litigation matters and claims that arise from time to time in the ordinary course of its business. While the Company believes that the ultimate outcome of such matters will not have a material adverse effect on the Company, their outcomes are not determinable and negative outcomes may adversely affect the Company’s financial position, liquidity or results of operations. Note 11. EQUITY METHOD INVESTMENTS As of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, the Company’s carrying value of its equity method investments totaled $186.4 million and $210.9 million, respectively, and is classified as “Other long-term assets” in its Consolidated Balance Sheets. The Company’s share of its earnings (loss) from equity method investments is reflected as “Equity in earnings of unconsolidated investees” in its Consolidated Statements of Operations. Equity Investment and Joint Venture with AUOSP In fiscal 2010, the Company, AUO and AUO Corp. formed the joint venture AUOSP. The Company and AUO each own 50% of AUOSP. AUOSP owns a solar cell manufacturing facility in Malaysia and manufactures solar cells and sells them on a “cost-plus” basis to the Company and AUO. In connection with the joint venture agreement, the Company and AUO also entered into licensing and joint development, supply, and other ancillary transaction agreements. Through the licensing agreement, the Company and AUO licensed to AUOSP, on a non-exclusive, royalty-free basis, certain background intellectual property related to solar cell manufacturing (in the case of the Company) and manufacturing processes (in the case of AUO). Under the seven-year supply agreement with AUOSP, renewable by the Company for one-year periods thereafter, the Company is committed to purchase 80% of AUOSP’s total annual output allocated on a monthly basis to the Company. The Company and AUO have the right to reallocate supplies from time to time under a written agreement. In fiscal 2010, the Company and AUOSP entered into an 115 agreement under which the Company will resell to AUOSP polysilicon purchased from a third-party supplier and AUOSP will provide prepayments to the Company related to such polysilicon, which prepayment will then be made by the Company to the third-party supplier. The Company and AUO are not permitted to transfer any of AUOSP’s shares held by them, except to each other. The Company and AUO agreed to each contribute additional amounts through fiscal 2016 amounting to $169.0 million, or such lesser amount as the parties may mutually agree. In addition, if AUOSP, the Company or AUO requests additional equity financing to AUOSP, then the Company and AUO will each be required to make additional cash contributions of up to $50.0 million in the aggregate. The Company has concluded that it is not the primary beneficiary of AUOSP since, although the Company and AUO are both obligated to absorb losses or have the right to receive benefits, the Company alone does not have the power to direct the activities of AUOSP that most significantly impact its economic performance. In making this determination the Company considered the shared power arrangement, including equal board governance for significant decisions, elective appointment, and the fact that both parties contribute to the activities that most significantly impact the joint venture’s economic performance. The Company accounts for its investment in AUOSP using the equity method as a result of the shared power arrangement. As of January 3, 2016, the Company’s maximum exposure to loss as a result of its equity investment in AUOSP is limited to the carrying value of the investment. As of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, the Company’s investment in AUOSP had a carrying value of $202.3 million and $191.7 million, respectively. Equity Investment in Huaxia CPV (Inner Mongolia) Power Co., Ltd. (“CCPV”) In December 2012, the Company entered into an agreement with Tianjin Zhonghuan Semiconductor Co. Ltd., Inner Mongolia Power Group Co. Ltd. and Hohhot Jinqiao City Development Company Co., Ltd. to form CCPV, a jointly owned entity to manufacture and deploy the Company’s LCPV concentrator technology in Inner Mongolia and other regions in China. CCPV is based in Hohhot, Inner Mongolia. The establishment of the entity was subject to approval of the Chinese government, which was received in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013. In December 2013, the Company made a $16.4 million equity investment in CCPV, for a 25% equity ownership. The Company has concluded that it is not the primary beneficiary of CCPV since, although the Company is obligated to absorb losses and has the right to receive benefits, the Company alone does not have the power to direct the activities of CCPV that most significantly impact its economic performance. The Company accounts for its investment in CCPV using the equity method since the Company is able to exercise significant influence over CCPV due to its board position. Equity Investment in Diamond Energy Pty Ltd. (“Diamond Energy”) In October 2012, the Company made a $3.0 million equity investment in Diamond Energy, an alternative energy project developer and clean electricity retailer headquartered in Melbourne, Australia, in exchange for a 25% equity ownership. The Company has concluded that it is not the primary beneficiary of Diamond Energy since, although the Company is obligated to absorb losses and has the right to receive benefits, the Company alone does not have the power to direct the activities of Diamond that most significantly impact its economic performance. The Company accounts for its investment in Diamond using the equity method since the Company is able to exercise significant influence over Diamond due to its board position. Equity Investment in 8point3 Energy Partners In June 2015, 8point3 Energy Partners, a joint YieldCo vehicle formed by the Sponsors to own, operate and acquire solar energy generation assets, consummated its IPO and its Class A shares are now listed on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the trading symbol “CAFD” (see Note 3). The Company has concluded that it is not the primary beneficiary of the 8point3 Group or any of its individual subsidiaries since, although the Sponsors are both obligated to absorb losses or have the right to receive benefits, the Company alone does not have the power to direct the activities of the 8point3 Group that most significantly impact its economic performance. In making this determination the Company considered, among other factors, the equal division between the Sponsors of management rights in the 8point3 Group and the corresponding equal influence over its significant decisions, the role and influence of the independent directors on the board of directors of the general partner of 8point3 Energy Partners, and how both Sponsors contribute to the activities that most significantly impact the 8point3 Group’s economic performance. The 116 Company accounts for its investment in the 8point3 Group using the equity method because the Company determined that, notwithstanding the division of management and ownership interests between the Sponsors, the Company exercises significant influence over the operations of the 8point3 Group. Future quarterly distributions from OpCo are subject to certain forbearance and subordination periods. During the forbearance period, the Sponsors have agreed to forego any distributions declared on their common and subordinated units. The forbearance period will end when, on or after March 1, 2016, the board of directors of the general partner of 8point3 Energy Partners, with the concurrence of its conflicts committee, determines that OpCo will be able to earn and pay at least the minimum quarterly distribution on each of its outstanding common and subordinated units for such quarter and the successive quarter. During the subordination period, holders of the subordinated units are not entitled to receive any distributions until the common units have received their minimum quarterly distribution plus any arrearages in the payment of minimum distributions from prior quarters. Approximately 70% of the Company’s OpCo units are subject to subordination. The subordination period will end after OpCo has earned and paid minimum quarterly distributions for three years ending on or after August 31, 2018 and there are no outstanding arrearages on common units. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the subordination period could end after OpCo has earned and paid 150% of minimum quarterly distributions, plus the related distribution on the incentive distribution rights, for one year ending on or after August 31, 2016 and there are no outstanding arrearages on common units. At the end of the subordination period, all subordinated units will convert to common units on a one-for-one basis. The Company also, through its interests in Holdings, holds IDRs in OpCo, which represent rights to incremental distributions after certain distribution thresholds are met. In June 2015, OpCo entered into a $525.0 million senior secured credit facility, consisting of a $300.0 million term loan facility, a $25.0 million delayed draw term loan facility, and a $200.0 million revolving credit facility (the “8point3 Credit Facility”). Proceeds from the term loan were used to make initial distributions to the Sponsors. The 8point3 Credit Facility is secured by a pledge of the Sponsors’ equity interests in OpCo. As of January 3, 2016, the Company’s investment in the 8point3 Group had a negative carrying value of $30.9 million resulting from the continued deferral of profit recognition for projects sold to the 8point3 Group that included the sale or lease of real estate (see Note 3). The Company did not have an investment balance in the 8point3 Group as of December 28, 2014. Summarized Financial Statements The following table presents summarized financial statements for significant investees accounted for by the equity method, based on the investees’ fiscal years and on information provided to the Company by the investee: (In thousands) Summarized statements of operations information: Revenue Cost of sales and operating expenses Net income Net income attributable to the entity $ 2015 480,106 457,392 38,770 140,969 (In thousands) Summarized balance sheet information Current assets Long-term assets Current liabilities Long-term liabilities Noncontrolling interests and redeemable noncontrolling interests $ $ Fiscal Year 2014 $ 463,275 437,207 22,769 22,769 2013 454,862 427.404 19,293 19,293 Fiscal Year 2015 2014 $ 204,055 1,488,418 273,144 315,574 101,520 439,191 483,254 73,606 478,763 — 117 Note 12. DEBT AND CREDIT SOURCES The following table summarizes the Company’s outstanding debt on its Consolidated Balance Sheets: (In thousands) Convertible debt: 4.00% debentures due 2023 0.875% debentures due 2021 0.75% debentures due 2018 4.50% debentures due 2015 0.75% debentures due 2027 IFC mortgage loan CEDA loan Quinto Credit Facility Project Financing and other debt1 January 3, 2016 December 28, 2014 Face Value Short-term Long-term Total Face Value Short-term Long-term Total $ 425,000 $ — $ 416,369 $ 416,369 $ — $ — $ — $ — 400,000 300,000 — — 32,500 30,000 — — — 396,424 396,424 400,000 298,167 298,167 300,000 — — 395,475 395,475 297,401 297,401 — — 249,645 245,325 — 245,325 — 14,994 — — 16,778 27,778 — 31,772 27,778 79 47,500 30,000 — 14,983 — 79 31,492 27,379 79 46,475 27,379 — — — — 61,481 — 61,481 61,481 435,963 $1,623,463 $ 90,568 91,398 4,642 19,636 $1,585,497 $1,605,133 $1,180,103 $ 262,271 $ 901,912 $1,164,183 434,623 429,981 88,605 1,963 1 Other debt excludes payments related to capital leases, which are disclosed in Note 10. As of January 3, 2016, the aggregate future contractual maturities of the Company’s outstanding debt, at face value, were as follows: (In thousands) Aggregate future maturities of outstanding debt Convertible Debt Fiscal 2016 Fiscal 2017 Fiscal 2018 Fiscal 2019 Fiscal 2020 Thereafter Total $ 19,048 33,496 314,922 20,724 31,225 1,204,048 $ 1,623,463 The following table summarizes the Company’s outstanding convertible debt: (In thousands) Convertible debt: 4.00% debentures due 2023 0.875% debentures due 2021 0.75% debentures due 2018 4.50% debentures due 2015 0.75% debentures due 2027 Carrying Value $ 416,369 396,424 298,167 — — $ 1,110,960 January 3, 2016 December 28, 2014 Face Value Fair Value1 Carrying Value Face Value Fair Value1 $ 425,000 400,000 300,000 — — $ 1,125,000 $ 515,903 $ 340,500 396,792 — — $ 1,253,195 $ — $ — $ 395,475 297,401 245,325 79 $ 938,280 400,000 300,000 249,645 79 $ 949,724 — 358,000 366,750 294,581 80 $ 1,019,411 1 The fair value of the convertible debt was determined using Level 2 inputs based on quarterly market prices as reported by an independent pricing source. The Company’s outstanding convertible debentures are senior, unsecured obligations of the Company, ranking equally with all existing and future senior unsecured indebtedness of the Company. 118 4.00% Debentures Due 2023 In December 2015, the Company issued $425.0 million in principal amount of its 4.00% debentures due 2023. Interest is payable semi-annually, beginning on July 15, 2016. Holders may exercise their right to convert the debentures at any time into shares of the Company’s common stock at an initial conversion price approximately equal to $30.53 per share, subject to adjustment in certain circumstances. If not earlier repurchased or converted, the 4.00% debentures due 2023 mature on January 15, 2023. 0.875% Debentures Due 2021 In June 2014, the Company issued $400.0 million in principal amount of its 0.875% debentures due 2021. Interest is payable semi-annually, beginning on December 1, 2014. Holders may exercise their right to convert the debentures at any time into shares of the Company’s common stock at an initial conversion price approximately equal to $48.76 per share, subject to adjustment in certain circumstances. If not earlier repurchased or converted, the 0.875% debentures due 2021 mature on June 1, 2021. 0.75% Debentures Due 2018 In May 2013, the Company issued $300.0 million in principal amount of its 0.75% debentures due 2018. Interest is payable semi-annually, beginning on December 1, 2013. Holders may exercise their right to convert the debentures at any time into shares of the Company’s common stock at an initial conversion price approximately equal to $24.95 per share, subject to adjustment in certain circumstances. If not earlier repurchased or converted, the 0.75% debentures due 2018 mature on June 1, 2018. 4.50% Debentures Due 2015 In 2010, the Company issued $250.0 million in principal amount of its 4.50% senior cash convertible debentures (“4.50% debentures due 2015”). Interest was payable semi-annually, beginning on September 15, 2010. The 4.50% debentures due 2015 were convertible only into cash, and not into shares of the Company’s common stock (or any other securities) at a conversion price of $22.53 per share. The 4.50% debentures due 2015 matured on March 15, 2015. During March 2015, the Company paid holders an aggregate of $324.4 million in cash in connection with the settlement of the outstanding 4.50% debentures due 2015. No 4.50% debentures due 2015 remained outstanding after the maturity date. The embedded cash conversion option was a derivative instrument (derivative liability) that was required to be separated from the 4.50% debentures due 2015. The fair value of the derivative liability is classified within “Other long-term liabilities” on the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. Changes in the fair value of the derivative liability were reported in the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Operations until the 4.50% debentures due 2015 matured in March 2015. During fiscal 2015, the Company recognized a non-cash loss of $52.0 million, recorded in “Other, net” in the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Operations to recognize the change in fair value prior to the expiration of the embedded cash conversion option. In fiscal 2014 and 2013, the Company recognized a non-cash loss of $58.5 million and $108.2 million, respectively, recorded in “Other, net” in the Company’s Consolidated Statement of Operations related to the change in fair value of the embedded cash conversion option. In fiscal 2015, 2014 and 2013, the Company recognized $4.3 million, $19.8 million and $17.3 million of non-cash interest expense, respectively, related to the amortization of the debt discount on the 4.50% debentures. Call Spread Overlay with Respect to 4.50% Debentures Concurrently with the issuance of the 4.50% debentures due 2015, the Company entered into privately-negotiated convertible debenture hedge transactions (collectively, the “4.50% Bond Hedge”) and warrant transactions (collectively, the “4.50% Warrants” and together with the 4.50% Bond Hedge, the “CSO2015” transactions), with certain of the initial purchasers of the 4.50% debentures due 2015 or their affiliates. The CSO2015 transactions represented a call spread overlay with respect to the 4.50% debentures due 2015, whereby the cost of the 4.50% Bond Hedge purchased by the Company to cover the cash outlay upon conversion of the debentures is reduced by the sales prices of the 4.50% Warrants. The transactions effectively reduced the Company’s potential payout over the principal amount on the 4.50% debentures due 2015 upon conversion of the 4.50% debentures due 2015. Under the terms of the 4.50% Bond Hedge, the Company bought options to acquire, at an exercise price of $22.53 per share, subject to customary adjustments for anti-dilution and other events, cash in an amount equal to the market value of up to 11.1 million shares of the Company’s common stock. 119 Each 4.50% Bond Hedge was a separate transaction, entered into by the Company with each counterparty, and was not part of the terms of the 4.50% debentures due 2015. The 4.50% Bond Hedge, which was indexed to the Company’s common stock, was a derivative instrument that required mark-to-market accounting treatment due to the cash settlement features until the 4.50% Bond Hedge settled in March 2015. During March 2015, the Company exercised its rights under the 4.50% Bond Hedge, resulting in a payment to the Company of $74.6 million. During fiscal 2015, the Company recognized a non-cash gain of $52.0 million, recorded in “Other, net” in the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Operations related to recognize the change in fair value before settlement of the 4.50% Bond Hedge. During fiscal 2014 and 2013, the Company recognized a non-cash gain of $58.5 million and $108.1 million, respectively, in “Other, net” in the Company’s Consolidated Statement of Operations related to the change in fair value of the 4.50% Bond Hedge. In connection with the 4.50% Warrants, the Company entered into warrant confirmations (collectively, and as amended from time to time, the “2015 Warrant Confirms”) with Deutsche Bank AG, London Branch, Bank of America, N.A., Barclays Bank PLC and Credit Suisse International providing for the acquisition, subject to anti-dilution adjustments, of up to approximately 11.1 million shares of the Company’s common stock via net share settlement. Each 4.50% Warrant transaction was a separate transaction, entered into by the Company with each counterparty, and was not part of the terms of the 4.50% debentures due 2015. During the second quarter of fiscal 2015, the Company entered into separate partial unwind agreements with each of Deutsche Bank AG, London Branch; Bank of America, N.A.; Barclays Bank PLC; and Credit Suisse International in order to reduce the number of warrants issued pursuant to the 2015 Warrant Confirms. Pursuant to the terms of these partial unwind agreements, the Company issued an aggregate of approximately 3.0 million shares of common stock to settle all of the warrants under the 2015 Warrant Confirms. Accordingly, as of January 3, 2016, no 4.50% Warrants remained outstanding. 4.75% Debentures Due 2014 In May 2009, the Company issued $230.0 million in principal amount of its 4.75% senior convertible debentures (“4.75% debentures due 2014”). Interest on the 4.75% debentures due 2014 was payable semi-annually, beginning October 15, 2009. Holders of the 4.75% debentures due 2014 were able to exercise their right to convert the debentures at any time into shares of the Company’s common stock at a conversion price equal to $26.40 per share, subject to adjustment upon certain events. In April 2014, the 4.75% debentures due 2014 matured. During April 2014, the Company issued approximately 7.1 million shares of common stock to holders that exercised conversion rights before maturity and paid holders an aggregate of $41.7 million in cash in connection with the settlement of the remaining 4.75% debentures. Accordingly, after the maturity date, no 4.75% debentures remained outstanding. Call Spread Overlay with Respect to the 4.75% Debentures Concurrently with the issuance of the 4.75% debentures due 2014, the Company entered into certain convertible debenture hedge transactions (the “4.75% Bond Hedge”) and warrant transactions (the “4.75% Warrants”) with affiliates of certain of the underwriters of the 4.75% debentures due 2014 (together, the “CSO2014”), whereby the cost of the 4.75% Bond Hedges purchased by the Company to cover the potential share outlays upon conversion of the debentures was reduced by the sales prices of the 4.75% Warrants. The components of the CSO2014 were not subject to mark-to-market accounting treatment since they could only be settled by issuance of the Company’s common stock. The 4.75% Bond Hedge allowed the Company to purchase up to 8.7 million shares of the Company’s common stock, on a net share basis. Each 4.75% Bond Hedge and 4.75%Warrant was a separate transaction, entered into by the Company with each counterparty, and was not part of the terms of the 4.75% debentures due 2014. The exercise prices of the 4.75% Bond Hedge were $26.40 per share of the Company’s common stock, subject to customary adjustment for anti-dilution and other events. In February 2014, the parties agreed to unwind the 4.75% Bond Hedge in full for a total cash settlement of $68.8 million, calculated by reference to the weighted price of the Company’s common stock on the settlement day, received by the Company. Under the 4.75% Warrants, the Company sold warrants to acquire up to 8.7 million shares of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $26.40 per share of the Company’s common stock, subject to adjustment for certain anti-dilution and other events. In February 2014, the parties agreed to unwind the 4.75% Warrants in full for a total cash settlement of $81.1 million, calculated by reference to the weighted price of the Company’s common stock on the settlement date, paid by the Company. 120 Other Debt and Credit Sources Mortgage Loan Agreement with IFC In May 2010, the Company entered into a mortgage loan agreement with IFC. Under the loan agreement, the Company borrowed $75.0 million and is required to repay the amount borrowed starting two years after the date of borrowing, in 10 equal semi-annual installments. The Company is required to pay interest of LIBOR plus 3% per annum on outstanding borrowings; a front-end fee of 1% on the principal amount of borrowings at the time of borrowing; and a commitment fee of 0.5% per annum on funds available for borrowing and not borrowed. The Company may prepay all or a part of the outstanding principal, subject to a 1% prepayment premium. The Company has pledged certain assets as collateral supporting its repayment obligations (see Note 6). As of both January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, the Company had restricted cash and cash equivalents of $9.2 million related to the IFC debt service reserve, which is the amount, as determined by IFC, equal to the aggregate principal and interest due on the next succeeding interest payment date. Loan Agreement with California Enterprise Development Authority (“CEDA”) In 2010, the Company borrowed the proceeds of the $30.0 million aggregate principal amount of CEDA’s tax-exempt Recovery Zone Facility Revenue Bonds (SunPower Corporation - Headquarters Project) Series 2010 (the “Bonds”) maturing April 1, 2031 under a loan agreement with CEDA. The Bonds mature on April 1, 2031, bear interest at a fixed rate of 8.50% through maturity, and include customary covenants and other restrictions on the Company. Revolving Credit Facility with Credit Agricole In July 2013, the Company entered into a revolving credit facility with Credit Agricole, as administrative agent, and certain financial institutions, under which the Company may borrow up to $250.0 million. On August 26, 2014, the Company entered into an amendment to the revolving credit facility that, among other things, extends the maturity date of the facility from July 3, 2016 to August 26, 2019 (the “Maturity Date”). Amounts borrowed may be repaid and reborrowed until the Maturity Date. On February 17, 2016, the Company entered into an amendment to the credit agreement, expanding the available borrowings under the revolving credit facility to $300.0 million and adding a $200.0 million letter of credit subfacility, subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions. The revolving credit facility includes representations, covenants, and events of default customary for financing transactions of this type. The revolving credit facility was entered into in conjunction with the delivery by Total S.A. of a guarantee of the Company’s obligations under the related facility. On January 31, 2014, as contemplated by the facility, (i) the Company’s obligations under the facility became secured by a pledge of certain accounts receivable and inventory; (ii) certain of the Company’s subsidiaries entered into guarantees of the facility; and (iii) Total S.A.’s guarantee of the Company’s obligations under the facility expired. After January 31, 2014, the Company is required to pay interest on outstanding borrowings and fees of (a) with respect to any LIBOR rate loan, an amount ranging from 1.50% to 2.00% (depending on the Company’s leverage ratio from time to time) plus the LIBOR rate divided by a percentage equal to one minus the stated maximum rate of all reserves required to be maintained against “Eurocurrency liabilities” as specified in Regulation D; (b) with respect to any alternate base rate loan, an amount ranging from 0.50% to 1.00% (depending on the Company’s leverage ratio from time to time) plus the greater of (1) the prime rate, (2) the Federal Funds rate plus 0.50%, and (3) the one-month LIBOR rate plus 1%; and (c) a commitment fee ranging from 0.25% to 0.35% (depending on the Company’s leverage ratio from time to time) per annum on funds available for borrowing and not borrowed. As of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, the Company had no outstanding borrowings under the revolving credit facility. Quinto Credit Facility On October 17, 2014, the Company, through a wholly-owned subsidiary (the “Quinto Project Company”), entered into an approximately $377.0 million credit facility with Santander Bank, N.A., Mizuho Bank, Ltd. and Credit Agricole (the “Quinto Credit Facility”) in connection with the planned construction of the approximately 135 MW Quinto Solar Energy Project, located in Merced County, California (the “Quinto Project”). 121 On June 24, 2015, in connection with the closing of 8point3 Energy Partners’ IPO and the concurrent transfer of the Quinto Project to an affiliate of 8point3 Energy Partners, the Quinto Project Company repaid the full amount outstanding under the Quinto Credit Facility and terminated the agreement early. Immediately before termination, there were outstanding borrowings of $224.3 million under the Quinto Credit Facility. The Quinto Project Company did not incur any material penalties for early repayment of the Quinto Credit Facility. Project Financing and Other Debt In order to facilitate the construction, sale or ongoing operation of certain solar projects, the Company regularly obtains project financing, typically in the form of loans from third-party financial institutions. These financings are secured by the assets of the specific project being financed and do not have recourse to the general assets of the Company for repayment of such debt obligations, and hence are referred to as non-recourse. The Company classifies non-recourse financings in the Consolidated Balance Sheets in accordance with their terms; however, in certain circumstances, the Company may repay or refinance these financings prior to stated maturity dates in connection with the sale of the related project or similar such circumstances. In addition, the customer may assume the loans at the time that the project entity is sold to the customer. In these instances, subsequent debt assumption is reflected as a financing outflow and operating inflow in the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows to reflect the substance of the assumption as a facilitation of customer financing from a third party. During fiscal 2015, the Company entered into a long-term non-recourse credit facility to finance a 128 MW utility-scale power plant in California. The outstanding borrowings under this facility amounted to $216.7 million as of January 3, 2016. In addition, the Company entered into a long-term non-recourse credit facility to finance a 60 MW utility-scale power plant in Colorado. The outstanding borrowings under this facility amounted to $37.3 million as of January 3, 2016. During fiscal 2014 and 2015, the Company entered into several long-term non-recourse loans to finance solar power systems and leases under its residential lease program. In fiscal 2015, the Company drew down $92.1 million of proceeds, net of issuance costs, under the loan agreements. The loans are repaid over their terms of between 17 and 18 years, and may be prepaid without penalty at the Company’s option beginning seven years after the original issuance of the loan. As of January 3, 2016, the short-term and long-term balances of the loans were $4.1 million and $167.6 million, respectively. During fiscal 2013, the Company entered into a project loan with a consortium of lenders to facilitate the development of a 10 MW utility and power plant project under construction in Israel. During the first quarter of fiscal 2014, the Company sold the Israeli project. The related loan, amounting to ILS 141.8 million (approximately $40.7 million based on the exchange rate at the time of sale), and accrued and unpaid interest was assumed by the customer. During fiscal 2013, the Company entered into a long-term non-recourse loan agreement to finance a 5.4 MW utility and power plant operating in Arizona. The outstanding balance of the loan as of January 3, 2016 was $8.1 million. Other debt is further composed of non-recourse project loans in EMEA, which are scheduled to mature through 2028. August 2011 Letter of Credit Facility with Deutsche Bank In August 2011, the Company entered into a letter of credit facility agreement with Deutsche Bank, as administrative agent, and certain financial institutions. Payment of obligations under the letter of credit facility is guaranteed by Total S.A. pursuant to the Credit Support Agreement (see Note 2). The letter of credit facility provides for the issuance, upon request by the Company, of letters of credit by the issuing banks thereunder in order to support certain obligations of the Company. Aggregate letter of credit amounts may be increased upon the agreement of the parties but, otherwise, may not exceed (i) $936.0 million for the period from January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015, and (ii) $1.0 billion for the period from January 1, 2016 through June 28, 2016. As of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, letters of credit issued and outstanding under the August 2011 letter of credit facility with Deutsche Bank totaled $294.5 million and $654.7 million, respectively. September 2011 Letter of Credit Facility with Deutsche Bank Trust In September 2011, the Company entered into a letter of credit facility with Deutsche Bank Trust which provides for the issuance, upon request by the Company, of letters of credit to support obligations of the Company in an aggregate amount not to exceed $200.0 million. Each letter of credit issued under the facility is fully cash-collateralized and the Company has entered into a security agreement with Deutsche Bank Trust, granting them a security interest in a cash collateral account established for this purpose. 122 As of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, letters of credit issued and outstanding under the Deutsche Bank Trust facility amounted to $8.6 million and $1.6 million, respectively, which were fully collateralized with restricted cash on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Note 13. DERIVATIVE FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS The following tables present information about the Company’s hedge instruments measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, all of which utilize Level 2 inputs under the fair value hierarchy: Balance Sheet Classification January 3, 2016 December 28, 2014 (In thousands) Assets Derivatives designated as hedging instruments: Foreign currency option contracts Foreign currency forward exchange contracts Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments: Foreign currency forward exchange contracts Prepaid expenses and other current assets Prepaid expenses and other current assets Prepaid expenses and other current assets Liabilities Derivatives designated as hedging instruments: Foreign currency forward exchange contracts Accrued liabilities Interest rate contracts Other long-term liabilities Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments: Foreign currency forward exchange contracts Interest rate contracts Accrued liabilities Other long-term liabilities $ $ $ $ $ — $ 2,240 — — $ 8,734 8,734 141 583 724 2,175 450 2,625 $ $ $ 4 2,244 4,774 4,774 — 3,712 3,712 1,345 — 1,345 January 3, 2016 Gross Amounts Not Offset in the Consolidated Balance Sheets, but Have Rights to Offset (In thousands) Derivative assets Derivative liabilities (In thousands) Derivative assets Derivative liabilities Gross Amounts Recognized Gross Amounts Offset Net Amounts Presented Financial Instruments Cash Collateral Net Amounts $ $ 8,734 3,349 $ $ — $ — $ 8,734 3,349 $ $ 2,316 2,316 $ $ — $ — $ 6,418 1,033 December 28, 2014 Gross Amounts Not Offset in the Consolidated Balance Sheets, but Have Rights to Offset Gross Amounts Recognized Gross Amounts Offset Net Amounts Presented Financial Instruments Cash Collateral Net Amounts $ $ 7,018 5,057 $ $ — $ — $ 7,018 5,057 $ $ 1,345 1,345 $ $ — $ — $ 5,673 3,712 123 The following table summarizes the pre-tax amount of unrealized gain or loss recognized in “Accumulated other comprehensive income” (“OCI”) in “Stockholders’ equity” in the Consolidated Balance Sheets: (In thousands) Derivatives designated as cash flow hedges: Gain (loss) in OCI at the beginning of the period Unrealized gain (loss) recognized in OCI (effective portion) Less: Loss (gain) reclassified from OCI to revenue (effective portion) Net gain (loss) on derivatives Gain (loss) in OCI at the end of the period 2015 Fiscal Year 2014 2013 $ $ $ (1,443) 12,129 (4,744) 7,385 5,942 $ $ $ (805) (255) (383) (638) (1,443) $ $ $ (243) (168) (394) (562) (805) The following table summarizes the amount of gain or loss recognized in “Other, net” in the Consolidated Statements of Operations in the years ended January 3, 2016, December 28, 2014 and December 29, 2013: (In thousands) Derivatives designated as cash flow hedges: Gain (loss) recognized in “Other, net” on derivatives (ineffective portion and amount excluded from effectiveness testing) Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments: Gain (loss) recognized in “Other, net” Foreign Currency Exchange Risk Designated Derivatives Hedging Cash Flow Exposure 2015 Fiscal Year 2014 2013 $ $ (1,925) 4,146 $ $ 704 6,463 $ $ (3,029) (4,615) The Company’s cash flow exposure primarily relates to anticipated third-party foreign currency revenues and expenses and interest rate fluctuations. To protect financial performance, the Company enters into foreign currency forward and option contracts designated as cash flow hedges to hedge certain forecasted revenue transactions denominated in currencies other than their functional currencies. As of January 3, 2016, the Company had designated outstanding cash flow hedge forward contracts with an aggregate notional value of $23.6 million. As of December 28, 2014, the Company had designated outstanding cash flow hedge option contracts and forward contracts with an aggregate notional value of $26.6 million and $12.2 million, respectively. The Company designates either gross external or intercompany revenue up to its net economic exposure. These derivatives have a maturity of 12 months or less and consist of foreign currency option and forward contracts. The effective portion of these cash flow hedges is reclassified into revenue when third-party revenue is recognized in the Consolidated Statements of Operations. Non-Designated Derivatives Hedging Transaction Exposure Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments consist of forward and option contracts used to hedge re-measurement of foreign currency denominated monetary assets and liabilities primarily for intercompany transactions, receivables from customers, and payables to third parties. Changes in exchange rates between the Company’s subsidiaries’ functional currencies and the currencies in which these assets and liabilities are denominated can create fluctuations in the Company’s reported consolidated financial position, results of operations and cash flows. As of January 3, 2016, to hedge balance sheet exposure, the Company held forward contracts with an aggregate notional value of $12.1 million. The maturity dates of these contracts range from December 2015 to April 2016. As of December 28, 2014, to hedge balance sheet exposure, the Company held forward contracts with an aggregate notional value of $122.5 million. 124 Interest Rate Risk The Company also enters into interest rate swap agreements to reduce the impact of changes in interest rates on its project specific non-recourse floating rate debt. As of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014, the Company had interest rate swap agreements designated as cash flow hedges with an aggregate notional value of $8.1 million and $247.0 million, respectively. These swap agreements allow the Company to effectively convert floating-rate payments into fixed rate payments periodically over the life of the agreements. These derivatives have a maturity of more than 12 months. The effective portion of these cash flow hedges is reclassified into interest expense when the hedged transactions are recognized in the Consolidated Statements of Operations. The Company analyzes its interest rate swaps quarterly to determine if the hedge transaction remains effective or ineffective. The Company may discontinue hedge accounting for interest rate swaps prospectively if certain criteria are no longer met, the interest rate swap is terminated or exercised, or if the Company elects to remove the cash flow hedge designation. If hedge accounting is discontinued, and the forecasted hedged transaction is considered possible to occur, the previously recognized gain or loss on the interest rate swaps will remain in accumulated other comprehensive loss and will be reclassified into earnings during the same period the forecasted hedged transaction affects earnings or is otherwise deemed improbable to occur. Credit Risk The Company’s option and forward contracts do not contain any credit-risk-related contingent features. The Company is exposed to credit losses in the event of nonperformance by the counterparties to these option and forward contracts. The Company enters into derivative contracts with high-quality financial institutions and limits the amount of credit exposure to any single counterparty. In addition, the Company continuously evaluates the credit standing of its counterparties. Note 14. INCOME TAXES The geographic distribution of income (loss) from continuing operations before income taxes and equity earnings of unconsolidated investees and the components of provision for income taxes are summarized below: (In thousands) Geographic distribution of income (loss) from continuing operations before income taxes and equity in earnings of unconsolidated investees: U.S. income (loss) Non-U.S. income (loss) Income (loss) before income taxes and equity in earnings (loss) of unconsolidated investees Provision for income taxes: Current tax benefit (expense) Federal State Foreign Total current tax expense Deferred tax benefit (expense) Federal State Foreign Total deferred tax benefit (expense) Provision for income taxes 2015 Fiscal Year 2014 2013 $ $ $ $ $ $ (222,688) (19,623) $ 183,412 1,202 (242,311) $ 184,614 (43,676) (22,143) (2,009) (67,828) 1,278 — (144) 1,134 (66,694) $ $ $ $ 141 3,554 (16,571) (12,876) 2,797 10 1,309 4,116 (8,760) $ $ $ $ $ $ (32,022) 73,605 41,583 5,068 (2,414) (14,043) (11,389) — — (516) (516) (11,905) 125 The provision for income taxes differs from the amounts obtained by applying the statutory U.S. federal tax rate to income before taxes as shown below: (In thousands) Statutory rate Tax benefit (expense) at U.S. statutory rate Foreign rate differential State income taxes, net of benefit Deemed foreign dividend Tax credits (investment tax credit and other) Change in valuation allowance Unrecognized tax benefits Non-controlling interest income Domestic production activity Transfer Pricing Adjustment Intercompany profit deferral Other, net Total 2015 35% 84,809 (9,676) (21,547) (16,618) 19,723 (164,236) (20,634) 14,353 10,262 (6,304) 49,705 (6,531) (66,694) $ $ $ $ (In thousands) Deferred tax assets: Net operating loss carryforwards Research and development credit and California manufacturing credit carryforwards Reserves and accruals Synthetic debt Stock-based compensation stock deductions Outside basis difference on investment in 8point3 Other Total deferred tax asset Valuation allowance Total deferred tax asset, net of valuation allowance Deferred tax liabilities: Foreign currency derivatives unrealized gains Other intangible assets and accruals Fixed asset basis difference Total deferred tax liabilities Net deferred tax asset Fiscal Year 2014 2013 35% (64,614) (15,387) 2,180 (4,625) 9,262 47,768 1,948 11,052 — — 4,721 (1,065) (8,760) $ $ As of 35% (14,554) 9,324 (2,414) (2,511) 15,599 (32,512) 10,550 9,570 — — — (4,957) (11,905) January 3, 2016 December 28, 2014 $ $ 61,021 595 196,926 — 19,293 136,269 846 414,950 (268,671) 146,279 (747) (23,950) (116,089) (140,786) 5,493 $ $ 60,092 14,846 164,585 1,635 14,694 — 216 256,068 (118,748) 137,320 (422) (35,279) (95,247) (130,948) 6,372 As of January 3, 2016, the Company had federal net operating loss carryforwards of $58.2 million for tax purposes. These federal net operating loss carryforwards will expire at various dates from 2031 to 2034. As of January 3, 2016, the Company had California state net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $112.9 million for tax purposes, of which $36.3 million relate to stock deductions and $35.8 million relate to debt issuance, both of which will benefit equity when realized. These California net operating loss carryforwards will expire at various dates from 2017 to 2034. The Company also had credit carryforwards of approximately $49.8 million for federal tax purposes, of which $25.1 million relate to stock deductions and $24.7 million relate to debt issuance, both of which will benefit equity when realized. The Company had California credit carryforwards of $0.8 million for state tax purposes, which will not benefit equity when realized. These federal credit carryforwards will expire at various dates from 2018 to 2035, and the California credit carryforwards do not expire. The Company’s ability to utilize a portion of the net operating loss and credit carryforwards is dependent upon the Company being able to generate taxable income in future periods and may be limited due to restrictions imposed on utilization of net operating loss and credit carryforwards under federal and state laws upon a change in ownership, such as the transaction with Cypress. 126 The Company is subject to tax holidays in the Philippines where it manufactures its solar power products. The Company’s current income tax holidays were granted as manufacturing lines were placed in service and thereafter expire within this fiscal year, and we are in the process of or have applied for extensions and renewals upon expiration. Tax holidays in the Philippines reduce the Company’s tax rate to 0% from 30%. Tax savings associated with the Philippines tax holidays were approximately $21.2 million, $8.3 million, and $11.7 million in fiscal 2015, 2014, and 2013, respectively, which provided a diluted net income (loss) per share benefit of $0.16, $0.05, and $0.08, respectively. The Company has a tax ruling in Switzerland where it sells its solar power products. The ruling in Switzerland reduces the Company’s tax rate to 11.5% from approximately 24.2%. Tax savings associated with this ruling were approximately $1.6 million, $3.5 million, and $1.5 million in fiscal 2015, 2014, and 2013, respectively, which provided a diluted net income (loss) per share benefit of $0.01, $0.02, and $0.02 in fiscal 2015, 2014, and 2013, respectively. This current tax ruling expires at the end of 2019. As of January 3, 2016, the Company’s foreign subsidiaries have accumulated undistributed earnings of approximately $143.2 million that are intended to be indefinitely reinvested outside the United States and, accordingly, no provision for U.S. federal and state tax has been made for the distribution of these earnings. At January 3, 2016, the amount of the unrecognized deferred tax liability on the indefinitely reinvested earnings was $29.3 million. Valuation Allowance The Company’s valuation allowance is related to deferred tax assets in the United States and France, and was determined by assessing both positive and negative evidence. When determining whether it is more likely than not that deferred assets are recoverable, with such assessment being required on a jurisdiction by jurisdiction basis, management believes that sufficient uncertainty exists with regard to the realizability of these assets such that a valuation allowance is necessary. Factors considered in providing a valuation allowance include the lack of a significant history of consistent profits, the lack of consistent profitability in the solar industry, the lack of carryback capacity to realize these assets, and other factors. Based on the absence of sufficient positive objective evidence, management is unable to assert that it is more likely than not that the Company will generate sufficient taxable income to realize these remaining net deferred tax assets. Should the Company achieve a certain level of profitability in the future, it may be in a position to reverse the valuation allowance which would result in a non-cash income statement benefit. The change in valuation allowance for fiscal 2015, 2014, and 2013 was $149.9 million, $28.2 million, and $91.8 million, respectively. Unrecognized Tax Benefits Current accounting guidance contains a two-step approach to recognizing and measuring uncertain tax positions. The first step is to evaluate the tax position for recognition by determining if the weight of available evidence indicates that it is more likely than not that the position will be sustained on audit, including resolution of related appeals or litigation processes, if any. The second step is to measure the tax benefit as the largest amount that is more than 50% likely of being realized upon ultimate settlement. A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amounts of unrecognized tax benefits during fiscal 2015, 2014, and 2013 is as follows: (In thousands) Balance, beginning of year Additions for tax positions related to the current year Additions (reductions) for tax positions from prior years Reductions for tax positions from prior years/statute of limitations expirations Foreign exchange (gain) loss Balance at the end of the period 2015 44,287 10,478 (12,545) (944) (218) 41,058 $ $ $ $ Fiscal Year 2014 29,618 5,579 14,408 (3,391) (1,927) 44,287 $ $ 2013 62,932 2,053 (24,535) (12,431) 1,599 29,618 Included in the unrecognized tax benefits at fiscal 2015 and 2014 is $41.7 million and $28.2 million, respectively that, if recognized, would result in a reduction of the Company’s effective tax rate. The amounts differ from the long term liability recorded of $43.3 million and $31.8 million as of fiscal 2015 and 2014 due to accrued interest and penalties. Certain components of the unrecognized tax benefits are recorded against deferred tax asset balances. 127 Management believes that events that could occur in the next 12 months and cause a change in unrecognized tax benefits include, but are not limited to, the following: • commencement, continuation or completion of examinations of the Company’s tax returns by the U.S. or foreign taxing authorities; and • expiration of statutes of limitation on the Company’s tax returns. The calculation of unrecognized tax benefits involves dealing with uncertainties in the application of complex global tax regulations. Uncertainties include, but are not limited to, the impact of legislative, regulatory and judicial developments, transfer pricing and the application of withholding taxes. Management regularly assesses the Company’s tax positions in light of legislative, bilateral tax treaty, regulatory and judicial developments in the countries in which the Company does business. Management determined that an estimate of the range of reasonably possible change in the amounts of unrecognized tax benefits within the next 12 months cannot be made. Classification of Interests and Penalties The Company accrues interest and penalties on tax contingencies which are classified as “Provision for income taxes” in the Consolidated Statements of Operations. Accrued interest as of January 3, 2016 and December 28, 2014 was approximately $1.7 million and $3.3 million, respectively. Accrued penalties were not material for any of the periods presented. Tax Years and Examination The Company files tax returns in each jurisdiction in which it is registered to do business. In the United States and many of the state jurisdictions, and in many foreign countries in which the Company files tax returns, a statute of limitations period exists. After a statute of limitations period expires, the respective tax authorities may no longer assess additional income tax for the expired period. Similarly, the Company is no longer eligible to file claims for refund for any tax that it may have overpaid. The following table summarizes the Company’s major tax jurisdictions and the tax years that remain subject to examination by these jurisdictions as of January 3, 2016: Tax Jurisdictions United States California Switzerland Philippines France Italy Tax Years 2010 and onward 2011 and onward 2014 and onward 2012 and onward 2012 and onward 2011 and onward Additionally, certain pre-2010 U.S. corporate tax return and pre-2011 California tax returns are not open for assessment but the tax authorities can adjust net operating loss and credit carryovers that were generated. The Company is under tax examinations in various jurisdictions. The Company does not expect the examinations to result in a material assessment outside of existing reserves. If a material assessment in excess of current reserves results, the amount that the assessment exceeds current reserves will be a current period charge to earnings. Note 15. COMMON STOCK Common Stock Voting Rights - Common Stock All common stock holders are entitled to one vote per share on all matters submitted to be voted on by the Company’s stockholders, subject to the preferences applicable to any preferred stock outstanding. 128 Dividends - Common Stock All common stock holders are entitled to receive equal per share dividends when and if declared by the Board of Directors, subject to the preferences applicable to any preferred stock outstanding. Certain of the Company’s debt agreements place restrictions on the Company and its subsidiaries’ ability to pay cash dividends. Shares Reserved for Future Issuance The Company had shares of common stock reserved for future issuance as follows: (In thousands) Equity compensation plans Note 16. NET INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE January 3, 2016 December 28, 2014 7,174 7,953 The Company calculates net income (loss) per share by dividing earnings allocated to common stockholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the period. Diluted weighted average shares is computed using basic weighted average shares plus any potentially dilutive securities outstanding during the period using the treasury-stock-type method and the if-converted method, except when their effect is anti- dilutive. Potentially dilutive securities include stock options, restricted stock units, the Upfront Warrants held by Total, warrants associated with the CSO2015 and CSO2014, and the outstanding senior convertible debentures. The following table presents the calculation of basic and diluted net income (loss) per share: (In thousands, except per share amounts) Basic net income (loss) per share: Numerator 2015 Fiscal Year 2014 2013 Net income (loss) attributable to stockholders $ (187,019) $ 245,894 $ 95,593 Denominator Basic weighted-average common shares 134,884 128,635 120,819 Basic net income (loss) per share $ (1.39) $ 1.91 $ 0.79 Diluted net income (loss) per share: Numerator Net income (loss) attributable to stockholders $ (187,019) $ 245,894 $ 95,593 Add: Interest expense incurred on the 4.00% debentures due 2023, net of tax Add: Interest expense incurred on the 0.75% debentures due 2018, net of tax Add: Interest expense incurred on the 0.875% debentures due 2021, net of tax Add: Interest expense incurred on the 4.75% debentures due 2014, net of tax Net income (loss) available to common stockholders — — — — 2,103 1,897 — 1,295 — — (187,019) $ $ 2,630 252,524 $ — 96,888 129 (In thousands, except per share amounts) Denominator Basic weighted-average common shares Effect of dilutive securities: Stock options Restricted stock units Upfront Warrants (held by Total) Warrants (under the CSO2015) Warrants (under the CSO2014) 4.00% debentures due 2023 0.75% debentures due 2018 0.875% debentures due 2021 4.75% debentures due 2014 Dilutive weighted-average common shares 2015 Fiscal Year 2014 2013 134,884 128,635 120,819 — — — — — — — — — 134,884 84 4,522 7,236 2,945 262 — 12,026 4,530 2,511 162,751 109 5,010 5,090 590 292 — 7,070 — — 138,980 Diluted net income (loss) per share $ (1.39) $ 1.55 $ 0.70 The Upfront Warrants allow Total to acquire up to 9,531,677 shares of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $7.8685. The warrants under the CSO2015 and CSO2014, when such warrants were still outstanding, entitled holders to acquire up to 11.1 million and 8.7 million shares, respectively, of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $24.00 and $26.40, respectively. In February 2014, the CSO2014 was settled, leaving none of the related Warrants outstanding (see Note 12); and during the second quarter of fiscal 2015, the Company entered into unwind agreements pursuant to which the Company issued common stock to settle all of the outstanding warrants relating to the CSO2015 (see Note 12). Holders of the Company’s 4.00% debentures due 2023, 0.875% debentures due 2021, and 0.75% debentures due 2018 can, and holders of the 4.75% debentures due 2014 before their maturity could, convert the debentures into shares of the Company’s common stock, at the applicable conversion rate, at any time on or before maturity. These debentures are included in the calculation of diluted net income per share if they were outstanding during the period presented and if their inclusion is dilutive under the if-converted method. In April 2014, the 4.75% debentures due 2014 matured and were fully settled in both cash and shares of the Company’s common stock (see Note 12). Holders of the Company’s 4.50% debentures due 2015 could, under certain circumstances at their option and before maturity, convert the debentures into cash, and not into shares of the Company’s common stock (or any other securities). Therefore, the 4.50% debentures due 2015 are excluded from the net income per share calculation. In March 2015, the 4.50% debentures due 2015 matured and were settled in cash (see Note 12). The following is a summary of outstanding anti-dilutive potential common stock that was excluded from income (loss) per diluted share in the following periods: (In thousands) Stock options Restricted stock units Upfront Warrants (held by Total) Warrants (under the CSO2015) Warrants (under the CSO2014) 4.00% debentures due 2023 0.75 debentures due 2018 0.875% debentures due 2021 4.75% debentures due 2014 20151 Fiscal Year 2014 2013 151 3,152 6,801 913 — 682 12,026 8,203 — 142 374 — — — — — — — 194 1,600 — — — — — n/a 8,712 1 As a result of the net loss per share for fiscal 2015, the inclusion of all potentially dilutive stock options, restricted stock units, and common shares under noted warrants and convertible debt would be anti-dilutive. Therefore, those stock options, restricted stock units and shares were excluded from the computation of the weighted-average shares for diluted net loss per share for such period. 130 Note 17. STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION The following table summarizes the consolidated stock-based compensation expense by line item in the Consolidated Statements of Operations: (In thousands) Cost of Residential revenue Cost of Commercial revenue Cost of Power Plant revenue Research and development Sales, general and administrative Total stock-based compensation expense 2015 4,764 2,676 5,904 9,938 35,678 58,960 $ $ $ $ Fiscal Year 2014 3,959 1,954 8,408 7,714 33,557 55,592 The following table summarizes the consolidated stock-based compensation expense by type of awards: (In thousands) Restricted stock units Change in stock-based compensation capitalized in inventory Total stock-based compensation expense 2015 Fiscal Year 2014 61,818 (2,858) 58,960 $ 55,591 1 55,592 $ 2013 4,230 1,918 4,668 5,414 29,448 45,678 2013 46,215 (537) 45,678 $ $ $ As of January 3, 2016, the total unrecognized stock-based compensation related to outstanding restricted stock units was $81.8 million, which the Company expects to recognize over a weighted-average period of 1.59 years. Equity Incentive Programs Stock-based Incentive Plans The Company has four stock incentive plans: (i) the 1996 Stock Plan (“1996 Plan”); (ii) the Third Amended and Restated 2005 SunPower Corporation Stock Incentive Plan (“2005 Plan”); (iii) the PowerLight Corporation Common Stock Option and Common Stock Purchase Plan (“PowerLight Plan”); and (iv) the SunPower Corporation 2015 Omnibus Incentive Plan (“2015 Plan”). The PowerLight Plan, which was adopted by PowerLight’s Board of Directors in October 2000, was assumed by the Company by way of the acquisition of PowerLight in fiscal 2007. Under the terms of all plans, the Company may issue incentive or non-statutory stock options or stock purchase rights to directors, employees and consultants to purchase common stock. The 2005 Plan, which replaced the 1996 Plan, was adopted by the Company’s Board of Directors in August 2005, and was approved by shareholders in November 2005. The 2015 Plan, which subsequently replaced the 2005 Plan, was adopted by the Company’s Board of Directors in February 2015, and was approved by shareholders in June 2015. The 2015 Plan allows for the grant of options, as well as grant of stock appreciation rights, restricted stock grants, restricted stock units and other equity rights. The 2015 Plan also allows for tax withholding obligations related to stock option exercises or restricted stock awards to be satisfied through the retention of shares otherwise released upon vesting. The 2015 Plan includes an automatic annual increase mechanism equal to the lower of three percent of the outstanding shares of all classes of the Company’s common stock measured on the last day of the immediately preceding fiscal year, 6.0 million shares, or such other number of shares as determined by the Company’s Board of Directors. In fiscal 2015, the Company’s Board of Directors voted to reduce the stock incentive plan’s automatic increase from 3% to 2% for 2016. Subsequent to the adoption of the 2015 Plan, no new awards are being granted under the 2005 Plan, the 1996 Plan, or the PowerLight Plan. Outstanding awards granted under these plans continue to be governed by their respective terms. As of January 3, 2016, approximately 7.2 million shares were available for grant under the 2015 Plan. Incentive stock options, nonstatutory stock options, and stock appreciation rights may be granted at no less than the fair value of the common stock on the date of grant. The options and rights become exercisable when and as determined by the Company’s Board of Directors, although these terms generally do not exceed ten years for stock options. Under the 1996 and 2005 Plans, the options typically vest over five years with a one-year cliff and monthly vesting thereafter. Under the PowerLight Plan, the options typically vest over five years with yearly cliff vesting. The Company has not granted stock options since fiscal 2008, and accordingly all outstanding options are fully vested. Under the 2005 and 2015 plans, the restricted stock grants and restricted stock units typically vest in equal installments annually over three or four years. 131 The majority of shares issued are net of the minimum statutory withholding requirements that the Company pays on behalf of its employees. During fiscal 2015, 2014, and 2013, the Company withheld 1,380,891 shares, 1,738,625 and 1,329,140 shares, respectively, to satisfy the employees’ tax obligations. The Company pays such withholding requirements in cash to the appropriate taxing authorities. Shares withheld are treated as common stock repurchases for accounting and disclosure purposes and reduce the number of shares outstanding upon vesting. Restricted Stock and Stock Options The following table summarizes the Company’s non-vested restricted stock activities: Outstanding as of December 30, 2012 Granted Vested2 Forfeited Outstanding as of December 29, 2013 Granted Vested2 Forfeited Outstanding as of December 28, 2014 Granted Vested2 Forfeited Outstanding as of January 3, 2016 Restricted Stock Units Shares (in thousands) 8,576 5,607 (3,583) (1,008) 9,592 2,187 (4,432) (792) 6,555 2,695 (3,560) (627) 5,063 Weighted-Average Grant Date Fair Value Per Share1 8.53 15.88 9.48 10.10 12.26 31.80 11.61 15.00 18.88 29.77 15.31 22.99 26.68 1 The Company estimates the fair value of its restricted stock awards and units at its stock price on the grant date. 2 Restricted stock awards and units vested include shares withheld on behalf of employees to satisfy the minimum statutory tax withholding requirements. The following table summarizes the Company’s outstanding options as of January 3, 2016: Outstanding Stock Options Weighted- Average Remaining Contractual Term (in years) Weighted- Average Exercise Price Per Share $ 54.04 2.19 Aggregate Intrinsic Value (in thousands) 38 $ Shares (in thousands) 151 Outstanding and exercisable as of January 3, 2016 The intrinsic value of options exercised in fiscal 2015, 2014, and 2013 were $1.0 million, $2.4 million, and $0.8 million, respectively. There were no stock options granted in fiscal 2015, 2014, and 2013. The aggregate intrinsic value in the preceding table represents the total pre-tax intrinsic value, based on the Company’s closing stock price of $30.01 at January 3, 2016 which would have been received by the option holders had all option holders exercised their options as of that date. The total number of in-the-money options exercisable was 2.6 thousand shares as of January 3, 2016. 132 Note 18. SEGMENT AND GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION In the first quarter of fiscal 2015, in connection with a realignment of its internal organizational structure, the Company changed its segment reporting from its Americas, EMEA and APAC Segments to three end-customer segments: (i) Residential Segment, (ii) Commercial Segment and (iii) Power Plant Segment (see Note 1). The Residential and Commercial Segments combined are referred to as Distributed Generation. Reclassifications of prior period segment information have been made to conform to the current period presentation. This change does not affect the Company’s previously reported Consolidated Financial Statements. The Company’s President and Chief Executive Officer, as the CODM assesses the performance of the three end- customer segments using information about their revenue and gross margin after certain adjustments to reflect the substance of the revenue transactions for certain utility and power plant projects, and adding back certain non-cash expenses such as stock- based compensation expense and interest expense, as well as other items including gain on contract termination, loss on change in European government incentives, accelerated depreciation associated with the Company’s manufacturing step reduction program, and amortization of other intangible assets. The CODM does not review asset information by segment. The following tables present information by end-customer segment including revenue, gross margin, and depreciation and amortization, as well as revenue by geography, based on the destination of the shipments: (In thousands): Revenue Distributed Generation Residential Solar power systems, components, others Residential leasing Commercial Power Plant Total revenue Cost of revenue Distributed Generation Residential Solar power systems, components, others Residential leasing Commercial Power Plant Total cost of revenue Gross margin Distributed Generation Residential Solar power systems, components, others Residential leasing Commercial Power Plant Total gross margin Depreciation and amortization by segment (in thousands): Distributed Generation Residential Commercial Power Plant 133 2015 Fiscal Year 2014 2013 456,707 186,813 277,143 655,810 1,576,473 369,157 139,292 259,600 563,778 1,331,827 87,550 47,521 17,543 92,032 244,646 2015 47,792 24,842 65,373 $ $ $ $ 525,976 129,960 361,828 2,009,501 3,027,265 455,568 86,244 326,324 1,534,002 2,402,138 70,408 43,716 35,504 475,499 625,127 Fiscal Year 2014 30,646 15,292 62,857 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 600,622 137,055 360,249 1,409,277 2,507,203 482,449 107,554 338,622 1,087,506 2,016,131 118,173 29,501 21,627 321,771 491,072 2013 39,730 17,631 40,830 The following tables present information by significant customers and categories: (As a percentage of total revenue): Significant Customers: MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company NRG Solar, Inc. Power Plant Power Plant Business Segment * denotes less than 10% during the period (As a percentage of total revenue): Revenue by geography: United States Japan Rest of World 2015 Fiscal Year 2014 2013 14% * 49% * 25% 17% 2015 Fiscal Year 2014 2013 69% 12% 19% 100% 72% 12% 16% 100% 67% 14% 19% 100% A reconciliation of the Company’s segment revenue and gross margin to its consolidated financial statements for the fiscal years ended January 3, 2016, December 28, 2014, and December 29, 2013 is as follows: Revenue Gross margin Fiscal 2015 Revenue and Gross margin by segment (in thousands, except percentages): As reviewed by CODM 8point3 Energy Partners Utility and power plant projects Sale of operating lease assets FPSC arbitration ruling Stock-based compensation Other GAAP Residential Commercial Power Plant Residential Commercial Power Plant $ 647,213 $ 392,866 $ 1,572,571 $ 140,010 21.6% $ 52,070 13.3% $ 432,921 27.5% 2,754 (115,723) (898,765) — (6,447) — — — — — — — — (17,996) — — — — 1,148 — (2,000) 4,425 (4,764) (3,748) (32,734) (338,371) — — 2,593 (2,676) (1,710) 3,016 — 7,582 (5,903) (7,213) $ 643,520 $ 277,143 $ 655,810 $ 135,071 21.0% $ 17,543 6.3% $ 92,032 14.0% Revenue Gross margin Fiscal 2014 Revenue and Gross margin by segment (in thousands, except percentages): Residential Commercial Power Plant Residential Commercial Power Plant As reviewed by CODM $ 655,936 $ 361,828 $ 1,600,885 $ 137,532 21.0% $ 47,497 13.1% $ 328,516 20.5% Utility and power plant projects FPSC arbitration ruling Stock-based compensation Other GAAP — — — — — — — — 408,616 — — — — (18,684) (3,959) (765) — (9,660) (1,954) (379) 190,712 (28,462) (8,408) (6,859) $ 655,936 $ 361,828 $ 2,009,501 $ 114,124 17.4% $ 35,504 9.8% $ 475,499 23.7% Revenue Gross margin Fiscal 2013 Revenue and Gross margin by segment (in thousands, except percentages): Residential Commercial Power Plant Residential Commercial Power Plant As reviewed by CODM $ 737,677 $ 339,051 $ 1,525,591 $ 133,327 18.1% $ 10,961 3.2% $ 386,091 25.3% Utility and power plant projects Gain on contract termination Stock-based compensation Other GAAP — — — — 21,198 — — — (116,986) — — 672 — 19,917 (4,229) (1,341) 3,167 10,004 (1,919) (586) (80,505) 22,066 (4,668) (1,213) $ 737,677 $ 360,249 $ 1,409,277 $ 147,674 20.0% $ 21,627 6.0% $ 321,771 22.8% 134 Note 19. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS Revolving Credit Facility with Credit Agricole In July 2013, the Company entered into a revolving credit facility with Credit Agricole, as administrative agent, and certain financial institutions, under which the Company may borrow up to $250.0 million. Amounts borrowed may be repaid and reborrowed until the August 26, 2019 Maturity Date. On February 17, 2016, the Company entered into an amendment to the credit agreement, expanding the available borrowings under the revolving credit facility to $300.0 million million and adding a $200.0 million letter of credit subfacility, subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions. The revolving credit facility includes representations, covenants, and events of default customary for financing transactions of this type. SELECTED UNAUDITED QUARTERLY FINANCIAL DATA Consolidated Statements of Operations: Three Months Ended January 3, 2016 September 27, 2015 June 28, 2015 March 29, 2015 December 28, 2014 September 28, 2014 June 29, 2014 March 30, 2014 $ 374,364 $ 20,303 $ $ 380,218 $ 381,020 $ 440,871 $ 62,644 $ 70,881 $ 90,818 $ 1,164,238 $ 259,479 $ 662,734 $ 507,871 $ 692,422 108,514 $ 94,145 $ 162,989 $ (159,635) $ (87,285) $ (23,466) $ (29,050) $ 121,609 $ 17,284 $ 1,168 $ 43,034 $ (127,621) $ (56,326) $ 6,509 $ (9,581) $ 134,715 $ 32,033 $ 14,102 $ 65,044 (In thousands, except per share data) Revenue Gross margin Net income (loss) Net income (loss) attributable to stockholders Net income (loss) per share attributable to stockholders: Basic Diluted $ $ (0.93) $ (0.93) $ (0.41) $ (0.41) $ 0.05 $ 0.04 $ (0.07) $ (0.07) $ 1.03 $ 0.83 $ 0.24 $ 0.20 $ 0.11 $ 0.09 $ 0.53 0.42 ITEM 9: CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES None. ITEM 9A: CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures We maintain “disclosure controls and procedures,” as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act, that are designed to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in SEC rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. In designing and evaluating our disclosure controls and procedures, management recognizes that disclosure controls and procedures, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the disclosure controls and procedures are met. Additionally, in designing disclosure controls and procedures, our management is required to apply its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible disclosure controls and procedures. The design of any disclosure control and procedure also is based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions. 135 Based on their evaluation as of the end of the period covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of January 3, 2016 at a reasonable assurance level. Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). Management conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting using the criteria described in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (2013 framework) (“COSO”). Based on this evaluation, management concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of January 3, 2016 based on the criteria described in Internal Control- Integrated Framework issued by COSO. Management reviewed the results of its assessment with our Audit Committee. The effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of January 3, 2016 has been audited by Ernst & Young LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which is included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting We regularly review our system of internal control over financial reporting and make changes to our processes and systems to improve controls and increase efficiency, while ensuring that we maintain an effective internal control environment. Changes may include such activities as implementing new, more efficient systems, consolidating activities, and migrating processes. There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting that occurred during our most recent fiscal quarter that materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting. ITEM 9B: OTHER INFORMATION None. 136 PART III ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE Information appearing under this Item is incorporated herein by reference to the “Board Structure-Board Committees, “Board Structure-Audit Committee,” “Security Ownership of Management and Certain Beneficial Owners-Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance,” “Executive Officers” and “Proposal One-Re-election of Class II Directors” sections in our proxy statement for the 2016 annual meeting of stockholders. We have adopted a code of ethics, entitled Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, that applies to all of our directors, officers and employees, including our principal executive officer, principal financial officer, and principal accounting officer. We have made it available, free of charge, on our website at www.sunpower.com, and if we amend it or grant any waiver under it that applies to our principal executive officer, principal financial officer, or principal accounting officer, we will promptly post that amendment or waiver on our website as well. ITEM 11: EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION Information appearing under this Item is incorporated herein by reference to the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis,” “Executive Compensation,” “Board Structure-Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation” and “Compensation Committee Report” sections in our proxy statement for the 2016 annual meeting of stockholders. ITEM 12: SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS Information appearing under this Item is incorporated herein by reference to the “Security Ownership of Management and Certain Beneficial Owners” and “Equity Compensation Plan Information” sections in our proxy statement for the 2016 annual meeting of stockholders. ITEM 13: CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE Information appearing under this Item is incorporated herein by reference to the “Certain Relationships and Related Persons Transactions,” “Determination of Independence,” “Compensation Committee” and “Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee” sections in our proxy statement for the 2016 annual meeting of stockholders. ITEM 14: PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES Information appearing under this Item is incorporated herein by reference to the “Ernst & Young LLP” and “Audit Committee Pre-Approval” sections in our proxy statement for the 2016 annual meeting of stockholders. 137 PART IV ITEM 15: EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES The following documents are filed as a part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K: 1. Financial Statements: Reports of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm Consolidated Balance Sheets Consolidated Statements of Operations Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss) Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements 2. Financial Statement Schedule: Page 80 82 83 84 85 86 88 All financial statement schedules are omitted as the required information is inapplicable or the information is presented in the Consolidated Financial Statements or Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements under Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. 138 3. Exhibits: EXHIBIT INDEX Exhibit Number 3.1 3.2 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6 Description Restated Certificate of Incorporation of SunPower Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 16, 2011). Amended and Restated By-Laws of SunPower Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 7, 2012). Specimen Common Stock Certificate (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Registrant’s Annual Report on From 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 29, 2012). Amended and Restated Rights Agreement, dated November 16, 2011, by and between SunPower Corporation and Computershare Trust Company, N.A., as Rights Agent, including the form of Certificate of Designation of Series A Junior Participating Preferred Stock, the forms of Right Certificates, and the Summary of Rights attached thereto as Exhibits A, B, and C, respectively (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form 8-A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 16, 2011). Certificate of Designation of Series A Junior Participating Preferred Stock of SunPower Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.6 to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 16, 2011). Amendment No. 1, dated May 10, 2012, to the Amended and Restated Rights Agreement, dated as of November 16, 2011, by and between the SunPower Corporation and Computershare Trust Company, N.A., as rights agent (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 10, 2012). Indenture, dated as of May 29, 2013, by and between SunPower Corporation and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Trustee (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 29, 2013). Indenture, dated as of December 15, 2015 by and between SunPower Corporation and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Trustee (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on December 16, 2015). Indenture, dated as of June 11, 2014 by and between SunPower Corporation and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Trustee (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 11, 2014). Credit Support Agreement, dated April 28, 2011, between SunPower Corporation and Total S.A. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.5 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 12, 2011). Amendment to Credit Support Agreement, dated June 7, 2011, between SunPower Corporation and Total S.A. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 7, 2011). Second Amendment to Credit Support Agreement, dated December 12, 2011, by and between Total S.A. and SunPower Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 of Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on December 23, 2011). Third Amendment to Credit Support Agreement, dated December 14, 2012, by and between SunPower Corporation and Total S.A. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.34 to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 25, 2013) Affiliation Agreement, dated April 28, 2011, between SunPower Corporation and Total Gas & Power USA, SAS (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.6 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 12, 2011). Amendment to Affiliation Agreement, dated June 7, 2011, between SunPower Corporation and Total Gas & Power USA, SAS (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 of Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 7, 2011). 139 10.7 10.8 10.9 10.10 10.11 10.12 10.13 10.14^ 10.15^ 10.16^ 10.17^ 10.18^ 10.19^ 10.20^ 10.21^ 10.22^ 10.23^ Second Amendment to Affiliation Agreement, dated December 23, 2011, by and between Total G&P and SunPower Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 of Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on December 23, 2011). Amendment No. 3 to Affiliation Agreement, dated February 28, 2012, by and between SunPower Corporation and Total Gas & Power USA, SAS (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.91 to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 29, 2012). Amendment No. 4 to Affiliation Agreement, dated August 10, 2012, by and between SunPower Corporation and Total Gas & Power USA, SAS (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 2, 2012). Affiliation Agreement Guaranty, dated April 28, 2011, between SunPower Corporation and Total S.A. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.7 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 12, 2011). Research & Collaboration Agreement, dated April 28, 2011, between SunPower Corporation and Total Gas & Power USA, SAS (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.8 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 12, 2011). Amendment to Research & Collaboration Agreement, dated June 7, 2011, between SunPower Corporation and Total Gas & Power USA, SAS (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 of Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 7, 2011). Registration Rights Agreement, dated April 28, 2011, between SunPower Corporation and Total Gas & Power USA, SAS (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.9 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 12, 2011). SunPower Corporation 2005 Stock Unit Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.28 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-1/A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 31, 2005). Third Amended and Restated SunPower Corporation 2005 Stock Incentive Plan and forms of agreements there- under (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 17, 2011). SunPower Corporation 2015 Omnibus Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-205207), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 25, 2015). PowerLight Corporation Common Stock Option and Common Stock Purchase Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on January 25, 2007). Form of PowerLight Corporation Incentive/Non-Qualified Stock Option, Market Standoff and Stock Restriction Agreement (Employees) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.4 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on January 25, 2007). Outside Director Compensation Policy, as amended on July 22, 2015 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 29, 2015). Form of Employment Agreement for Executive Officers (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.47 to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 18, 2014). First Amendment to Employment Agreement, dated May 1, 2013, by and among SunPower Corporation and Charles David Boynton (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 2, 2013). SunPower Corporation Annual Executive Bonus Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 30, 2014). SunPower Corporation Executive Semi-Annual Bonus Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 30, 2014). 140 10.24^* 10.25^ 10.26† 10.27 10.28 10.29 10.30 10.31 10.32 10.33 10.34† 10.35† 10.36 10.37 Form of Indemnification Agreement for Directors and Officers. 2016 Management Career Transition Plan, dated August 10, 2015 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 29, 2015). Mortgage Loan Agreement, dated May 6, 2010, by and among SunPower Philippines Manufacturing Ltd., SPML Land, Inc. and International Finance Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 13, 2010). Guarantee Agreement, dated May 6, 2010, by and between SunPower Corporation and International Finance Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.14 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 13, 2010). Amendment No. 1 to Loan Agreement, dated November 2, 2010, by and between SunPower Philippines Manufacturing Ltd. and International Finance Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.42 to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 28, 2011). Mortgage Supplement No. 1, dated November 3, 2010, by and between SunPower Philippines Manufacturing Ltd., SPML Land, Inc. and International Finance Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.63 to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 25, 2013). Mortgage Supplement No. 2, dated October 9, 2012, by and between SunPower Philippines Manufacturing Ltd., SPML Land, Inc. and International Finance Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.64 to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 25, 2013). Mortgage Supplement No. 3, dated February 7, 2013, by and between SunPower Philippines Manufacturing Ltd., SPML Land, Inc. and International Finance Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 7, 2013). Loan Agreement, dated December 1, 2010, by and among California Enterprise Development Authority and SunPower Corporation, relating to $30,000,000 California Enterprise Development Authority Tax Exempt Recovery Zone Facility Revenue Bonds (SunPower Corporation - Headquarters Project) Series 2010 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.50 to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 28, 2011). First Supplement to Loan Agreement, dated June 1, 2011, by and between California Enterprise Development Authority and SunPower Corporation, relating to $30,000,000 California Enterprise Development Authority Tax Exempt Recovery Zone Facility Revenue Bonds (SunPower Corporation - Headquarters Project) Series 2010 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.16 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 9, 2011). Letter of Credit Facility Agreement, dated August 9, 2011, by and among SunPower Corporation, Total S.A., the Subsidiary Applicants party thereto, the Banks party thereto, and Deutsche Bank AG New York Branch (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 10, 2011). First Amendment to Letter of Credit Facility Agreement, dated December 20, 2011, by and among SunPower Corporation, Total S.A., the Subsidiary Applicants party thereto, the Banks party thereto, and Deutsche Bank AG New York Branch (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.65 to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 29, 2012). Second Amendment to Letter of Credit Facility Agreement, dated December 19, 2012, by and among SunPower Corporation, Total S.A., the Subsidiary Applicants party thereto, the Banks party thereto, and Deutsche Bank AG New York Branch (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.69 to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 25, 2013). Third Amendment to Letter of Credit Facility Agreement, dated December 20, 2013, by and among SunPower Corporation, SunPower Corporation, Systems, Total S.A., Deutsche Bank AG New York Branch (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.61 to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 18, 2014). 141 10.38 10.39 10.40 10.41 10.42 10.43 10.44† 10.45 10.46 10.47 10.48 10.49† Fourth Amendment to Letter of Credit Facility Agreement, dated December 23, 2014, by and among SunPower Corporation, SunPower Corporation, Systems, Total S.A., Deutsche Bank AG New York Branch (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.66 to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 24, 2015). Fifth Amendment to Letter of Credit Facility Agreement, dated October 7, 2015, by and among SunPower Corporation, SunPower Corporation, Systems, Total S.A., Deutsche Bank AG New York Branch (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 29, 2015). Continuing Agreement for Standby Letters of Credit and Demand Guarantees, dated September 27, 2011, by and among SunPower Corporation, Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, and Deutsche Bank AG New York Branch (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.10 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 10, 2011). Security Agreement, dated September 27, 2011, by and among SunPower Corporation, Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, and Deutsche Bank AG New York Branch (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.11 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 10, 2011). Revolving Credit Agreement, dated July 3, 2013, by and among SunPower Corporation and Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank, and the financial institutions party thereto (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 31, 2013). First Amendment to Revolving Credit Agreement, dated August 26, 2014, by and among SunPower Corporation, its subsidiaries, SunPower Corporation, Systems; SunPower North America LLC; and SunPower Capital, LLC, and Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank and the other lenders party thereto (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 28, 2014). Security Agreement, dated January 31, 2014, by and among SunPower Corporation, SunPower Corporation, Systems, SunPower North America, LLC, SunPower Capital, LLC, and Crédit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.91 to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 18, 2014). Joint Venture Agreement, dated May 27, 2010, by and among SunPower Technology, Ltd., AU Optronics Singapore Pte. Ltd., AU Optronics Corporation and AUO SunPower Sdn. Bhd. (formerly known as SunPower Malaysia Manufacturing Sdn. Bhd.) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 13, 2010). Amendment No. 1 to Joint Venture Agreement, dated June 29, 2010, by and among SunPower Technology, Ltd., AU Optronics Singapore Pte. Ltd., AU Optronics Corporation and AUO SunPower Sdn. Bhd. (formerly known as SunPower Malaysia Manufacturing Sdn. Bhd.) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 12, 2010). Amendment No. 2 to Joint Venture Agreement, dated July 5, 2010, by and among SunPower Technology, Ltd., AU Optronics Singapore Pte. Ltd., AU Optronics Corporation and AUO SunPower Sdn. Bhd. (formerly known as SunPower Malaysia Manufacturing Sdn. Bhd.) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 12, 2010). Amendment No. 3 to Joint Venture Agreement, dated March 3, 2014, by and among SunPower Technology, Ltd., AU Optronics Singapore Pte. Ltd., AU Optronics Corporation and AUO SunPower Sdn. Bhd. (formerly known as SunPower Malaysia Manufacturing Sdn. Bhd.) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 30, 2014). Supply Agreement, dated July 5, 2010, by and among AUO SunPower Sdn. Bhd. (formerly known as SunPower Malaysia Manufacturing Sdn. Bhd.), SunPower Systems, Sarl and AU Optronics Singapore Pte. Ltd. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 12, 2010). 142 10.50 10.51 10.52 10.53 10.54† 10.55 10.56 21.1* 23.1* 24.1* 31.1* 31.2* 32.1* 101.INS*+ 101.SCH*+ 101.CAL*+ 101.LAB*+ 101.PRE*+ 101.DEF*+ License and Technology Agreement, dated July 5, 2010, by and among SunPower Technology, Ltd., AU Optronics Singapore Pte. Ltd. and AUO SunPower Sdn. Bhd. (formerly known as SunPower Malaysia Manufacturing Sdn. Bhd.) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 12, 2010). Compensation and Funding Agreement, dated February 28, 2012, by and between SunPower Corporation and Total S.A. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.90 to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 29, 2012). Amendment No. 1 to Compensation and Funding Agreement, dated August 10, 2012, by and between SunPower Corporation and Total S.A. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 2, 2012). Warrant to Purchase Common Stock, dated February 28, 2012, issued to Total Gas & Power USA, SAS (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.92 to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 29, 2012). Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement of 8point3 Holding Company, LLC, dated as of June 24, 2015, by and between SunPower YC Holdings, LLC and First Solar 8point3 Holdings, LLC (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on July 29, 2015). Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement of 8point3 Operating Company, LLC, dated as of June 24, 2015, by and between 8point3 Energy Partners LP, SunPower YC Holdings, LLC, First Solar 8point3 Holdings, LLC, Maryland Solar Holdings, Inc. and 8point3 Holdings, LL (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on July 29, 2015). Master Formation Agreement, dated as of March 10, 2015, by and between First Solar, Inc. and SunPower Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 11, 2015). List of Subsidiaries. Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm. Power of Attorney. Certification by Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a). Certification by Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a). Certification Furnished Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002. XBRL Instance Document. XBRL Taxonomy Schema Document. XBRL Taxonomy Calculation Linkbase Document. XBRL Taxonomy Label Linkbase Document. XBRL Taxonomy Presentation Linkbase Document. XBRL Taxonomy Definition Linkbase Document. Exhibits marked with a carrot (^) are director and officer compensatory arrangements. Exhibits marked with an asterisk (*) are filed herewith. Exhibits marked with an extended cross (†) are subject to a request for confidential treatment filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Exhibits marked with a cross (+) are XBRL (Extensible Business Reporting Language) information furnished and not filed herewith, are not a part of a registration statement or Prospectus for purposes of sections 11 or 12 of the Securities Act of 1933, are deemed not filed for purposes of section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and otherwise are not subject to liability under these sections. 143 Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereto duly authorized. SIGNATURES SUNPOWER CORPORATION Dated: February 18, 2016 By: /s/ CHARLES D. BOYNTON Charles D. Boynton Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this Report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated. Signature Title Date /S/ THOMAS H. WERNER Thomas H. Werner /S/ CHARLES D. BOYNTON Charles D. Boynton /S/ ERIC BRANDERIZ Eric Branderiz * Arnaud Chaperon * Bernard Clement * Denis Giorno * Catherine A. Lesjak * Thomas R. McDaniel * Jean-Marc Otero del Val * Humbert de Wendel * Patrick Wood III * By: /S/ CHARLES D. BOYNTON Charles D. Boynton Power of Attorney President, Chief Executive Officer and Director (Principal Executive Officer) Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer) Senior Vice President, Corporate Controller and Chief Accounting Officer (Principal Accounting Officer) Director Director Director Director Director Director Director Director 144 February 18, 2016 February 18, 2016 February 18, 2016 February 18, 2016 February 18, 2016 February 18, 2016 February 18, 2016 February 18, 2016 February 18, 2016 February 18, 2016 February 18, 2016 NOTICE OF THE 2016 ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS TO ALL SUNPOWER STOCKHOLDERS: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the 2016 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the “Annual Meeting”) of SunPower Corporation, a Delaware corporation (“SunPower”), will be held on: Date: Time: Place: Virtual Meeting Admission: Items of Business: Thursday, April 28, 2016 10:00 a.m. Pacific Time Online at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/SPWR2016 This year’s Annual Meeting will be a virtual meeting of stockholders, conducted via a live webcast. You will be able to attend the Annual Meeting online, vote your shares electronically and submit questions during the meeting by visiting www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/SPWR2016. Have your Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials or proxy card in hand when you access the website and then follow the instructions. To participate in the meeting, you will need the 16-digit control number included on the Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials or proxy card. Online check-in will begin at 9:30 a.m. Pacific Time, and you should allow ample time for the online check-in procedures. 1. The re-election of three directors to serve as Class II directors on our board of directors (the “Board”); 2. The approval, in an advisory vote, of our named executive officer compensation; 3. The ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for fiscal year 2016; and 4. The transaction of such other business as may properly come before the Annual Meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof. The foregoing items of business are more fully described in the proxy statement accompanying this notice of the Annual Meeting. On or about March 17, 2016 we began mailing to stockholders either a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials or this notice of the Annual Meeting, the proxy statement and the form of proxy. All stockholders are cordially invited to attend the Annual Meeting. Only stockholders of record at the close of business on February 29, 2016 (the “Record Date”) are entitled to receive notice of, and to vote at, the Annual Meeting or any adjournment or postponement of the Annual Meeting. Any registered stockholder in attendance at the Annual Meeting and entitled to vote may do so during the meeting even if such stockholder returned a proxy. San Jose, California March 17, 2016 FOR THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS Lisa Bodensteiner Corporate Secretary IMPORTANT: WHETHER OR NOT YOU EXPECT TO ATTEND THE ANNUAL MEETING, PLEASE COMPLETE, DATE AND SIGN THE PROXY CARD AND MAIL IT PROMPTLY, OR YOU MAY VOTE BY TELEPHONE OR VIA THE INTERNET BY FOLLOWING THE DIRECTIONS ON THE PROXY CARD. ANY ONE OF THESE METHODS WILL ENSURE REPRESENTATION OF YOUR SHARES AT THE ANNUAL MEETING. NO POSTAGE NEED BE AFFIXED TO THE COMPANY-PROVIDED PROXY CARD ENVELOPE IF MAILED IN THE UNITED STATES. PROXY STATEMENT FOR 2016 ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS TABLE OF CONTENTS INFORMATION CONCERNING SOLICITATION AND VOTING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Delivery of Voting Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Record Date and Shares Outstanding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Board Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Voting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . How Your Proxy Will Be Voted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Revoking Your Proxy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Solicitation of Proxies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Voting Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Note Concerning Forward-Looking Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PROPOSAL ONE—RE-ELECTION OF CLASS II DIRECTORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BOARD STRUCTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Determination of Independence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Leadership Structure and Risk Oversight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Board Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Controlled Company, NASDAQ Listing Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Board Committees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Audit Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Compensation Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Finance Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CORPORATE GOVERNANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stockholder Communications with Board of Directors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Directors’ Attendance at Our Annual Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Submission of Stockholder Proposal for the 2017 Annual Meeting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Corporate Governance Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Code of Business Conduct and Ethics; Related Persons Transactions Policy and Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Certain Relationships and Related Persons Transactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . DIRECTOR COMPENSATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2015 Director Compensation Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2015 Director Compensation Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PROPOSAL TWO—ADVISORY VOTE TO APPROVE NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICER COMPENSATION . . . . EXECUTIVE OFFICERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . General Philosophy and Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Compensation Setting Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Compensation Consultant and Peer Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Benchmarking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2015 Compensation Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Analysis of Fiscal 2015 Compensation Decisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Employment and Severance Arrangements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Section 162(m) Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stock Ownership Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Other Disclosures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 5 9 9 9 9 9 10 10 11 11 11 13 14 14 14 14 15 16 16 25 27 27 27 29 31 33 33 35 35 36 37 37 38 43 43 43 43 i EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Compensation of Named Executive Officers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2015 Summary Compensation Table. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Grants of Plan-Based Awards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2015 Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Estimated Possible Payouts Under Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Equity Incentive Plan Compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Employment and Severance Agreements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Outstanding Equity Awards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Outstanding Equity Awards At 2015 Fiscal Year-End Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2015 Option Exercises and Stock Vested Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change of Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Termination Payments Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF MANAGEMENT AND CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . COMPANY STOCK PRICE PERFORMANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . EQUITY COMPENSATION PLAN INFORMATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PROPOSAL THREE—RATIFICATION OF THE APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 44 44 45 45 47 47 48 49 51 51 53 53 55 57 58 59 59 61 62 ii SUNPOWER CORPORATION 77 Rio Robles San Jose, California 95134 PROXY STATEMENT FOR 2016 ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS INFORMATION CONCERNING SOLICITATION AND VOTING General The Board of Directors (the “Board”) of SunPower Corporation, a Delaware corporation, is furnishing this proxy statement and proxy card to you in connection with its solicitation of proxies to be used at SunPower Corporation’s Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held on April 28, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. Pacific Time (the “Meeting Date”), or at any adjournment(s), continuation(s) or postponement(s) of the meeting (the “Annual Meeting”). This year’s Annual Meeting will be a virtual meeting of stockholders, conducted via a live webcast. You will be able to attend the Annual Meeting online, vote your shares electronically and submit your questions during the meeting by visiting www. virtualshareholdermeeting.com/SPWR2016. Have your Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials or proxy card in hand when you access the website and then follow the instructions. To participate in the meeting, you will need the 16-digit control number included on the Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials or proxy card. Online check-in will begin at 9:30 a.m. Pacific Time on the Meeting Date, and you should allow ample time for the online check-in procedures. We will have technicians ready to assist you should you have any technical difficulties accessing the virtual meeting. If you encounter any difficulties accessing the virtual meeting during the check-in or meeting time, please call 1-855-449-0991. We use a number of abbreviations in this proxy statement. We refer to SunPower Corporation as “SunPower,” “the Company,” or “we,” “us” or “our.” The term “proxy solicitation materials” includes this proxy statement, the notice of the Annual Meeting, and the proxy card. References to “fiscal 2015” mean our 2015 fiscal year, which began on December 29, 2014 and ended on January 3, 2016, while references to “fiscal 2014” mean our 2014 fiscal year, which began on December 30, 2013 and ended on December 28, 2014. Our principal executive offices are located at 77 Rio Robles, San Jose, California 95134, and our telephone number is (408) 240-5500. Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials We have elected to comply with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) “Notice and Access” rules, which allow us to make our proxy solicitation materials available to our stockholders over the Internet. Under these rules, on or about March 17, 2016, we started mailing to certain of our stockholders a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (the “Notice of Internet Availability”). The Notice of Internet Availability contains instructions on how our stockholders can both access the proxy solicitation materials and our 2015 Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 3, 2016 (the “2015 Annual Report”) online and vote online. By sending the Notice of Internet Availability instead of paper copies of the proxy materials, we expect to lower the costs and reduce the environmental impact of our Annual Meeting. Our proxy solicitation materials and our 2015 Annual Report are available at www.proxyvote.com. Stockholders receiving the Notice of Internet Availability may request a paper or electronic copy of our proxy solicitation materials by following the instructions set forth on the Notice of Internet Availability. Stockholders who did not receive the Notice of Internet Availability will continue to receive a paper or electronic copy of our proxy solicitation materials, which were first mailed to stockholders and made public on or about March 17, 2016. 1 Delivery of Voting Materials If you would like to further reduce our environmental impact and costs in mailing proxy materials, you can consent to receiving all future proxy statements, proxy cards and annual reports electronically via e-mail or the Internet. To sign up for electronic delivery, please follow the instructions provided for voting via www.proxyvote.com and, when prompted, indicate that you agree to receive or access proxy materials electronically in future years. To reduce the environmental waste and expense of delivering duplicate materials to our stockholders, we are taking advantage of householding rules that permit us to deliver only one set of proxy solicitation materials and our 2015 Annual Report, or one copy of the Notice of Internet Availability, to stockholders who share the same address, unless otherwise requested. Each stockholder retains a separate right to vote on all matters presented at the Annual Meeting. If you share an address with another stockholder and have received only one set of materials, you may write or call us to request a separate copy of these materials at no cost to you. For future annual meetings, you may request separate materials or request that we only send one set of materials to you if you are receiving multiple copies by writing to us at SunPower Corporation, 77 Rio Robles, San Jose, California 95134, Attention: Corporate Secretary, or calling us at (408) 240-5500. A copy of our 2015 Annual Report has been furnished with this proxy statement to each stockholder. A stockholder may also request a copy of our 2015 Annual Report by writing to our Corporate Secretary at 77 Rio Robles, San Jose, California 95134. Upon receipt of such request, we will provide a copy of our 2015 Annual Report without charge, including the financial statements required to be filed with the SEC pursuant to Rule 13a-1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) for our fiscal year 2015. Our 2015 Annual Report is also available on our website at http://investors.sunpower.com/sec.cfm. Record Date and Shares Outstanding Stockholders who owned shares of our common stock, par value $0.001 per share, at the close of business on February 29, 2016, which we refer to as the Record Date, are entitled to notice of, and to vote at, the Annual Meeting. On the Record Date, we had 136,780,515 shares of common stock outstanding. For more information about beneficial ownership of our issued and outstanding common stock, please see “Security Ownership of Management and Certain Beneficial Owners.” Board Recommendations Our Board recommends that you vote: “FOR” Proposal One: re-election of each of the nominated Class II directors; “FOR” Proposal Two: the approval, on an advisory basis, of the compensation of our named executive officers; and “FOR” Proposal Three: the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for fiscal year 2016; • • • Voting Each holder of shares of common stock is entitled to one vote for each share of common stock held as of the Record Date. Cumulating votes is not permitted under our By-laws. Many of our stockholders hold their shares through a stockbroker, bank or other nominee, rather than directly in his or her own name. As summarized below, there are distinctions between shares held of record and those beneficially owned. Stockholder of Record. If your shares are registered directly in your name with our transfer agent, Computershare Trust Company N.A., you are considered, with respect to those shares, the stockholder of record and these proxy solicitation materials are being furnished to you directly by us. Beneficial Owner. If your shares are held in a stock brokerage account, or by a bank or other nominee (also known as shares registered in “street name”), you are considered the beneficial owner of such shares held in street name, and these proxy solicitation materials are being furnished to you by your broker, bank or other nominee, who is considered, with respect to those shares, the stockholder of record. As the beneficial owner, you have the right to direct your broker, bank or other nominee how to vote your shares, or to vote your shares during the Annual Meeting. 2 How to Vote. If you hold shares directly as a stockholder of record, you can vote in one of the following four ways: (1) Vote via the Internet before the Meeting Date. Go to www.proxyvote.com to transmit your voting instructions and for electronic delivery of information up until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on April 27, 2016. Have your Notice of Internet Availability or proxy card in hand when you access the website and then follow the instructions. (2) Vote by Telephone at 1-800-690-6903 before the Meeting Date. Use a touch-tone telephone to transmit your voting instructions up until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on April 27, 2016. Have your Notice of Internet Availability or proxy card in hand when you call and then follow the instructions. This number is toll free in the United States and Canada. (3) Vote by Mail before the Meeting Date. Mark, sign and date your proxy card and return it in the postage- paid envelope we have provided, or return the proxy card to SunPower Corporation, c/o Broadridge, 51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, NY 11717. (4) Vote via the Internet during the Annual Meeting. You may attend the Annual Meeting on April 28, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. Pacific Time via the Internet at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/SPWR2016 and vote during the Annual Meeting. Have your Notice of Internet Availability or proxy card in hand when you access the website and then follow the instructions. If you hold shares beneficially in street name, you may submit your voting instructions in the manner prescribed by your broker, bank or other nominee by following the instructions provided by your broker, bank or other nominee, or you may vote your shares during the Annual Meeting. Even if you plan to attend the Annual Meeting, we recommend that you vote your shares in advance as described in options (1), (2), and (3) above so that your vote will be counted if you later decide not to attend the Annual Meeting. Quorum. A quorum, which is the holders of at least a majority of shares of our stock issued and outstanding and entitled to vote as of the Record Date, is required to be present in person or by proxy at the Annual Meeting in order to hold the Annual Meeting and to conduct business. Your shares will be counted as being present at the Annual Meeting if you attend the Annual Meeting (and are the stockholder of record for your shares), if you vote your shares by telephone or over the Internet, or if you submit a properly executed proxy card. Abstentions and “broker non-votes” are counted as present and entitled to vote for purposes of determining a quorum. Votes against a particular proposal will also be counted both to determine the presence or absence of a quorum and to determine whether the requisite number of voting shares has been obtained. Explanation of Broker Non-Votes and Abstentions. A “broker non-vote” occurs when a nominee holding shares for a beneficial owner does not vote on a particular proposal because the nominee does not have discretionary voting power with respect to that item and has not received instructions from the beneficial owner. The rules of The New York Stock Exchange (which also apply to companies listed on The NASDAQ Global Select Market) prohibit brokers from voting in their discretion on any non- routine proposals without instructions from the beneficial owners. If you do not instruct your broker how to vote on a non-routine proposal, your broker will not vote for you. Abstentions are deemed to be entitled to vote for purposes of determining whether stockholder approval of that matter has been obtained, and they would be included in the tabulation of voting results as votes against the proposal. Votes Required/Treatment of Broker Non-Votes and Abstentions. Proposal One—Re-election of Class II Directors. Election of a director requires the affirmative vote of the holders of a plurality of votes represented by the shares in attendance or represented by proxy at the Annual Meeting and entitled to vote on the election of directors. The three persons receiving the greatest number of votes at the Annual Meeting shall be elected as Class II directors. Neither “broker non-votes” nor abstentions will affect the outcome of the voting on Proposal One. Proposal Two—Advisory Vote on Named Executive Officer Compensation. The non-binding advisory vote on named executive officer compensation requires the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of our stock having voting power and in attendance or represented by proxy at the Annual Meeting. “Broker non-votes” have no effect and will not be counted towards the vote total for this proposal. Abstentions will have the effect of votes against Proposal Two. Proposal Three—Ratification of the Appointment of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for Fiscal Year 2016. Ratification of the appointment of our independent registered public accounting firm requires the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of our stock having voting power and in attendance or represented by proxy at the Annual Meeting. “Broker non-votes” have no effect and will not be counted towards this proposal. We do not expect “broker non-votes” since brokers have discretionary authority to vote on this proposal. Abstentions will have the effect of votes against Proposal Three. 3 How Your Proxy Will Be Voted If you complete and submit your proxy card or vote via the Internet or by telephone, the shares represented by your proxy will be voted at the Annual Meeting in accordance with your instructions. If you submit your proxy card by mail, but do not fill out the voting instructions on the proxy card, the shares represented by your proxy will be voted in favor of each of the three proposals. In addition, if any other matters properly come before the Annual Meeting, it is the intention of the persons named in the enclosed proxy card to vote the shares they represent as directed by the Board. We have not received notice of any other matters that may properly be presented at the Annual Meeting. Revoking Your Proxy You may revoke your proxy at any time before the Meeting Date by: (1) submitting a later-dated vote by telephone, by mail, or via the Internet before or at the Annual Meeting; or (2) delivering instructions to us at 77 Rio Robles, San Jose, California 95134 to the attention of our Corporate Secretary. Any notice of revocation sent to us must include the stockholder’s name and must be actually received by us before the Annual Meeting to be effective. Your attendance at the Annual Meeting after having executed and delivered a valid proxy card or vote via the Internet or by telephone will not in and of itself constitute a revocation of your proxy. If you are the stockholder of record or if your shares are held in “street name,” you may revoke your proxy by voting electronically at the Annual Meeting. Solicitation of Proxies We will pay for the cost of this proxy solicitation. We may reimburse brokerage firms and other persons representing beneficial owners of shares for their expenses in forwarding or furnishing proxy solicitation materials to such beneficial owners. Proxies may also be solicited personally or by telephone, telegram or facsimile by certain of our directors, officers, and regular employees, without additional compensation. Voting Results We will announce preliminary voting results at the Annual Meeting and publish final results on a Current Report on Form 8-K, which we intend to file with the SEC within four business days after the Meeting Date. Note Concerning Forward-Looking Statements Certain of the statements contained in this proxy statement are “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements are statements that do not represent historical facts and the assumptions underlying such statements. We use words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “continue,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “potential,” “should,” “will,” “would” and similar expressions to identify forward-looking statements. These statements include, but are not limited to, operating results, business strategies, management’s plans and objectives for future operations, expectations and intentions, actions to be taken by us and other statements that are not historical facts. These forward- looking statements are based on information available to us as of the date of this proxy statement and our current expectations, forecasts and assumptions and involve a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated by these forward-looking statements. Such risks and uncertainties include a variety of factors, some of which are beyond our control. All of the forward-looking statements are qualified in their entirety by reference to the factors discussed in Part I, Item 1A, “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in our 2015 Annual Report, which accompanies this proxy statement. There may be other factors of which we are not currently aware that may affect matters discussed in the forward-looking statements and may cause actual results to differ materially from those discussed. These forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as representing our views as of any subsequent date, and we are under no obligation to, and expressly disclaim any responsibility to, update our forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. WHETHER OR NOT YOU EXPECT TO ATTEND THE ANNUAL MEETING, YOU ARE REQUESTED TO COMPLETE, DATE AND SIGN THE PROXY CARD AND RETURN IT PROMPTLY, OR VOTE BY TELEPHONE OR VIA THE INTERNET BY FOLLOWING THE DIRECTIONS ON THE PROXY CARD. STOCKHOLDERS WHO ATTEND THE ANNUAL MEETING MAY REVOKE A PRIOR PROXY VOTE AND VOTE THEIR SHARES AS SET FORTH IN THIS PROXY STATEMENT. 4 PROPOSAL ONE RE-ELECTION OF CLASS II DIRECTORS Our Board is currently composed of nine directors and divided into three classes, in accordance with Article IV, Section B of our Certificate of Incorporation. Only the terms of the three directors serving as Class II directors are scheduled to expire in 2016. The terms of other directors expire in subsequent years. On April 28, 2011, we and Total Energies Nouvelles Activités USA, SAS, formerly known as Total Gas & Power USA, SAS (“Total”), a subsidiary of Total S.A. (“Total S.A.”), entered into a Tender Offer Agreement (the “Tender Offer Agreement”). Pursuant to the Tender Offer Agreement, on June 21, 2011, Total purchased in a cash tender offer approximately 60% of the outstanding shares of our former Class A common stock and 60% of the outstanding shares of our former Class B common stock (the “Tender Offer”). In connection with the Tender Offer, we and Total entered into an Affiliation Agreement that governs the relationship between Total and us following the close of the Tender Offer (the “Affiliation Agreement”). In accordance with the terms of the Affiliation Agreement, our Board has nine members, composed of our Chief Executive Officer, three non-Total- designated members of the Board, and five directors designated by Total. If the ownership of our voting power by Total, together with the controlled subsidiaries of Total S.A., declines below certain thresholds, the number of members of the Board that Total is entitled to designate will be reduced as set forth in the Affiliation Agreement. See “Certain Relationships and Related Persons Transactions—Agreements with Total Energies Nouvelles Activités USA, SAS and Total S.A.—Affiliation Agreement.” The Board has considered and approved the nomination of Bernard Clément, Denis Giorno, and Catherine Lesjak, our current Class II directors, for re-election as directors at the Annual Meeting. Messrs. Clement and Giorno are Total-designated directors. Ms. Lesjak is an independent director. Each nominee has consented to being named in this proxy statement and to serve if re-elected. Unless otherwise directed, the proxy holders will vote the proxies received by them for the three nominees named below. If any nominee is unable or declines to serve as a director at the time of the Annual Meeting, the proxies will be voted for any nominee who is designated by the present Board to fill the vacancy. We do not expect that any nominee will be unable or will decline to serve as a director. The Class II directors elected will hold office until the annual meeting of stockholders in 2019 or until their successors are elected. The Class I group of directors consists of Arnaud Chaperon, Daniel Lauré, and Pat Wood III, who will hold office until the annual meeting of stockholders in 2018 or until their successors are elected. Messrs. Chaperon and Lauré are Total-designated directors. Mr. Wood is an independent director. The Class III group of directors consists of Thomas McDaniel, Humbert de Wendel, and Thomas Werner, who will hold office until the annual meeting of stockholders in 2017 or until their successors are elected. Mr. de Wendel is a Total-designated director. Mr. Werner is our President, CEO and Chairman of the Board. Mr. McDaniel is an independent director. Additional information, as of March 17, 2015, about the Class II director nominees for re-election and the Class I and Class III directors is set forth below. Class II Directors Nominated for Re-Election at the Annual Meeting Name Bernard Clément Denis Giorno Catherine Lesjak Age 57 65 57 Position(s) with SunPower Director Director Director Director Since 2011 2011 2013 Mr. Bernard Clément has served as the Senior Vice President, Business & Operations, of the New Energies division of Total S.A. since July 1, 2012. Before that appointment, he was Senior Vice President of Gas Assets, Technology, and Research & Development for the Gas & Power division of Total S.A. since January 1, 2010. From 2003 through 2009, Mr. Clément served as Vice President of the Exploration & Production division of Total S.A. relative to its interests in the Middle East. Before that, he held other positions within the Total group, where he has been employed since 1983. Mr. Clément has engineering degrees from Ecole Nationale Supérieure du Pétrole et des Moteurs, where he focused on geophysics, and from École Polytechnique. Mr. Clément brings significant international operational and development experience to the Board. His extensive experience managing international energy projects and assets, as well as managing technology development, allows him to provide valuable insight into our strategic development and our ability to meet our manufacturing goals. It is based on the Board’s identification of these qualifications, skills and experience that the Board has concluded that Mr. Clément should serve as a director on our Board. 5 Mr. Denis Giorno has served as President and CEO of Total New Energies USA since January 2013. From November 2011 until January 2013, he also served as President and General Manager. From October 2007 until October 2011, he served as the Vice President of New Ventures for the Gas & Power division of Total S.A. From 2005 to 2007, Mr. Giorno was Vice President, Business Development, of the Gas & Power division relative to Total’s interests in Asia, South America, and Africa. Before that, he held other positions within the Total group, where he has been employed since 1975. Mr. Giorno received a degree in civil engineering from École Nationale des Ponts et Chaussées, a master of science degree in managerial science and engineering from Stanford University and a degree in petroleum engineering from École Nationale du Pétrole et des Moteurs. Mr. Giorno also completed the Stanford Graduate School of Business’ Executive Education program. Mr. Giorno’s extensive, worldwide business development and international negotiation experience covers a broad spectrum of traditional power projects and renewable energy projects, including experience throughout the value chain in the solar sector. This experience allows him to make significant contributions to our strategic outlook and international development perspectives. It is based on the Board’s identification of these qualifications, skills and experience that the Board has concluded that Mr. Giorno should serve as a director on our Board. Ms. Catherine A. Lesjak has served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of HP Inc. (formerly Hewlett- Packard Company) (HP) since January 1, 2007. Ms. Lesjak served as interim Chief Executive Officer of HP from August 2010 through October 2010. As a 29-year veteran at HP, Ms. Lesjak held a broad range of financial leadership roles across HP. Before being named as CFO, Ms. Lesjak served as Senior Vice President and Treasurer, responsible for managing HP’s worldwide cash, debt, foreign exchange, capital structure, risk management and benefits plan administration. Earlier in her career at HP, she managed financial operations for Enterprise Marketing and Solutions and the Software Global Business Unit. Before that, she was group controller for HP’s Software Solutions Organization and managed HP’s global channel credit risk as controller and credit manager for the Commercial Customer Organization. Ms. Lesjak has a bachelor’s degree in biology from Stanford University and a master of business degree in finance from the University of California, Berkeley. Ms. Lesjak’s extensive experience as the chief financial officer of a major corporation, with significant presence in both the business-to-consumer and business-to-business markets, allows her to make significant contributions to our strategic business planning and execution. Her background is also valuable in terms of financial oversight and review of our strategic investments. It is based on the Board’s identification of these qualifications, skills and experience that the Board has concluded that Ms. Lesjak should serve as a director on our Board. Class I Directors with Terms Expiring in 2018 Name Arnaud Chaperon Daniel Lauré Pat Wood III Age 60 59 53 Position(s) with SunPower Director Director Director Director Since 2011 2016 2005 Mr. Arnaud Chaperon currently serves as the Senior Vice President of Prospective Analysis, Institutional Relations and Communications for the New Energies division of Total S.A. Before taking this position with the New Energies division in 2007, Mr. Chaperon was the Managing Director for five years of Total E&P Qatar and country representative of the Total group, which has oil, gas and petrochemical assets and operations in the State of Qatar. Before that, he held other positions within the Total group, where he has been employed since 1980. Mr. Chaperon holds a master’s degree in engineering from École Nationale Supérieure de Techniques Avancées. Mr. Chaperon brings significant international strategic, operational and development experience to the Board. His experience developing renewable energy projects and investments throughout the value chain for the Total group, as well as managing traditional oil and gas operations, gives him a unique perspective on our strategic outlook and worldwide opportunities. It is based on the Board’s identification of these qualifications, skills and experience that the Board has concluded that Mr. Chaperon should serve as a director on our Board. Mr. Daniel Lauré currently serves as President and CEO of Total New Energies USA Inc. Before taking this position in March 2016, Mr. Lauré served as Senior Vice President Industrial Assets, Finance & Information Technology from 2012 through 2015. Before that, he held other positions within Total Gas & Power beginning in 2004, including Vice President, Strategy, Markets & IT, and Deputy Director, Renewable Energy, Strategy, Human Resources & Communication. Prior to those positions, Mr. Lauré held various other positions within the Total Group, where he has been employed since 1988. Mr. Lauré holds a degree in civil engineering from l’École Nationale des Ponts et Chaussées and a law degree from Université Panthéon Assas (Paris II). 6  Mr. Lauré brings significant international managerial and operational experience to the Board. His extensive experience in the energy industry gives him a valuable perspective on our efforts to manage our business and project development activities. It is based on the Board’s identification of these qualifications, skills and experience that the Board has concluded that Mr. Lauré should serve as a director on our Board. Mr. Pat Wood III has served as a Principal of Wood3 Resources, an energy infrastructure developer, since July 2005. He is active in the development of electric power and natural gas infrastructure assets in North America. From 2001 to 2005 Mr. Wood served as the Chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. From 1995 to 2001, he chaired the Public Utility Commission of Texas. Mr. Wood has also been an attorney with Baker & Botts, a global law firm, and an associate project engineer with Arco Indonesia, an oil and gas company, in Jakarta. He currently serves as Chairman of Dynegy, Inc., and is a director of Quanta Services, Inc. and of Memorial Resource Development Corp. He is a strategic advisor to Hunt Transmission Services/ InfraREIT Capital Partners. Mr. Wood is a past director of the American Council on Renewable Energy and is a member of the National Petroleum Council. Mr. Wood brings significant strategic and operational management experience to the Board. Mr. Wood has demonstrated strong leadership skills through a decade of regulatory leadership in the energy sector. Mr. Wood brings a unique perspective and extensive knowledge of energy project development, public policy development, governance and the regulatory process. His legal background also provides the Board with a perspective on the legal implications of matters affecting our business. It is based on the Board’s identification of these qualifications, skills and experience that the Board has concluded that Mr. Wood should serve as a director on our Board, Chairman of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and Chairman of the Compensation Committee. Class III Directors with Terms Expiring in 2017 Name Thomas R. McDaniel Humbert de Wendel Thomas H. Werner Age 67 59 56 Position(s) with SunPower Director Director President and CEO, Director and Chairman of the Board Director Since 2009 2011 2003 Mr. Thomas R. McDaniel was Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of Edison International, a generator and distributor of electric power and investor in infrastructure and energy assets, before retiring in July 2008 after 37 years of service. Before January 2005, Mr. McDaniel was Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President of Edison Mission Energy, a power generation business specializing in the development, acquisition, construction, management and operation of power production facilities. Mr. McDaniel was also Chief Executive Officer and a director of Edison Capital, a provider of capital and financial services supporting the growth of energy and infrastructure projects, products and services, both domestically and internationally. Mr. McDaniel has served on our Board since February 2009. He is Chairman of the Board of Tendril, a smart-grid, software-as-a-service company. Mr. McDaniel is a director of SemGroup, L.P., a midstream energy services company, and a Director of Aquion Energy, a manufacturer of energy storage systems. He is also on the advisory board of Cypress Envirosystems, which develops and markets energy efficiency products. Mr. McDaniel also serves on the Advisory Board of On Ramp Wireless, a communications company serving electrical, gas and water utilities. Mr. McDaniel formerly served on the board of directors of the Senior Care Action Network (SCAN) from 2000-2013. Through the McDaniel Family Foundation, he is also actively involved in a variety of charitable activities such as the Boys and Girls Club of Huntington Beach, Heifer International and the Free Wheelchair Mission. Mr. McDaniel brings significant operational and development experience to the Board. Mr. McDaniel’s extensive experience growing and operating global electric power businesses is directly aligned with our efforts to further develop the utility and power plant portions of our business. In addition, Mr. McDaniel’s prior experience as a Chief Financial Officer qualifies him as a financial expert, which is relevant to his duties as an audit committee member. It is based on the Board’s identification of these qualifications, skills and experience that the Board has concluded that Mr. McDaniel should serve as a director on our Board, Chairman of the Audit Committee and Chairman of the Finance Committee. Mr. Humbert de Wendel has served as the Total group Treasurer since the beginning of 2012. Previously, Mr. de Wendel served as the Senior Vice President of Corporate Business Development for Total from 2006 to 2011. From 2000 to 2006, Mr. de Wendel served as a Vice President for Total, overseeing finance operations of its exploration and production subsidiaries. Before 7 that, he held other positions within the Total group, where he has been employed since 1982. Mr. de Wendel holds a degree in law and economics from the Institut d’études Politiques de Paris, and a degree in business administration from École Supérieure des Sciences Économiques et Commerciales. Mr. de Wendel brings extensive international experience in finance and business development to the Board. This experience allows him to bring valuable perspective to our relationships with our key financial and industrial partners. It is based on the Board’s identification of these qualifications, skills and experience that the Board has concluded that Mr. de Wendel should serve as a director on our Board. Mr. Thomas H. Werner has served as our President and Chief Executive Officer since May 2010, as a member of our Board since June 2003, and Chairman of the Board since May 2011. From June 2003 to April 2010, Mr. Werner served as our Chief Executive Officer. Before joining SunPower, from 2001 to 2003, he held the position of Chief Executive Officer of Silicon Light Machines, Inc., an optical solutions subsidiary of Cypress Semiconductor Corporation. From 1998 to 2001, Mr. Werner was Vice President and General Manager of the Business Connectivity Group of 3Com Corp., a network solutions company. He has also held a number of executive management positions at Oak Industries, Inc. and General Electric Co. Mr. Werner currently serves as a board member of Cree, Inc., Silver Spring Networks, and the Silicon Valley Leadership Group. Mr. Werner is on the Board of Trustees of Marquette University. Mr. Werner holds a bachelor’s degree in industrial engineering from the University of Wisconsin Madison, a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering from Marquette University and a master’s degree in business administration from George Washington University. Mr. Werner brings significant leadership, technical, operational and financial management experience to the Board. Mr. Werner provides the Board with valuable insight into management’s perspective with respect to our operations. Mr. Werner has demonstrated strong executive leadership skills through nearly 20 years of executive officer service with various companies and brings the most comprehensive view of our operational history over the past several years. Mr. Werner also brings to the Board leadership experience through his service on the board of directors for two other organizations, which gives him the ability to compare the way in which management and the boards operate within the companies he serves. It is based on the Board’s identification of these qualifications, skills and experience that the Board has concluded that Mr. Werner should serve as a director on our Board and Chairman of the Board. Vote Required Election of a director requires the affirmative vote of the holders of a plurality of votes represented by the shares in attendance or represented by proxy at the Annual Meeting and entitled to vote on the election of directors. The three persons receiving the greatest number of votes at the Annual Meeting shall be elected as Class II directors. Neither “broker non-votes” nor abstentions will affect the outcome of the voting on this proposal. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” THE ELECTION TO THE BOARD OF EACH OF THE CLASS II DIRECTOR NOMINEES. 8 Determination of Independence BOARD STRUCTURE Our Board has determined that three of our nine directors, namely Messrs. McDaniel and Wood and Ms. Lesjak, each meet the standards for independence as defined by applicable listing standards of The NASDAQ Stock Market and rules and regulations of the SEC. Our Board has also determined that Mr. Werner, our President and Chief Executive Officer, and Messrs. Chaperon, Clement, Giorno, Lauré, and de Wendel, as directors designated by our controlling stockholder Total Energies Nouvelles Activités USA, SAS, formerly known as Total Gas & Power USA, SAS, pursuant to our Affiliation Agreement with Total, are not “independent” as defined by applicable listing standards of The NASDAQ Stock Market. There are no family relationships among any of our directors or executive officers. Leadership Structure and Risk Oversight The Board has determined that having a lead independent director assist Mr. Werner, the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer, is in the best interest of our stockholders. Mr. Wood has served as the lead independent director of the Board since June 2012. The Board believes this structure ensures a greater role for the independent directors in the oversight of our company and encourages active participation of the independent directors in setting agendas and establishing priorities and procedures for the work of the Board. We believe that this leadership structure also is preferred by a significant number of our stockholders. The Board is actively involved in oversight of risks that could affect our company. This oversight is conducted primarily through committees of the Board, in particular our Audit Committee, as disclosed in the descriptions of each of the committees below and in the respective charters of each committee. The full Board, however, has retained responsibility for general oversight of risks. The Board satisfies this responsibility through full reports by each committee chair regarding the committee’s considerations and actions, as well as through regular reports directly from our officers responsible for oversight of particular risks within our company. Board Meetings Our Board held four regular, quarterly meetings, one annual meeting and nine special meetings during fiscal 2015. During fiscal 2015, each director attended at least 75% of the aggregate number of meetings of the Board and its committees on which such director served during his or her term. Our independent directors held four executive sessions during regular, quarterly meetings without management present during fiscal 2015. Controlled Company, NASDAQ Listing Standards Since the Tender Offer in June 2011 (including as of March 17, 2015) Total has owned greater than 50% of our outstanding voting securities and we are therefore considered a “controlled company” within the meaning of The NASDAQ Stock Market rules. As long as we remain a “controlled company,” we are exempt from the rules that would otherwise require that our Board be composed of a majority of independent directors and that our Compensation Committee and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee be composed entirely of independent directors. This “controlled company” exception does not modify the independence requirements for the Audit Committee, and we comply with the requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and The NASDAQ Stock Market rules that require that our Audit Committee be composed exclusively of independent directors. 9 Board Committees We believe that good corporate governance is important to ensure that we are managed for the long-term benefit of our stockholders. Our Board has established committees to ensure that we maintain strong corporate governance standards. Our Board has standing Audit, Compensation, Finance and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees. The charters of our Audit, Compensation, Finance and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees are available on our website at http://investors.sunpower.com. You may also request copies of our committee charters free of charge by writing to SunPower Corporation, 77 Rio Robles, San Jose, California 95134, Attention: Corporate Secretary. Below is a summary of our committee structure and membership information. Audit Committee — — — Member — Chair — Member Compensation Committee — Member — — — Member Member Chair Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee — — Member — Member Member — Chair Finance Committee Member — — Member — Chair Member — Director Arnaud Chaperon Bernard Clément Denis Giorno Catherine Lesjak (I) Daniel Lauré Thomas R. McDaniel (I) Humbert de Wendel Pat Wood III (I)(*) (I) Indicates an independent director. (*) Indicates the lead independent director. Audit Committee Mr. McDaniel is the Chairman of the Audit Committee, appointed in June 2012. Our Audit Committee is a separately- designated standing committee established in accordance with Section 3(a)(58)(A) of the Exchange Act. The Board has determined that each member of our Audit Committee is “independent” as that term is defined in Section 10A of the Exchange Act and as defined by applicable listing standards of The NASDAQ Stock Market. Each member of the Audit Committee is financially literate and has the financial sophistication required by the applicable listing standards of The NASDAQ Stock Market. The Board has determined that each of Ms. Lesjak and Mr. McDaniel meet the criteria of an “audit committee financial expert” within the meaning of applicable SEC regulations due to their professional experience. Mr. McDaniel’s and Ms. Lesjak’s relevant professional experience is described above under “Proposal One—Re-election of Class II Directors.” The Audit Committee held nine meetings during fiscal 2015. The purpose of the Audit Committee, pursuant to its charter, is, among other things, to: • • • • • • provide oversight of our accounting and financial reporting processes and the audit of our financial statements and internal controls by our independent registered public accounting firm; assist the Board in the oversight of: (1) the integrity of our financial statements; (2) our compliance with legal and regulatory requirements; (3) the independent registered public accounting firm’s performance, qualifications and independence; and (4) the performance of our internal audit function; oversee management’s identification, evaluation and mitigation of major risks to our company; prepare an audit committee report as required by the SEC to be included in our annual proxy statement; provide to the Board such information and materials as it may deem necessary to make the Board aware of financial matters requiring the attention of the Board; consider questions of actual and potential conflicts of interest (including corporate opportunities) of Board members and corporate officers and review and approve proposed related party transactions that would be required to be disclosed under Item 404 of Regulation S-K, provided that any approval of related party transactions may be made only by the disinterested members of the Audit Committee; and • oversee any waiver of the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics for directors and executive officers; 10 The Audit Committee also serves as the representative of the Board with respect to its oversight of the matters described below in the “Audit Committee Report.” The Audit Committee has established procedures for (1) the receipt, retention and treatment of complaints received by us regarding accounting, internal accounting controls or auditing matters, and (2) the confidential, anonymous submission by our employees of concerns regarding accounting or auditing matters. The Audit Committee promptly reviews such complaints and concerns. Compensation Committee Mr. Wood is the Chairman of the Compensation Committee, appointed in November 2012. Two of the four members of the Compensation Committee, Messrs. McDaniel and Wood, are “independent” as defined by applicable listing standards of The NASDAQ Stock Market. Messrs. Clément and de Wendel were designated by Total to be on the Compensation Committee pursuant to our Affiliation Agreement with Total. The Compensation Committee held six meetings during fiscal 2015. The Compensation Committee, pursuant to its charter, assists the Board in discharging its duties with respect to: • • • • • the formulation, implementation, review and modification of the compensation of our directors and executive officers; the preparation of an annual report of the Compensation Committee for inclusion in our annual proxy statement or Annual Report on Form 10-K, in accordance with applicable rules of the SEC and applicable listing standards of The NASDAQ Stock Market; reviewing and discussing with management the Compensation Discussion and Analysis section of our annual proxy statement or Annual Report on Form 10-K; the establishment of a company compensation philosophy, which may be performance-based, to reward and retain employees based on achievement of goals; and the administration of our equity incentive plans, including the SunPower Corporation 2015 Omnibus Incentive Plan. We also have a Section 16/162(m) Subcommittee of the Compensation Committee consisting solely of independent directors available to approve certain compensation matters in accordance with Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code) and Rule 16b-3 of the Exchange Act, each as recommended by the Compensation Committee. In certain instances, the Compensation Committee has delegated limited authority to Mr. Werner, in his capacity as a Board member, with respect to compensation and equity awards for employees other than our executive officers. For more information on our processes and procedures for the consideration and determination of executive compensation, see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” below. Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation No member of our Compensation Committee was at any time during fiscal 2015 one of our officers or employees, or is one of our former officers or employees. No member of our Compensation Committee had any relationship requiring disclosure under Item 404 and Item 407(e)(4) of Regulation S-K. Additionally, during fiscal 2015, none of our executive officers or directors was a member of the board of directors, or any committee of the board of directors, or of any other entity such that the relationship would be construed to constitute a compensation committee interlock within the meaning of the rules and regulations of the SEC. Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee Mr. Wood is the Chairman of our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. Two of the four members of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, Messrs. McDaniel and Wood, are “independent” as defined by applicable listing standards of The NASDAQ Stock Market. Messrs. Lauré and Giorno were designated by Total to be on the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee pursuant to our Affiliation Agreement with Total. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee held four meetings during fiscal 2015. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, pursuant to its charter, assists the Board in discharging its responsibilities with respect to: • the identification of individuals qualified to become directors and the selection or recommendation of candidates for all directorships to be filled by the Board or by the stockholders; 11 • • the evaluation of whether an incumbent director should be nominated for re-election to the Board upon expiration of such director’s term, based upon factors established for new director candidates as well as the incumbent director’s qualifications, performance as a Board member, and such other factors as the Nominating and Governance Committee deems appropriate; and the development, maintenance and recommendation of a set of corporate governance principles applicable to us, and for periodically reviewing such principles. The Nominating and Governance Committee also considers diversity in identifying nominees for directors. In particular, the Nominating and Governance Committee believes that the members of the Board should reflect a diverse range of talent, skill and expertise sufficient to provide sound and prudent guidance with respect to our operations and interests. In addition, the Nominating and Governance Committee has determined that the Board as a whole must have the right diversity, mix of characteristics and skills for the optimal functioning of the Board in its oversight role. The Nominating and Governance Committee believes the Board should be composed of persons with skills in areas such as: • • • • • • • • • relevant industries, especially solar products and services; technology manufacturing; sales and marketing; leadership of large, complex organizations; finance and accounting; corporate governance and compliance; strategic planning; international business activities; and human capital and compensation. Under our Corporate Governance Principles, during the director nominee evaluation process, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and the Board take the following into account: • A significant number of directors on the Board should be independent directors, unless otherwise required by applicable law or The NASDAQ Stock Market rules; • Candidates should be capable of working in a collegial manner with persons of different educational, business and cultural backgrounds and should possess skills and expertise that complement the attributes of the existing directors; • Candidates should represent a diversity of viewpoints, backgrounds, experiences and other demographics; • Candidates should demonstrate notable or significant achievement and possess senior-level business, management or regulatory experience that would inure to our benefit; • Candidates shall be individuals of the highest character and integrity; • Candidates shall be free from any conflict of interest that would interfere with their ability to properly discharge their duties as a director or would violate any applicable law or regulation; • Candidates for the Audit and Compensation Committees should have the enhanced independence and financial literacy and expertise that may be required under law or The NASDAQ Stock Market rules; • Candidates shall be capable of devoting the necessary time to discharge their duties, taking into account memberships on other boards and other responsibilities; and • Candidates shall have the desire to represent the interests of all stockholders. 12 Finance Committee Mr. McDaniel is the Chairman of the Finance Committee. Two of the four members of the Finance Committee, Ms. Lesjak and Mr. McDaniel, are “independent” as defined by applicable listing standards of The NASDAQ Stock Market. Messrs. Chaperon and de Wendel were designated by Total to be on the Finance Committee pursuant to our Affiliation Agreement with Total. The Finance Committee held five meetings during fiscal 2015. The Finance Committee, pursuant to its charter, assists the Board in discharging its duties with respect to: • The review, evaluation and approval of financing transactions, including credit facilities, structured finance, issuance of debt and equity securities in private and public transactions, and the repurchase of debt and equity securities (other than financing activity exceeding $50 million which requires the review and approval of the Board); • The review of our annual operating plan for recommendation to the Board, and the monitoring of capital spend as compared with the annual operating plan; • The review and recommendation to the Board of investments, acquisitions, divestitures and other corporate transactions; and • General oversight of our treasury activities, and the review, at least annually, of our counterparty credit risk and insurance programs. 13 Stockholder Communications with Board of Directors CORPORATE GOVERNANCE We provide a process by which stockholders may send communications to our Board, any committee of the Board, our non-management directors or any particular director. Stockholders can contact our non-management directors by sending such communications to the Chairman of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, c/o Corporate Secretary, SunPower Corporation, 77 Rio Robles, San Jose, California 95134. Stockholders wishing to communicate with a particular Board member, a particular Board committee or the Board as a whole, may send a written communication to our Corporate Secretary, SunPower Corporation, 77 Rio Robles, San Jose, California 95134. The Corporate Secretary will forward such communication to the full Board, to the appropriate committee or to any individual director or directors to whom the communication is addressed, unless the communication is unduly hostile, threatening, illegal, or harassing, in which case the Corporate Secretary has the authority to discard the communication or take appropriate legal action regarding the communication. Directors’ Attendance at Our Annual Meetings Although we do not have a formal policy that mandates the attendance of our directors at our annual stockholder meetings, our directors are encouraged to attend. All of our nine directors are expected to attend the 2016 Annual Meeting, and eight of our nine directors attended our annual meeting of stockholders held on June 3, 2015 (the “2015 Annual Meeting”). Submission of Stockholder Proposals for the 2017 Annual Meeting As a SunPower stockholder, you may submit a proposal, including director nominations, for consideration at future annual meetings of stockholders. Stockholder Proposals. Only stockholders meeting certain criteria outlined in our By-laws are eligible to submit nominations for election to the Board or to propose other proper business for consideration by stockholders at an annual meeting. Under the By-laws, stockholders who wish to nominate persons for election to the Board or propose other proper business for consideration by stockholders at an annual meeting must give proper written notice to us not earlier than the 120th day and not later than the 90th day before the first anniversary of the preceding year’s annual meeting, provided that in the event that an annual meeting is called for a date that is not within 25 days before or after such anniversary date, notice by the stockholder in order to be timely must be received not later than the close of business on the 10th day following the day on which we mail or publicly announce our notice of the date of the annual meeting, whichever occurs first. Therefore, notices regarding nominations of persons for election to the Board and proposals of other proper business for consideration at the 2017 annual meeting of stockholders must be submitted to us no earlier than December 29, 2016 and no later than January 28, 2017. If the date of the 2017 annual meeting is moved more than 25 days before or after the anniversary date of the 2016 annual meeting, the deadline will instead be the close of business on the 10th day following notice of the date of the 2017 annual meeting of stockholders or public disclosure of such date, whichever occurs first. We have discretionary power, but are not obligated, to consider stockholder proposals submitted after January 28, 2017 for the 2017 annual meeting. Stockholder proposals will also need to comply with SEC regulations, such as Rule 14a-8 of the Exchange Act regarding the inclusion of stockholder proposals in any Company-sponsored proxy material. In order to be included in our proxy materials for the 2017 annual meeting of stockholders, pursuant to Rule 14a-8 of the Exchange Act the submission deadline for stockholder proposals is November 17, 2016. All written proposals must be received by our Corporate Secretary, at our corporate offices at 77 Rio Robles, San Jose, California 95134 by the close of business on the required deadline in order to be considered for inclusion in our proxy materials for the 2017 annual meeting of stockholders. Nomination of Director Candidates. Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will consider director candidates recommended by our stockholders. Such nominations should be directed to the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, c/o Corporate Secretary, SunPower Corporation, 77 Rio Robles, San Jose, California 95134. In addition, the stockholder must give notice of a nomination to our Corporate Secretary, and such notice must be received within the time period described above under “Stockholder Proposals.” Any such proposal must include the following: • • • the name, age, business address, residence address and record address of such nominee; the principal occupation or employment of such nominee; the class or series and number of shares of our stock owned beneficially or of record by such nominee; 14 • • any information relating to the nominee that would be required to be disclosed in our proxy statement; the nominee holder for, and number of, shares owned beneficially but not of record by such person; • whether and the extent to which any hedging or other transaction or series of transactions has been entered into by or on behalf of, or any other agreement, arrangement or understanding (including any derivative or short positions, profit interests, options or borrowed or loaned shares) has been made, the effect or intent of which is to mitigate loss to or manage risk or benefit of share price changes for, or to increase or decrease the voting power of, such person with respect to any share of our stock; • • • to the extent known by the stockholder giving the notice, the name and address of any other stockholder supporting the nominee for election or reelection as a director on the date of such stockholder’s notice; a description of all arrangements or understandings between or among such persons pursuant to which the nomination(s) are to be made by the stockholder and any relationship between or among the stockholder giving notice and any person acting in concert, directly or indirectly, with such stockholder and any person controlling, controlled by or under common control with such stockholder, on the one hand, and each proposed nominee, on the other hand; and a representation that the stockholder intends to appear in person or by proxy at the meeting to nominate the persons named in its notice. If a director nomination is made pursuant to the process set forth above, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will apply the same criteria in evaluating the nominee as it would any other board nominee candidate, and will recommend to the Board whether or not the stockholder nominee should be included as a candidate for election in our proxy statement. The nominee and nominating stockholder should be willing to provide any information reasonably requested by the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee in connection with its evaluation. The Board will make the final determination whether or not a nominee will be included in the proxy statement and on the proxy card for election. Once either a search firm selected by the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee or a stockholder has provided our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee with the identity of a prospective candidate, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee communicates the identity and known background and experience of the candidate to the Board. If warranted by a polling of the Board, members of our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and/or other members of our senior management may interview the candidate. If the Nominating and Governance Committee reacts favorably to a candidate, the candidate is next invited to interview with the members of the Board who are not on the Nominating and Governance Committee. The Nominating and Governance Committee then makes a final determination whether to recommend the candidate to the Board for directorship. The Nominating and Governance Committee currently has not set specific, minimum qualifications or criteria for nominees that it proposes for Board membership, but evaluates the entirety of each candidate’s credentials. The Nominating and Governance Committee believes, however, that we will be best served if our directors bring to the Board a variety of diverse experience and backgrounds and, among other things, demonstrated integrity, executive leadership and financial, marketing or business knowledge and experience. See “Board Structure—Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee” for factors considered by the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and the Board in considering director nominees. Corporate Governance Principles We believe that strong corporate governance practices are the foundation of a successful, well-run company. The Board has adopted Corporate Governance Principles that set forth our core corporate governance principles, including: • • • • • oversight responsibilities of the Board; election and responsibilities of the lead independent director; role of Board committees and assignment and rotation of members; review of the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics and consideration of related party transactions; independent directors meetings without management and with outside auditors; • Board’s access to employees; • annual review of Board member compensation; 15 • membership criteria and selection of the Board; • • • • • annual review of Board performance; director orientation and continuing education; stock ownership guidelines for certain of our executive officers and directors; annual review of performance and compensation of executive officers; and succession planning for key executive officers. Our Corporate Governance Principles are available on our website at http://investors.sunpower.com. Code of Business Conduct and Ethics; Related Persons Transactions Policy and Procedures It is our general policy to conduct our business activities and transactions with the highest level of integrity and ethical standards and in accordance with all applicable laws. In addition, it is our policy to avoid situations that create an actual or potential conflict between our interests and the personal interests of our officers and directors. Such principles are described in our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics. Our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics is applicable to our directors, officers, and employees (including our principal executive officer, principal financial officer and principal accounting officer) and is designed to promote compliance with the laws applicable to our business, accounting standards, and proper and ethical business methods and practices. Our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics is available on our website at http://investors.sunpower.com/corporate-governance.cfm under the link for “Code of Business Conduct and Ethics.” You may also request a copy by writing to us at SunPower Corporation, 77 Rio Robles, San Jose, California 95134, Attention: Corporate Secretary. If we amend our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics or grant a waiver applicable to our principal executive officer, principal financial officer or principal accounting officer, we will post a copy of such amendment or waiver on our website. Under our Corporate Governance Principles, the Audit Committee is responsible for reviewing and recommending changes to our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics. Pursuant to our Corporate Governance Principles and our Audit Committee Charter, our Audit Committee will consider questions of actual and potential conflicts of interest (including corporate opportunities) of directors and officers, and approve or prohibit such transactions. The Audit Committee will review and approve in advance all proposed related-party transactions that would be required to be disclosed under Item 404 of Regulation S-K, in compliance with the applicable NASDAQ Stock Market rules. A related-party transaction will only be approved if the Audit Committee determines that it is in our best interests. If a director is involved in the transaction, he or she will be recused from all voting and approval processes in connection with the transaction. Certain Relationships and Related Persons Transactions Other than the compensation agreements and other arrangements described herein, and the transactions described below, since the start of our last fiscal year on December 29, 2014, there has not been, nor is there currently proposed, any transaction or series of similar transactions to which we have been or will be a party: • • in which the amount involved exceeded or will exceed $120,000; and in which any director, director nominee, executive officer, beneficial owner of more than 5% of any class of our common stock, or any immediate family member of such persons had or will have a direct or indirect material interest. Agreements with Total Energies Nouvelles Activités USA, SAS and Total S.A. Tender Offer Agreement and Tender Offer Agreement Guaranty On April 28, 2011, we and Total entered into the Tender Offer Agreement, pursuant to which, on June 21, 2011, Total purchased approximately 60% of our then-outstanding shares of common stock for a total cost of approximately $1.4 billion. Tenesol Stock Purchase Agreement, Private Placement Agreement, and Master Agreement On December 23, 2011, we entered into a Stock Purchase Agreement with Total, under which we agreed to acquire 100% of the equity interests of Tenesol SA (“Tenesol”) from Total for $165.4 million in cash. The Tenesol acquisition was consummated on January 31, 2012. Tenesol is a European-based manufacturer and developer of solar projects with module manufacturing operations in France and South Africa. 16 Contemporaneously with the execution of the Tenesol Stock Purchase Agreement, we entered into a Private Placement Agreement with Total, under which Total agreed to purchase, and we agreed to issue and sell 18.6 million shares of our common stock for a purchase price of $8.80 per share. The sale was completed contemporaneously with the closing of the Tenesol acquisition on January 31, 2012, thereby increasing Total’s ownership to approximately 66% of our outstanding common stock as of such date. On December 23, 2011, we also entered into a Master Agreement with Total, under which we and Total agreed to a framework of transactions related to the Tenesol acquisition and Private Placement Agreement. Additionally, Total agreed to pursue several negotiations on additional agreements related to directly investing in our R&D program over a multi-year period, the purchase of our modules and the development of a multi-megawatt project using our products. We and Total amended the Master Agreement on December 20, 2012 to clarify that the development of the multi-megawatt project using our products meant development of up to 10 LCPV Tracker demonstration projects at a total cost to Total of not more than $2.5 million provided agreements for such projects were entered into before December 31, 2013. On July 22, 2014 we and Total agreed to extend the deadline for development of the LCPV Tracker demonstration projects from December 31, 2013 to December 31, 2015. Credit Support Agreement In connection with the Tender Offer, on April 28, 2011, we entered into a Credit Support Agreement with Total S.A. Pursuant to the Credit Support Agreement, subject to the terms and conditions described below, Total S.A., as “Guarantor” has agreed to enter into one or more guarantee agreements (each a “Guaranty”) with banks providing letter of credit facilities to us or our subsidiaries in support of our utility and power plant (“UPP”) and large commercial portion of the residential and commercial segment (“LComm”) businesses and certain other permitted purposes. Pursuant to such Guarantees, Guarantor would guarantee the payment to the applicable bank of our obligation to reimburse a draw on a letter of credit and pay interest thereon in accordance with the letter of credit facility between such bank and us. The Credit Support Agreement became effective on June 28, 2011 (the “CSA Effective Date”), and was amended on June 7, 2011, December 12, 2011 and December 14, 2012. Under the Credit Support Agreement, at any time from the CSA Effective Date until the fifth anniversary thereof, we may request that Guarantor provide a Guaranty with respect to a letter of credit facility. Guarantor is required to issue and enter into the Guaranty requested by us subject to certain terms and conditions, any of which may be waived by Total S.A. The aggregate letter of credit amount could not exceed $936 million for the period from January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015 and cannot exceed $1 billion for the period from January 1, 2016 through the termination of the Credit Support Agreement (the “Maximum L/C Amount”), subject to certain adjustments. Payments to be Paid by us to the Guarantor. In consideration for the commitments of Guarantor, we are required to pay Guarantor a guarantee fee, repay any payments made under any Guaranty plus interest, and pay certain expenses of Guarantor and interest on overdue amounts owed to Guarantor. The guarantee fee for each letter of credit that is the subject of a Guaranty and was outstanding for all or part of the preceding calendar quarter will be equal to: (w) the average daily amount of the undrawn amount of such letter of credit plus the amount drawn on such letter of credit that has not yet been reimbursed by us or Guarantor, (x) multiplied by 1.85% for letters of credit issued or extended from the third anniversary of the CSA Effective Date until the fourth anniversary of the CSA Effective Date and 2.35% for letters of credit issued or extended from the fourth anniversary of the CSA Effective Date until the fifth anniversary of the CSA Effective Date, (y) multiplied by the number of days that such letter of credit was outstanding, (z) divided by 365. We are required to reimburse payments made by Guarantor under any Guaranty within 30 days plus interest at a rate equal to LIBOR (as in effect as of the date of Guarantor’s payment) plus 3.00%. The expenses of Guarantor to be reimbursed by us include reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred after the CSA Effective Date in the performance of its services under the Credit Support Agreement and reasonable out-of-pocket attorneys’ fees and expenses incurred in connection with payments to a bank under a Guaranty or enforcement of any of our obligations. Overdue payment obligations accrue interest at a rate per annum equal to LIBOR as in effect at such time such payment was due plus 5.00%. Finally, we are solely responsible for any bank fees incurred in connection with securing any letter of credit facilities. In fiscal 2015, we incurred guaranty fees of approximately $11.2 million to Total S.A. Benchmark Credit Terms. Annually not later than every June 30, and also at any time we desire to obtain a letter of credit facility that would be the subject of a Guaranty, we are required to solicit benchmark credit terms for a letter of credit facility without a Guaranty from Guarantor and without collateral and report those benchmark terms to Guarantor. If (a) the annual fees payable by us on the issued amount of a letter of credit under a proposed letter of credit facility that is not guaranteed by Guarantor are equal to or less than 110% of the annual fees plus any applicable guarantee fee payable to Guarantor pursuant to a guaranteed letter of credit facility under the Credit Support Agreement, (b) the other fees payable under such non-guaranteed letter of credit facility are reasonable in light of the fees payable under a guaranteed letter of credit facility and the anticipated uses of such non-guaranteed letter of credit facility and (c) the other terms and conditions of such non-guaranteed letter of credit facility (including restrictive 17 covenants) are reasonable in light of the anticipated use of such non-guaranteed letter of credit facility, then (i) we will be required to enter into such non-guaranteed letter of credit facility as soon as commercially reasonable, (ii) we will be required to reduce the commitments under guaranteed letter of credit facilities in an amount equal to such non-guaranteed letter of credit facility and (iii) so long as such non-guaranteed letter of credit facility remains in effect, the Maximum L/C Amount during such period will be reduced by the maximum aggregate amount of the letters of credit that may be issued pursuant to such non-guaranteed letter of credit facility. Covenants of SunPower. Under the Credit Support Agreement, we have agreed to undertake certain actions, including, but not limited to, ensuring that our payment obligations to Guarantor rank at least equal in right of payment with all of our other present and future indebtedness, other than certain permitted secured indebtedness. We have agreed to refrain from taking certain actions as detailed in the Credit Support Agreement, including (1) amending any agreements related to any guaranteed letter of credit facility, (2) granting any lien to secure indebtedness unless (a) an identical lien is granted to Guarantor and (b) such other lien is at all times equal or subordinate to the priority of the lien granted to Guarantor under (a), and (3) making any equity distributions. Trigger Events. Under the Credit Support Agreement, following a Trigger Event (as defined in the agreement and described below), and during its continuation, Guarantor may elect not to enter into any additional Guarantees; declare all or any portion of the outstanding amounts owed by us to Guarantor to be due and payable; direct banks that have provided guaranteed letter of credit facilities to stop all issuances of any additional letters of credit under such facilities; access and inspect our relevant financial records and other documents upon reasonable notice to us; and exercise all other rights it may have under applicable law, provided that at its discretion Guarantor may also rescind such actions. Each of the following events constitutes a “Trigger Event”: • we default with respect to our reimbursement obligations to Guarantor described above or any other payment obligation under the Credit Support Agreement that is 30 days overdue for which Guarantor has demanded payment in writing; • any representation or warranty made by us in the Credit Support Agreement is false, incorrect, incomplete or misleading in any material respect when made and has not been cured within 15 days after notice thereof by Guarantor; • we fail, and continue to fail for 15 days, to observe or perform any material covenant, obligation, condition or agreement in the Credit Support Agreement; • we default in the observance or performance of any agreement, term or condition contained in a guaranteed letter of credit facility that would constitute an event of default or similar event thereunder (other than an obligation to pay any amount, the payment of which is guaranteed by Guarantor), up to or beyond any grace period provided in such facility, unless waived by the applicable bank and Guarantor; • we or any of our subsidiaries defaults in the observance or performance of any agreement, term or condition contained in any bond, debenture, note or other indebtedness such that the holders of such indebtedness may accelerate the payment of $25 million or more of such indebtedness; and • certain bankruptcy or insolvency events. Termination. The Credit Support Agreement is scheduled to terminate following the fifth anniversary of the CSA Effective Date, after the later of the payment in full of all obligations thereunder and the termination or expiration of each Guaranty provided thereunder. Affiliation Agreement In connection with the Tender Offer, we and Total entered into an affiliation agreement (the “Affiliation Agreement”). The Affiliation Agreement was amended on June 7, 2011, December 12, 2011, February 28, 2012 and August 10, 2012. The Affiliation Agreement governs the relationship following the closing of the Tender Offer between SunPower, on the one hand, and Total S.A., Total, any other affiliate of Total S.A. and any member of a group of persons formed for the purpose of acquiring, holding, voting, disposing of or beneficially owning our voting stock of which Total S.A. or any of its affiliates is a member (the “Total Group”), on the other hand. 18 Standstill. Following the closing of the Tender Offer and during the Standstill Period (as defined below), Total, Total S.A., and the Total Group may not: • • effect or seek, or announce any intention to effect or seek, any transaction that would result in the Total Group beneficially owning shares in excess of the Applicable Standstill Limit (as defined below), or take any action that would require us to make a public announcement regarding the foregoing; request that (i) we, (ii) our Board members that are independent directors and not appointed to the Board by Total (the “Disinterested Directors”), or (iii) our officers or employees, amend or waive any of the standstill restrictions applicable to the Total Group described above; or • enter into any discussions with any third party regarding any of the foregoing. In addition, no member of the Total Group may, among other things, solicit proxies relating to the election of directors to our Board without the prior approval of the Disinterested Directors. The Total Group is, however, permitted to either (i) make and consummate a Total Tender Offer or (ii) propose and effect a Total Merger so long as, in each case, Total complies with certain advance notice and prior negotiation obligations, including providing written notice to us at least 120 days before commencing or proposing such Total Tender Offer or Total Merger and making its designees reasonably available for the purpose of negotiation with the Disinterested Directors concerning such Total Tender Offer or Total Merger. The “Standstill Period” is the period beginning on the date of the Affiliation Agreement and ending on the earlier to occur of: • • a change of control of our company; the first time that the Total Group beneficially owns less than 15% of outstanding voting power of our company; • we or our Board take or fail to take certain of the actions described below under “—Events Requiring Stockholder Approval by Total” or fail to comply with certain of the covenants described below under “—Covenants of Total and SunPower” during the time when Total, together with the controlled subsidiaries of Total S.A., owns 50% or less of the outstanding voting power of our company or 40% or less of the outstanding voting power of our company when at least $100 million in Guarantees are outstanding under the Credit Support Agreement; • a tender offer for at least 50% of the outstanding voting power of our company is commenced by a third party after the time when Total, together with the controlled subsidiaries of Total S.A. owns 50% or less of the outstanding voting power of our company or 40% or less of the outstanding voting power of our company when at least $100 million in Guarantees are outstanding under the Credit Support Agreement; and • the termination of the Affiliation Agreement. The “Applicable Standstill Limit” is 70% of the lower of (i) the then outstanding shares of our common stock or (ii) the then outstanding voting power of our company. During the Standstill Period, the Total Group will not be in breach of its standstill obligations described above if any member of the Total Group holds beneficial ownership of shares of our common stock in excess of the Applicable Standstill Limit solely as a result of: • • • recapitalizations, repurchases or other actions taken by us or our controlled subsidiaries that have the effect of reducing the number of shares of our common stock then outstanding; the issuance of shares of our common stock to Total in connection with the acquisition of Tenesol SA; or the rights specified in any “poison pill” share purchase rights plan having separated from the shares of our common stock and a member of the Total Group having exercised such rights. Transfer of Control. If any member or members of the Total Group seek to transfer, in one or a series of transactions, either (i) 40% or more of the outstanding shares of our common stock or (ii) 40% or more of the outstanding voting power of our company to a single person or group, then such transfer must be conditioned on, and may not be effected, unless the transferee either: • makes a tender offer to acquire 100% of the voting power of our company, at the same price per share of voting stock and using the same form of consideration to be paid by the transferee to the Total Group; or 19 • proposes a merger providing for the acquisition of 100% of the voting power of our company, at the same price per share of voting stock and using the same form of consideration to be paid by the transferee to the Total Group. Total’s Rights to Maintain. The Total Group has the following rights to maintain its ownership in us until (i) the first time that the Total Group owns less than 40% of the outstanding voting power of our company, or (ii) until the first time that Total transfers shares of our common stock to a person other than Total S.A. or a controlled subsidiary of Total S.A. and as a result of such transfer Total S.A. and its subsidiaries own less than 50% of the outstanding voting power of our company. If we propose to issue new securities primarily for cash in a financing transaction, then Total has the right to purchase a portion of such new securities equal to its percentage ownership in us. Total can also elect to purchase our securities in open market transactions or through privately-negotiated transactions in an amount equal to its percentage ownership in connection with such issuance of new securities. If we propose to issue new securities in consideration for our purchase of a business or assets of a business, then Total has the right to purchase additional securities in the open market or through privately-negotiated transactions equal to its percentage ownership in us. Total has similar rights in the event that we issue or propose to issue (including pursuant to our equity plans or as the result of the conversion of our convertible securities) securities that, together with all other issuances of securities by us since the end of the preceding fiscal quarter aggregate to more than 1% of our fully diluted equity. Total has a nine- month grace period, subject to certain extensions to satisfy regulatory conditions, to acquire securities in the open market or through privately-negotiated transactions in connection with any of the securities issuances described above. SunPower Board. The Affiliation Agreement provides that Total is entitled to designate nominees to our Board, subject to the maintenance of certain ownership thresholds described below. See “Proposal One” above for more details on our current Board membership. So long as Total, together with the controlled subsidiaries of Total S.A., owns at least 10% of the outstanding voting power of our company, then our Board must use its reasonable best efforts to elect the directors designated by Total as follows: • • • • • until the first time that Total, together with the controlled subsidiaries of Total S.A., owns less than 50% of the voting power of our company, Total will be entitled to designate five nominees to serve on our Board; until the first time that Total, together with the controlled subsidiaries of Total S.A., owns less than 50% but not less than 40% of the voting power of our company, Total will be entitled to designate four nominees to serve on our Board; until the first time that Total, together with the controlled subsidiaries of Total S.A., owns less than 40% but not less than 30% of the voting power of our company, Total will be entitled to designate three nominees to serve on our Board; until the first time that Total, together with the controlled subsidiaries of Total S.A., owns less than 30% but not less than 20% of the voting power of our company, Total will be entitled to designate two nominees to serve on our Board; and until the first time that Total, together with the controlled subsidiaries of Total S.A., owns less than 20% but not less than 10% of the voting power of our company, Total will be entitled to designate one nominee to serve on our Board. For as long as they are serving on our Board, the directors designated by Total will be allocated across the three classes that comprise our Board in a manner as equal as practicable. Subject to the listing standards of The NASDAQ Stock Market, until the first time that Total, together with the controlled subsidiaries of Total S.A., owns less than 30% of the outstanding voting power of our company: • • • the Audit Committee will be composed of three Disinterested Directors; the Compensation Committee and the Nominating and Governance Committee will each be composed of two Disinterested Directors and two directors designated by Total; and any other standing committee will be composed of two Disinterested Directors and two directors designated by Total. Until the first time that Total, together with the controlled subsidiaries of Total S.A., own less than 10% of the outstanding voting power of our company, a representative of Total will, subject to certain exceptions, be permitted to attend all meetings of our Board or any committee thereof in a non-voting, observer capacity (other than any committee whose sole purpose is to consider a transaction for which there exists an actual conflict of interest between the Total Group, on the one hand, and us and any of our affiliates, on the other hand). 20 Events Requiring Specific Board Approval. At any time when Total, together with the controlled subsidiaries of Total S.A., owns at least 30% of the outstanding voting power of our company, neither the Total Group nor we (or any of our affiliates) may effect any of the following without first obtaining the approval of a majority of the Disinterested Directors: • • • • • • • • • • any amendment to our Certificate of Incorporation or By-laws; any transaction that, in the reasonable judgment of the Disinterested Directors, involves an actual conflict of interest between the Total Group, on the one hand, and us and any of our affiliates, on the other hand; the adoption of any shareholder rights plan or the amendment or failure to renew our existing shareholder rights plan; except as provided above, the commencement of any tender offer or exchange offer by the Total Group for shares of our common stock or securities convertible into shares of our common stock, or the approval of a merger of us or any company that we control with a member of the Total Group; any voluntary dissolution or liquidation of our company or any company that we control; any voluntary bankruptcy filing by us or any company that we control or the failure to oppose any other person’s bankruptcy filing or action to appoint a receiver of our company or any company that we control; any delegation of all or a portion of the authority of our Board to any committee thereof; any amendment, modification or waiver of any provision of the Affiliation Agreement; any modification of, or action with respect to, director’s and officer’s insurance coverage; or any reduction in the compensation of the Disinterested Directors. Events Requiring Supermajority Board Approval. At any time when Total, together with the controlled subsidiaries of Total S.A., owns at least 30% of the outstanding voting power of our company, neither Total nor we (nor any of Total’s or our affiliates, respectively) may, without first obtaining the approval of two-thirds of our directors (including at least one Disinterested Director), effect any approval or adoption of our annual operating plan or budget that has the effect of reducing the planned letter of credit utilization in any given year by more than 10% below the applicable maximum letter of credit amount in the Credit Support Agreement. Events Requiring Stockholder Approval by Total. Until the first time that Total, together with the controlled subsidiaries of Total S.A., owns 50% or less of the outstanding voting power of our company or 40% or less of the outstanding voting power of our company when at least $100 million in Guarantees are outstanding pursuant to the Credit Support Agreement and, thereafter, for so long as (1) any loans by Total S.A. to us remain outstanding, (2) any guarantees by Total S.A. of any of our indebtedness remain outstanding, or (3) any other continuing obligation of Total S.A. to or for the benefit of us remain outstanding (“Total Stockholder Approval Period”), neither we (including any of our controlled subsidiaries) nor our Board may effect any of the following without first obtaining the approval of Total: • • • • • any amendment to our Certificate of Incorporation or By-laws; any transaction pursuant to which we or any company that we control acquires or otherwise obtains the ownership or exclusive use of any business, property or assets of a third party if as of the date of the consummation of such transaction the aggregate net present value of the consideration paid or to be paid exceeds the lower of (i) 15% of our then-consolidated total assets or (ii) 15% of our market capitalization; any transaction pursuant to which a third party obtains ownership or exclusive use of any of our business, property or assets or those of any company that we control if as of the date of the consummation of such transaction the aggregate net present value of the consideration received or to be received exceeds the lower of (i) 10% of our then-consolidated total assets or (ii) 10% of our market capitalization; the adoption of any shareholder rights plan or certain changes to our existing shareholder rights plan; except for the incurrence of certain permitted indebtedness, the incurrence of additional indebtedness in excess of the difference, if any, of 3.5 times our LTM EBITDA (as defined in the Affiliation Agreement) less our Outstanding Gross Debt (as defined in the Affiliation Agreement); • subject to certain exceptions, any voluntary dissolution or liquidation of our company or any company that we control; 21 • • any voluntary bankruptcy filing by us or any company that we control or the failure to oppose any other person’s bankruptcy filing or action to appoint a receiver of our company or any company that we control; or any repurchase of our common stock. Certain Matters Related to SunPower’s Shareholder Rights Plan. Until the Total Group beneficially owns less than 15% of the outstanding voting power of our company, neither we nor our Board is permitted to adopt any shareholder rights plan or make certain changes to our existing shareholder rights plan without the approval of Total. Covenants of Total and SunPower. In order to effect the transactions contemplated by the Affiliation Agreement, each of Total and we have committed to taking certain actions. With respect to us, such actions include: • • • amending our By-laws to provide that the Total Group may call a special meeting of stockholders in certain circumstances; taking certain actions to exculpate Total S.A., Total, any controlled subsidiary of Total S.A. and those of our directors designated by Total from corporate opportunities, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law; taking certain actions to render Delaware’s business combination statute inapplicable to the Total Group and certain future transferees of the Total Group; • making certain amendments to our shareholder rights plan, including excluding the Total Group from the definition of “Acquiring Person” under such plan; • • renewing our existing shareholder rights plan so long as the Total Group beneficially owns at least 15% of our outstanding voting power; and providing Total with certain of our financial information from time to time. Termination. The Affiliation Agreement generally terminates upon the earlier to occur of (i) Total, together with the controlled subsidiaries of Total S.A., owning less than 10% of the outstanding voting power of our company or (ii) Total, together with the controlled subsidiaries of Total S.A., owning 100% of the outstanding voting power of our company. Affiliation Agreement Guaranty Total S.A. entered into a guaranty (the “Affiliation Agreement Guaranty”) in connection with the Tender Offer and entry into the Affiliation Agreement, pursuant to which Total S.A. unconditionally guarantees the full and prompt payment of Total S.A.’s, Total’s and each Total S.A. controlled company’s payment obligations under the Affiliation Agreement and the full and prompt performance of their respective representations, warranties, covenants, duties and agreements contained in the Affiliation Agreement. Research & Collaboration Agreement In connection with the Tender Offer, we and Total entered into a Research & Collaboration Agreement (the “R&D Agreement”) that establishes a framework under which the parties may engage in long-term research and development collaboration (the “R&D Collaboration”). The R&D Collaboration is expected to encompass a number of different projects (“R&D Projects”), with a focus on advancing technology in the area of photovoltaics. The primary purpose of the R&D Collaboration is to: (i) maintain and expand our technology position in the crystalline silicon domain; (ii) ensure our industrial competitiveness; and (iii) guarantee a sustainable position for both us and Total to be best-in-class industry players. The R&D Agreement contemplates a joint committee (the “R&D Strategic Committee”) that identifies, plans and manages the R&D Collaboration. Due to the impracticability of anticipating and establishing all of the legal and business terms that will be applicable to the R&D Collaboration or to each R&D Project, the R&D Agreement sets forth broad principles applicable to the parties’ potential R&D Collaboration, and the R&D Collaboration Committee establishes the particular terms governing each particular R&D Project consistent with the terms set forth in the R&D Agreement. In fiscal 2015, Total contributed $1.6 million to us under the R&D Agreement. Registration Rights Agreement In connection with the Tender Offer, we and Total entered into a customary registration rights agreement (the “Registration Rights Agreement”) related to Total’s ownership of shares of our common stock. The Registration Rights Agreement provides Total with shelf registration rights, subject to certain customary exceptions, and up to two demand registration rights in any 12-month 22 period, also subject to certain customary exceptions. Total also has certain rights to participate in any registrations of securities that we initiate. We will generally pay all costs and expenses we incur and that Total incurs in connection with any shelf or demand registration (other than selling expenses incurred by Total). We and Total have also agreed to certain indemnification rights under the agreement. The Registration Rights Agreement terminates on the first date on which: (i) the shares held by Total constitute less than 5% of our then-outstanding common stock; (ii) all of our securities held by Total may be immediately resold pursuant to Rule 144 promulgated under the Exchange Act during any 90-day period without any volume limitation or other restriction; or (iii) we cease to be subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act. The Registration Rights Agreement was amended on May 29, 2013, in connection with the issuance of our 0.75% Senior Convertible Debentures due 2018, to provide that convertible debentures and our common stock underlying such debentures are “registrable securities” within the meaning of the Registration Rights Agreement. Stockholder Rights Plan On April 28, 2011, before the execution of the Tender Offer Agreement, we entered into an amendment (the “Rights Agreement Amendment”) to the Rights Agreement, dated August 12, 2008, by and between us and Computershare Trust Company, N.A., as Rights Agent (the “Rights Agreement”), in order to, among other things, render the rights therein inapplicable to each of: (i) the approval, execution or delivery of the Tender Offer Agreement; (ii) the commencement or consummation of the Tender Offer; (iii) the consummation of the other transactions contemplated by the Tender Offer Agreement and the related agreements; and (iv) the public or other announcement of any of the foregoing. On June 14, 2011, we entered into a second amendment to the Rights Agreement (the “Second Rights Agreement Amendment”), in order to, among other things, exempt Total, Total S.A. and certain of their affiliates and certain members of a group of which they may become members from the definition of “Acquiring Person” thereunder, such that the rights issuable pursuant to the Rights Agreement will not become issuable in connection with the completion of the Tender Offer. By-laws Amendment On June 14, 2011, our Board approved amendments of our By-laws as required under the Affiliation Agreement. The amendments: (i) allow any member of the Total Group to call a meeting of stockholders for the sole purpose of considering and voting on a proposal to effect a Total Merger or a Transferee Merger (as defined in the Affiliation Agreement); (ii) provide that the number of directors of our Board shall be determined from time to time by resolution adopted by the affirmative vote of a majority of our entire Board at any regular or special meeting; and (iii) require, before the termination of the Affiliation Agreement, the approval of a majority of our independent directors to amend our By-laws so long as Total, together with the controlled subsidiaries of Total S.A., owns at least 30% of our voting securities as well as require, before the termination of the Affiliation Agreement, Total’s written consent during the Total Stockholder Approval Period to amend the By-laws. In addition, in November 2011, our By-laws were amended to remove restrictions prohibiting stockholder consents in writing. Upfront Warrant On February 28, 2012, in consideration for Total S.A.’s agreement to enter into a Liquidity Support Agreement and for Total S.A.’s commitments set forth in such agreement, we issued to Total a warrant (the “Upfront Warrant”) that is exercisable to purchase 9,531,677 shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $7.8685 per share, subject to adjustment for customary anti- dilution and other events. The Upfront Warrant is exercisable at any time for seven years after its issuance, provided that, so long as at least $25 million of our existing convertible debt remains outstanding, such exercise will not cause “any person,” including Total S.A., to, directly or indirectly, including through one or more wholly-owned subsidiaries, become the “beneficial owner” (as such terms are defined in Rule 13d-3 and Rule 13d-5 under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended), of more than 74.99% of the voting power of our common stock at such time, because “any person” becoming such “beneficial owner” would trigger the repurchase or conversion of our existing convertible debt. The Tender Offer Agreement, Tender Offer Agreement Guaranty, Credit Support Agreement, Affiliation Agreement, Affiliation Agreement Guaranty, Research and Collaboration Agreement, Registration Rights Agreement, Rights Agreement Amendment, Second Rights Agreement Amendment and By-Law amendments, and amendments thereto, as described above are attached to, and more fully described in, our Form 8-Ks as filed with the SEC on May 2, 2011, June 7, 2011, June 15, 2011 and December 23, 2011, our Solicitation/Recommendation Statement on Form 14D-9 filed with the SEC on May 3, 2011, and our Form 10-Q as filed with the SEC on November 2, 2012. The Tenesol Stock Purchase Agreement, the Private Placement Agreement and the Master Agreement are attached to, and more fully described in, our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on December 23, 2011 and Information Statement on Schedule 14C filed with the SEC on January 3, 2012. 23 Sale of 0.75% Debentures Due 2018 In May 2013, we issued $300 million in aggregate principal amount of our 0.75% Senior Convertible Debentures due 2018 (the “2018 Debentures”) in a private offering. $200 million in aggregate principal amount of the 2018 Debentures were sold to Total by the initial purchasers of the 2018 Debentures. The 2018 Debentures are convertible into shares of our common stock at any time based on an initial conversion rate of 40.0871 shares of common stock per $1,000 principal amount of 2018 Debentures (which is equivalent to an initial conversion price of approximately $24.95 per share of our common stock), subject to adjustment under certain circumstances. The holders of the 2018 Debentures may require us to repurchase their 2018 Debentures under certain circumstances. The 2018 Debentures are subject to redemption at our option under certain circumstances. Sale of 0.875% Debentures Due 2021 In June 2014, we issued $400 million in aggregate principal amount of our 0.875% Senior Convertible Debentures due 2021 (the “2021 Debentures”) in a private offering. $250 million in aggregate principal amount of the 2021 Debentures were sold to Total by the initial purchasers of the 2021 Debentures. The 2021 Debentures are convertible into shares of our common stock at any time based on an initial conversion rate of 20.5071 shares of common stock per $1,000 principal amount of 2021 Debentures (which is equivalent to an initial conversion price of approximately $48.76 per share of our common stock), subject to adjustment under certain circumstances. The holders of the 2021 Debentures may require us to repurchase their 2021 Debentures under certain circumstances. The 2021 Debentures are subject to redemption at our option under certain circumstances. Sale of 4.00% Debentures Due 2023 In December 2015, we issued $425 million in aggregate principal amount of our 4.00% Senior Convertible Debentures due 2023 (the “2023 Debentures”) in a private offering. $100 million in aggregate principal amount of the 2023 Debentures were sold to Total by the initial purchasers of the 2023 Debentures. The 2023 Debentures are convertible into shares of our common stock at any time based on an initial conversion rate of 32.7568 shares of common stock per $1,000 principal amount of 2023 Debentures (which is equivalent to an initial conversion price of approximately $30.53 per share of our common stock), subject to adjustment under certain circumstances. The holders of the 2023 Debentures may require us to repurchase their 2023 Debentures under certain circumstances. The 2023 Debentures are subject to redemption at our option under certain circumstances. Project Co-Development Agreements In the ordinary course of our business, from time to time we enter into agreements with Total or its affiliates in connection with certain of our international project co-development initiatives, including master services agreements. In fiscal 2015, Total incurred $0.5 million in fees payable to us and we incurred $0.7 million in fees payable to Total under these agreements. EPC, O&M Services and Components Agreements In the ordinary course of our business, from time to time we enter into various engineering, procurement and construction (“EPC”) services, operations and maintenance services (“O&M services”) and component sales agreements relating to solar projects, including EPC services, O&M services and component sales agreements relating to projects owned or partially owned by Total or its affiliates. In fiscal 2015, we received an aggregate of approximately $56.8 million from Total and its affiliates under EPC services, O&M services and component sales agreements in respect of projects in which Total has a direct or indirect material interest. 24 The Audit Committee of our Board of Directors serves as the representative of the Board of Directors with respect to its AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT oversight of: • • • • • • our accounting and financial reporting processes and the audit of our financial statements; the integrity of our financial statements; our internal controls; our compliance with legal and regulatory requirements and efficacy of and compliance with our corporate policies; the independent registered public accounting firm’s appointment, qualifications and independence; and the performance of our internal audit function. The Audit Committee also reviews the performance of our independent registered public accounting firm, Ernst & Young LLP, in the annual audit of financial statements and in assignments unrelated to the audit, and reviews the independent registered public accounting firm’s fees. The Audit Committee provides the Board such information and materials as it may deem necessary to make the Board aware of financial matters requiring the attention of the Board. The Audit Committee reviews our financial disclosures, and meets privately, outside the presence of our management, with our independent registered public accounting firm. In fulfilling its oversight responsibilities, the Audit Committee reviewed and discussed the audited financial statements in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for our fiscal year ended January 3, 2016 with management, including a discussion of the quality and substance of the accounting principles, the reasonableness of significant judgments made in connection with the audited financial statements, and the clarity of disclosures in the financial statements. The Audit Committee reports on these meetings to our Board of Directors. Our management has primary responsibility for preparing our financial statements and for our financial reporting process. In addition, our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Our independent registered public accounting firm, Ernst & Young LLP, is responsible for expressing an opinion on the conformity of our financial statements to generally accepted accounting principles, and on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. The Audit Committee reports as follows: (1) The Audit Committee has reviewed and discussed the audited financial statements for fiscal year 2015 with our management. (2) The Audit Committee has discussed with Ernst & Young LLP, our independent registered public accounting firm, the matters required to be discussed by Auditing Standard No. 16, “Communications with Audit Committees” issued by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. (3) The Audit Committee has received the written disclosures and the letter from Ernst & Young LLP required by the applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding the independent accountant’s communications with the Audit Committee regarding independence, and has discussed with Ernst & Young LLP its independence, including whether Ernst & Young LLP’s provision of non-audit services to us is compatible with its independence. The Audit Committee has adopted a policy that requires advance approval of all audit, audit-related, tax services, and other services performed by the independent registered public accounting firm. The policy provides for pre-approval by the Audit Committee (or its Chair pursuant to delegated authority) of specifically defined audit and non-audit services. Unless the specific service has been previously pre-approved with respect to that fiscal year, the Audit Committee (or its Chair pursuant to delegated authority) must approve the specific service before the independent registered public accounting firm is engaged to perform such services for us. 25 Based on the review and discussion referred to in items (1) through (3) above, the Audit Committee recommended to our Board of Directors, and the Board approved, the inclusion of our audited financial statements in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 3, 2016, as filed with the SEC. The foregoing report was submitted by the Audit Committee of the Board and shall not be deemed to be “soliciting material” or to be “filed” with the SEC or subject to Regulation 14A promulgated by the SEC or Section 18 of the Exchange Act, and shall not be deemed incorporated by reference into any prior or subsequent filing by us under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act. AUDIT COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS Thomas R. McDaniel, Chair Catherine A. Lesjak Pat Wood III February 18, 2015 26 The following table sets forth a summary of the compensation we paid to our non-employee directors for fiscal 2015. The table does not include Mr. Werner, who did not receive separate compensation for his service on the Board. DIRECTOR COMPENSATION Name Arnaud Chaperon Bernard Clément Denis Giorno Catherine Lesjak Jean-Marc Otero del Val(4) Thomas R. McDaniel Humbert de Wendel Pat Wood III(3) 2015 Director Compensation Table Fees Earned or Paid in Cash ($)(1) Stock Awards ($)(2)(3) — — — 100,030 — 100,030 — 125,030 — — — 300,000 — 300,000 — 300,000 Total ($) — — — 400,030 — 400,030 — 425,030 (1) The amounts reported in this column represent the aggregate cash retainers and payments for fractional shares received by the non-employee directors for fiscal 2015, but do not include amounts reimbursed to the non-employee directors for expenses incurred in connection with attending Board and committee meetings. (2) The amounts reported in this column represent the aggregate grant date fair value computed in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (or FASB) ASC Topic 718 for restricted stock units granted to our non-employee directors in fiscal 2015, as further described below. Each non-employee director received the following grants of restricted stock units on the following dates with the following grant date fair values (please note that some amounts reported may not add up exactly due to rounding on an award-by-award basis): Non-Employee Director Catherine Lesjak Thomas R. McDaniel Pat Wood III Grant Date 02/11/2015 05/11/2015 08/11/2015 11/11/2015 02/11/2015 05/11/2015 08/11/2015 11/11/2015 02/11/2015 05/11/2015 08/11/2015 11/11/2015 Restricted Stock Units (#) 2,735 2,281 3,009 2,928 Grant Date Fair Value ($) $74,994 $74,977 $75,014 $75,015 2,735 2,281 3,009 2,928 2,735 2,281 3,009 2,928 $74,994 $74,977 $75,014 $75,015 $74,994 $74,977 $75,014 $75,015 (3) As of January 3, 2016, the following non-employee directors held options for the following number of shares: Mr. Wood held options for 12,000 shares. No other non-employee directors held stock awards or stock options as of January 3, 2016. (4) Mr. Otero del Val resigned from the Board on March 8, 2016. 2015 Director Compensation Program Our outside director compensation policy provides for the compensation set forth below for our non-employee directors, other than the Total-nominated directors: • • • an annual fee of $400,000 ($100,000 quarterly) for our non-employee directors (other than the Chairman of the Board) for service on our Board and on Board committees; if our Chairman is an independent director, an annual fee of $450,000 ($112,500 quarterly) to our Chairman of the Board for service on our Board and on Board committees; and an additional annual fee of $25,000 ($6,250 quarterly) to the lead independent director. 27 Our policy provides that these annual fees are prorated on a quarterly basis for any director that joins the Board during the year. The $25,000 additional fee payable to the lead independent director is paid in cash. Any fees payable to the Chairman of the Board are paid in the form of restricted stock units. The other fees are paid on a quarterly basis, 25% in cash on or about the date of the quarterly Board meeting and 75% in the form of fully-vested restricted stock units on the 11th day in the second month of each quarter (or on the next trading day if such day is not a trading day). Any fractional shares resulting from this calculation are rounded up to a full share. The restricted stock units are settled in shares of our common stock within seven days of the date of grant. Because Mr. Werner is our President and Chief Executive Officer, he is not separately compensated for his service as Chairman of the Board. Similarly, because each of our Total-nominated directors do not qualify as independent directors under our director compensation policy, such individuals receive no director compensation. Stock Ownership Guidelines In 2015, we adopted stock ownership guidelines for our Chief Executive Officer, certain executive officers, and non- employee directors. Under the guidelines and subject to certain exceptions, non-employee directors are expected to own shares of our common stock that have a value equal to five times the annual cash retainer they receive for serving on our Board, with ownership measured at the end of each calendar year. Shares may be owned directly by the individual, owned by the individual’s spouse, or held in trust for the benefit of the individual’s family. Each non-employee director is expected to maintain ownership at or above the threshold applicable to them beginning the later of December 31, 2020 or five years after first becoming subject to the guidelines. With the exception of Ms. Lesjak, each non-employee director exceeded the ownership threshold as of December 31, 2015. 28 PROPOSAL TWO ADVISORY VOTE TO APPROVE NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICER COMPENSATION As required under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, or the Dodd-Frank Act, and Section 14A of the Exchange Act, we are asking our stockholders to again vote to approve, on an advisory (non-binding) basis, the compensation of our named executive officers as disclosed in this proxy statement in accordance with the SEC’s rules. As described in detail under the headings “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” and “Executive Compensation,” we have adopted an executive compensation philosophy designed to deliver competitive total compensation to our executive officers upon the achievement of financial and strategic performance objectives. In order to implement that philosophy, the Compensation Committee has established a disciplined process for adopting executive compensation programs and individual executive officer pay actions that includes the analysis of competitive market data, a review of each executive officer’s role, performance assessments and consultation with the Compensation Committee’s independent compensation consultant. Please read the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” beginning on page 33 and “Executive Compensation” beginning on page 44 for additional details about our executive compensation programs, including information about the fiscal 2015 compensation of our named executive officers. 2015 Compensation Features. Our compensation programs are intended to align our executive officers’ interests with those of our stockholders by rewarding performance that meets or exceeds the goals that the Compensation Committee establishes with the objective of increasing stockholder value. The Compensation Committee annually reviews the compensation programs for our named executive officers to ensure they achieve the desired goals of aligning our executive compensation structure with our stockholders’ interests and current market practices. Among the program features incorporated by the Compensation Committee in fiscal 2015 to implement the executive compensation philosophy stated above are the following: • Revenue, profitability, and free cash flow metrics and corresponding performance targets, along with corporate milestone performance targets and individual modifiers assigned based on individual performance determined the actual payouts under our performance-based cash bonus programs (specifically, the 2015 Annual Bonus Program and the Semi-Annual Executive Incentive Bonus Plan) for our named executive officers. • Long-term incentives in the form of time- and performance-based restricted stock units comprised a large portion of each named executive officer’s compensation and are linked to the long-term performance of our stock. Restricted stock units generally vest over three years, and performance-based restricted stock units are earned only after the achievement of corporate performance targets and also vest over a three-year period. • Earning performance-based restricted stock units depends on the achievement of performance targets corresponding to our revenue, profitability and free cash flow metrics. • Individual performance was also measured each half of the fiscal year based on each named executive officer’s achievement of his or her personal Key Initiatives, which support our corporate, strategic and operational milestones, as well as other individual performance factors, as evaluated by our Chief Executive Officer (or, in the case of our Chief Executive Officer, by the Board) in connection with the assignment of an individual modifier to each named executive officer. • Our change of control severance agreements do not entitle our named executive officers to payment without termination of employment following a change of control (a “double trigger”). Our financial and operational performance was the key factor in the compensation decisions and outcomes for fiscal 2015, as further described in “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” and “Executive Compensation.” One of the core tenets of our executive compensation philosophy is our emphasis on performance pay. As highlighted in the Compensation Components chart in “Compensation Discussion and Analysis,” in fiscal 2015, a large portion of our named executive officers’ target compensation (79% for our Chief Executive Officer and averaging 77% for our other named executive officers) consisted of annual and semi-annual incentive bonus programs and long-term equity incentives. The Compensation Committee believes that our executive compensation programs, executive officer pay levels and individual pay actions approved for our executive officers, including our named executive officers, are directly aligned with our executive compensation philosophy and fully support its goals. Performance with respect to our revenue, profitability and free cash flow metric targets exceeded target performance levels in fiscal 2015, which resulted in performance-based restricted stock awards being earned at approximately 118% of the target level. Our corporate performance in fiscal 2015 also resulted in aggregate cash bonus awards under our performance-based cash bonus programs above the target level. We are asking our stockholders to 29 indicate their support for our named executive officer compensation as described in this proxy statement. This proposal, commonly known as a “say-on-pay” proposal, gives our stockholders the opportunity to express their views on our named executive officers’ compensation. This vote is not intended to address any specific compensation item, but rather the overall compensation of our named executive officers and the philosophy, policies and practices described in this proxy statement. Accordingly, the Board recommends that our stockholders vote “FOR” the following resolution at the Annual Meeting: “RESOLVED, that, on an advisory basis, the compensation of SunPower’s named executive officers, as disclosed pursuant to Item 402 of Regulation S-K, including the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, compensation tables and related narratives and descriptions in SunPower’s proxy statement for the Annual Meeting, is hereby APPROVED.” Vote Required The non-binding advisory vote on named executive officer compensation requires the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of our stock having voting power and in attendance or represented by proxy at the Annual Meeting. “Broker non-votes” have no effect and will not be counted towards the vote total for this proposal. Abstentions will have the effect of votes against this proposal. Although the say-on-pay vote is advisory, and therefore not binding on us, the Compensation Committee or our Board, our Board and our Compensation Committee value the opinions of our stockholders. To the extent there is any significant vote against our named executive officers’ compensation as disclosed in this proxy statement, we expect to consider our stockholders’ concerns and the Compensation Committee expects to evaluate whether any actions are necessary to address those concerns. Next Advisory Vote on Named Executive Officers’ Compensation In a non-binding advisory vote at our 2011 Annual Meeting, our stockholders recommended that a non-binding advisory vote to approve the compensation of SunPower’s named executive officers be presented to stockholders for their consideration every year. In light of the result of this vote, our Board determined to implement a non-binding advisory stockholder vote on named executive officers’ compensation once every year. Therefore, the next non-binding advisory stockholder vote on named executive officers’ compensation is expected to occur at the 2017 annual stockholders meeting. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” THE APPROVAL OF THE COMPENSATION OF OUR NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS, AS DISCLOSED IN THIS PROXY STATEMENT PURSUANT TO THE COMPENSATION DISCLOSURE RULES OF THE SEC ON A NON-BINDING, ADVISORY BASIS. 30 Certain information, as of March 17, 2016, regarding each of our executive officers is set forth below. EXECUTIVE OFFICERS Name Thomas H. Werner Charles D. Boynton Howard J. Wenger Marty T. Neese Lisa Bodensteiner Douglas J. Richards Eric Branderiz Age 56 48 56 53 54 57 51 Position President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer President, Business Units Chief Operating Officer Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary Executive Vice President, Administration Senior Vice President, Corporate Controller and Chief Accounting Officer Mr. Thomas H. Werner has served as our President and Chief Executive Officer since May 2010, a member of our Board since June 2003, and Chairman of the Board of Directors since May 2011. From June 2003 to April 2010, Mr. Werner served as our Chief Executive Officer. Before joining SunPower, from 2001 to 2003, he held the position of Chief Executive Officer of Silicon Light Machines, Inc., an optical solutions subsidiary of Cypress Semiconductor Corporation. From 1998 to 2001, Mr. Werner was Vice President and General Manager of the Business Connectivity Group of 3Com Corp., a network solutions company. He has also held a number of executive management positions at Oak Industries, Inc. and General Electric Co., and currently serves as a board member of Cree, Inc., Silver Spring Networks, and the Silicon Valley Leadership Group. Mr. Werner is on the Board of Trustees of Marquette University. Mr. Werner holds a bachelor’s degree in industrial engineering from the University of Wisconsin–Madison, a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering from Marquette University, and a master’s degree in business administration from George Washington University. Mr. Charles D. Boynton has served as our Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer since March 2012. In March 2012, Mr. Boynton also served as our Acting Financial Officer. From June 2010 to March 2012, he served as our Vice President, Finance and Corporate Development, where he drove strategic investments, joint ventures, mergers and acquisitions, field finance and finance, planning and analysis. Before joining SunPower in June 2010, Mr. Boynton was the Chief Financial Officer for ServiceSource, LLC from April 2008 to June 2010. From March 2004 to April 2008 he served as the Chief Financial Officer at Intelliden. Earlier in his career, Mr. Boynton held key financial positions at Commerce One, Inc., Kraft Foods, Inc. and Grant Thornton, LLP. He is a member of the board of trustees of the San Jose Technology Museum of Innovation and has served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of 8Point3 Energy Partners LP since June 2015. Mr. Boynton was a certified public accountant, State of Illinois, and a Member FEI, Silicon Valley Chapter. Mr. Boynton earned his master’s degree in business administration at Northwestern University and his Bachelor of Science degree in business from Indiana University. Mr. Howard J. Wenger has served as our President, Business Units since October 2014. From November 2011 to October 2014, Mr. Wenger served as President, Regions. From January 2010 to October 2011, Mr. Wenger served as President, Utilities and Power Plants. From August 2008 to January 2010, Mr. Wenger served as President, Global Business Units, and led all of our business units since January 2007 as an executive officer of the Company. From 2003 to 2007, Mr. Wenger served as Executive Vice President and a member of the board of directors of PowerLight Corporation, a solar system integration company that we acquired in January 2007 and subsequently renamed SunPower Corporation, Systems with Mr. Wenger serving as President. From 2000 to 2003, Mr. Wenger was Vice President, North American Business of AstroPower Inc., a solar power manufacturer and system provider acquired by General Electric, and from 1998 to 2000 he was the Director, Grid-Connected Business. From 1993 to 1998, Mr. Wenger co-founded and managed Pacific Energy Group, a solar power consulting firm and, from 1989 to 1993, Mr. Wenger worked for the Pacific Gas & Electric Company, a utility company in northern California, in both research and strategic planning of solar and distributed generation assets. Mr. Wenger holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in environmental studies from the University of California, Santa Barbara, and a Master of Science degree in engineering from the University of Colorado, Boulder. Mr. Marty T. Neese has served as our Chief Operating Officer since June 2008. From October 2007 to June 2008, Mr. Neese served as Executive Vice President, Worldwide Operations of Flextronics International Ltd., a manufacturing services company. From September 2004 to October 2007, Mr. Neese served in a variety of senior management positions at Solectron Corporation, a manufacturing services company, most recently as its Executive Vice President, Worldwide Operations. Mr. Neese also served in the U.S. Army for five years, reaching the rank of Captain. He is a graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point. He received his master’s degree in business administration from the University of Florida. 31  Ms. Lisa Bodensteiner has served as our Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary since June 2012. From October 2009 to June 2012, Ms. Bodensteiner served in roles with increasing responsibility, and most recently as General Counsel, Project Development at First Solar Inc. From October 2007 to April 2009, Ms. Bodensteiner served as Vice President and General Counsel at OptiSolar Inc., a privately held, vertically integrated solar energy producer, manufacturer of proprietary thin-film photovoltaic solar panels and developer of utility-scale solar farms. Before OptiSolar, Ms. Bodensteiner had more than a decade of experience at Calpine Corporation, serving in various legal roles including as Executive Vice President, General Counsel, Secretary and Chief Compliance Officer. From 1989 to 1996, Ms. Bodensteiner practiced as a transactional attorney at law firms. Ms. Bodensteiner earned a Bachelor of Science degree in business administration from the University of Nevada, Reno, and a J.D. from Santa Clara University. Mr. Douglas J. Richards has served as our Executive Vice President, Administration since November 2011. From April 2010 to October 2011, Mr. Richards served as our Executive Vice President, Human Resources and Corporate Services. From September 2007 to March 2010, Mr. Richards served as our Vice President, Human Resources and Corporate Services. From 2006 to 2007, Mr. Richards was Vice President of Human Resources and Administration for SelectBuild, a construction services company and a wholly-owned subsidiary of BMHC, and from 2000 to 2006, Mr. Richards was Senior Vice President of Human Resources and Administration for BlueArc, a provider of high performance unified network storage systems to enterprise markets. Before BlueArc, Mr. Richards spent 10 years at Compaq Computer Corporation and five years at Apple Computer, Inc. in various management positions. Mr. Richards graduated from California State University, Chico, with a Bachelor of Arts degree in public administration. Mr. Eric Branderiz has served as our Senior Vice President, Corporate Controller and Chief Accounting Officer since August 2012, was Vice President, Corporate Controller and Chief Accounting Officer from September 2011 to July 2012 and was Vice President and Corporate Controller from June 2010 to August 2011. Concurrent with his other responsibilities, as of March 2016, Mr. Branderiz is also Senior Vice President, Head of Corporate Tax, and served as Senior Vice President, Head of Corporate Financial Planning & Analysis from June 2015 to March 2016 and as Senior Vice President, Global RLC Operations and Finance from March 2013 to September 2014. Mr. Branderiz was the Vice President, Corporate Controller, Treasurer, and Head of Subsidy Business Operations for the Knowledge Universe (KU) from May 2009 to May 2010. Before KU, he served in various positions at Spansion, Inc. from June 2003 to April 2009, including as the Corporate Vice President, Corporate Finance & Corporate Controller. Before Spansion’s initial public offering, Mr. Branderiz served in several concurrent capacities as Corporate Controller, Head of Corporate Financial Planning & Analysis, Head of Regional Sales & Marketing Finance, and Internal Controls. Before Spansion, Mr. Branderiz held various positions at Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., including Americas Regional Controller; he also held positions at Ernst & Young, LLP, and the Provincial Branch of Consumer & Corporate Affairs, Alberta Securities Commission and Treasury Departments in Canada. He is a California licensed Certified Public Accountant and earned a Business Commerce degree from the University of Alberta, Canada. 32 COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS This Compensation Discussion and Analysis provides a detailed review and analysis of our compensation policies and programs that applied to our named executive officers during the fiscal year ended January 3, 2016. Our named executive officers, as set forth in the following table, were our Chief Executive Officer, our Chief Financial Officer, and the next three most highly- compensated executive officers serving as of January 3, 2016. Name Thomas H. Werner Charles D. Boynton Howard J. Wenger Marty T. Neese Douglas J. Richards Executive Summary Title President and Chief Executive Officer Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer President, Business Units Chief Operating Officer Executive Vice President, Administration Our compensation programs are intended to align our named executive officers’ interests with those of our stockholders by rewarding performance that meets or exceeds the goals that the Compensation Committee establishes with the ultimate objective of increasing stockholder value. We have adopted an executive compensation philosophy designed to deliver competitive total compensation upon the achievement of financial and strategic performance objectives. The total compensation received by our named executive officers varies based on corporate and individual performance, as measured against performance goals. Therefore, a significant portion of each named executive officer’s total pay is tied to Company performance (see the “2015 Compensation Components” chart below). We delivered strong financial and operational results for fiscal 2015: • We achieved record EBITDA in fiscal 2015 of $566 million (a GAAP net loss of $1.39 per diluted share). • We exceeded our cost reduction targets for fiscal 2015. • We expanded our global power plant footprint while completing construction of the world’s largest solar power plant, the 579 MW Solar Star Projects for Berkshire Hathaway Energy and Southern California Edison. • 8point3 Energy Partners LP, a joint YieldCo vehicle formed by us and First Solar, to own, operate, and acquire solar generation assets, completed its initial public offering. • We completed construction of our 135 MW Quinto project in California. Construction of the 128 MW Henrietta project in California, the 125 MW Boulder Solar project in Nevada, and several other pipeline projects proceeded on plan with expected completion in 2016. • We achieved record performance in our existing manufacturing facilities, and continued construction and ramp of our fourth new cell manufacturing facility in the Philippines. • We launched our Helix system, a pre-engineered modular solution for residential applications that combines our high- efficiency solar module technology with integrated plug-and-play power stations, cable management systems, and mounting hardware that enable our customers to quickly and easily complete system installations and manage their energy production. • We ended the year with a commercial project pipeline of more than $1 billion. • We saw continuing growth in our North American residential business, with a more than 45% increase in MW installed in fiscal 2015, and announced a partnership with TXU Energy to provide residential solar solutions in Texas. • We completed several strategic acquisitions and investments that will allow us to service a broader market with enhanced expertise, including our acquisitions of Cogenra Solar, Inc. and Solaire Generation, Inc. 33 For fiscal 2015, our financial performance was the key factor in the compensation decisions and outcomes for the year. In fiscal 2015, the highlights of our named executive officer compensation program were as follows: • Our annual bonus program incorporated financial metrics that we believe align our compensation practices with our business goals and, correspondingly, align executives’ interests with stockholders’ interests. Achievement of performance targets related to our revenue, profitability, and free cash flow metrics, along with achievement of our corporate milestone performance targets and individual modifiers assigned based on individual performance determined the actual payouts under our performance-based cash bonus programs (specifically, the 2015 Annual Bonus Program and the Executive Semi-Annual Incentive Bonus Plan) for our named executive officers. Our corporate performance in fiscal 2015 resulted in aggregate cash bonus awards under these programs above the target level. Performance metrics, thresholds, and targets are further described below in “Executive Compensation—Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation.” • We redesigned our previous quarterly bonus program, replacing it with the Executive Semi-Annual Incentive Bonus Plan, which we believe further aligns our compensation practices with our business goals, and, correspondingly, will maximize long-term value for our shareholders. Under the Executive Semi-Annual Incentive Bonus Plan (which we refer to as the Semi-Annual Bonus Plan), we measured corporate and individual performance semi-annually. Each named executive officer’s manager (or, in the case of our Chief Executive Officer, by the Board of Directors) assigns an individual modifier, expressed as a percentage (capped at 125%), to such executive officer based on his or her individual performance. Such individual modifiers were combined with a Company milestone factor, based on the level of achievement of our corporate targets, and a profitability factor, based on our semi-annual pre-tax net income, with certain adjustments, to calculate bonus payments under the plan. We made payments under our Semi-Annual Bonus Plan after we exceeded the target and, in some cases, maximum performance levels. Performance metrics and the calculation of target amounts and actual payments under the Semi-Annual Bonus Plan are further described below in “Executive Compensation—Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation.” • Long-term incentives in the form of time- and performance-based restricted stock units comprised more than 50% of each named executive officer’s compensation and were linked to the long-term performance of our stock. Restricted stock units generally vest over three years. Performance-based restricted stock units were earned only after the achievement of corporate performance targets and, to the extent earned, generally vest over a three-year period. • Certain performance-based restricted stock units granted in 2015 to each of our named executive officers (other than Mr. Neese) were only earned if we achieved performance targets set in respect of our revenue, profitability, and free cash flow metrics. Performance with respect to the revenue, profitability, and free cash flow metric targets exceeded the target performance levels, and the Compensation Committee utilized its negative discretion to adjust payout attainment with respect to the free cash flow metric target to the minimum, which resulted in 118% of these equity awards being earned. Other performance-based restricted stock units granted in 2015 to each of our named executive officers (other than Mr. Neese) were only earned if we achieved performance targets set in respect of specific cost, new business development, and profit metrics. Performance with respect to these metrics exceeded the target performance levels, which resulted in 100% of these equity awards being earned. Performance metrics, thresholds, and targets are further described below in “Executive Compensation—Equity Incentive Plan Compensation.” • Additional performance-based restricted stock units granted in 2015 to each of Mr. Werner, Mr. Wenger, and Mr. Neese were only earned if we achieved performance targets set in respect of other specified metrics with respect to each individual relating to other strategic goals. Those awards, as well as performance metrics, and achievement levels with respect to all such awards, are further described below in “Executive Compensation—Equity Incentive Plan Compensation.” • In fiscal 2015, we raised the salaries of the following named executive officers: (i) Mr. Boynton, our Executive Vice President and Chief Financial officer, by 5.9%, (ii) Mr. Wenger, our President, Business Units, by 2.2%, and (iii) Mr. Richards, our Executive Vice President, Administration, by 2.8%. We did not raise the salary of any of our other named executive officers, including Mr. Werner, our Chief Executive Officer. • Our change of control severance agreements entitle our named executive officers to severance benefits only in connection with termination of employment following a change of control. 34 In fiscal 2015, a significant majority of our named executive officers’ target compensation (89% for our Chief Executive Officer and averaging 77% for our other named executive officers) consisted of semi-annual and annual bonus programs and long- term equity incentives. At our 2015 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, our stockholders voted to approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of our named executive officers, as disclosed in the proxy statement for that meeting. We refer to this vote as our Say-on-Pay vote. Our Compensation Committee considered the results of the Say-on-Pay vote (which received 99% approval of the votes cast) at its meetings after the Say-on-Pay vote when it set annual executive compensation. After our Compensation Committee reviewed the stockholders’ approval of the Say-on-Pay vote in 2015, our Compensation Committee decided to maintain the general framework of our fiscal 2014 compensation policies and programs for our named executive officers in fiscal 2015 as it believed such programs continued to be in the best interest of our stockholders. The following discussion should be read together with the information we present in the compensation tables, the footnotes and narratives to those tables and the related disclosure appearing in “Executive Compensation” below. General Philosophy and Objectives In fiscal 2015, we continued to operate a compensation program designed primarily to reward our named executive officers for outstanding financial performance and achievement of corporate objectives consistent with increasing long-term stockholder value. Our compensation program continued to be based on the following principal goals: • • • • aligning executive compensation with business objectives and performance; enabling us to attract, retain and reward executive officers who contribute to our long-term success; attracting and retaining the best people in the industry; and providing long-term incentives to executives to work to maximize stockholder value. In order to implement our philosophy, the Compensation Committee has a disciplined process for adopting executive compensation programs and individual executive officer pay actions that includes the analysis of competitive market data, a review of each executive officer’s role, performance assessments and consultation with the Compensation Committee’s independent compensation consultant, as described below. The Compensation Committee believes that the most effective executive compensation program is one that rewards the achievement of specific corporate and financial goals by rewarding our named executive officers when those goals are met or exceeded, with the ultimate objective of increasing stockholder value. In addition, we believe the mix of base salary, performance- based cash awards and time-based and performance-based equity awards provides proper incentives without encouraging excessive risk taking. We believe that the risks arising from our compensation policies and practices for our employees are not reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on our company. Compensation Setting Process The Compensation Committee is responsible for managing the compensation of our executive officers, including our named executive officers, in a manner consistent with our compensation philosophy. In accordance with the “controlled company” exception under the applicable listing standards of The NASDAQ Stock Market, our Compensation Committee is composed of two independent directors and two directors designated by our controlling stockholder, Total. We also have a Section 16/162(m) Subcommittee of the Compensation Committee consisting solely of independent directors available to approve certain compensation matters in accordance with Section 162(m) of the Code and Rule 16b-3 of the Exchange Act, as recommended by the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee establishes our compensation philosophy and objectives and annually reviews and, as necessary and appropriate, adjusts each named executive officer’s compensation. Consistent with its philosophy, the Compensation Committee offered our named executive officers total target compensation opportunities ranging from the 50th percentile to the 75th percentile of our peer group of companies (as further described below) during fiscal 2015. When determining appropriate compensation for the named executive officers, the Compensation Committee considered the advice of an independent compensation consultant, recommendations from management and internal compensation specialists, practices of companies within our peer group, our performance, our business plan and individual performance. As part of this process, the compensation consultant prepared a competitive analysis of our compensation program, and management presented its recommendations regarding base salary, time- and performance-based equity awards and performance targets under our 2015 Annual Bonus Program and Semi-Annual Bonus 35 Plan to the Compensation Committee for its review and consideration. The Compensation Committee accepts, rejects, or accepts as modified, management’s various recommendations regarding compensation for the named executive officers other than our Chief Executive Officer. The Compensation Committee also approves, after modification, management’s recommendations on various performance targets and milestones. The Compensation Committee met without our Chief Executive Officer when reviewing and establishing his compensation. Compensation Consultant and Peer Group In fiscal 2015, the Compensation Committee again directly engaged and retained Radford, a compensation consulting firm and a business unit of Aon Hewitt, to identify and maintain a list of our peer group of companies. The Compensation Committee selected Radford on the basis of its experience and familiarity with the technology industry. The Compensation Committee established the peer group used in connection with fiscal 2015 compensation decisions consistent with the Compensation Committee’s belief that the peer group should closely match our business, and be based on our historical and anticipated growth. In comparison to our peer group used for purposes of setting fiscal 2014 compensation, our peer group in fiscal 2015 remained unchanged. The peer group was selected using a mix of the following factors: • Publicly-traded North American semiconductor, alternative energy and clean technology companies; • Companies with between 50% and 250% of our annual revenues; and • Companies that are comparable in other size and performance metrics such as number of employees, revenue per employee, trailing twelve month revenue and net income, market capitalization, ratio of market capitalization to revenue, and market capitalization per employee. The Compensation Committee believes the characteristics of our fiscal 2015 peer group closely match those of our core business. The companies included in our peer group for purposes of establishing fiscal 2015 compensation are listed below: Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc. • Altera Corporation • Analog Devices, Inc. • AVX Corporation • Energizer Holdings, Inc. • • • FLIR Systems, Inc. • Hexcel Corporation • • • International Rectifier First Solar, Inc. Itron, Inc. JDS Uniphase Corporation • Juniper Networks, Inc. • KLA-Tencor Corporation • Linear Technology Corporation • ON Semiconductor Corporation • Quanta Services, Inc. • Roper Industries, Inc. • SunEdison, Inc. • Trimble Navigation Limited • Waters Corporation • Xilinx, Inc. Radford provided the Committee with competitive market information on the peer companies, as well as aggregated data on the broader technology market with respect to base salaries, cash bonus awards as a percentage of base salaries, total cash compensation, and equity awards. In fiscal 2015, Radford also advised the Compensation Committee in connection with evaluating our compensation practices, developing and implementing our executive compensation program and philosophy, establishing total compensation targets, and setting specific compensation components to reach the determined total compensation targets. We also participated in the Radford Global Technology Survey. Radford did not provide any services to us other than advising the Compensation Committee and us, at the direction of the Compensation Committee, on executive compensation issues. We have considered and assessed all relevant factors, including, but not limited to, those set forth in Rule 10C-1(b)(4)(i) through (vi) under the Exchange Act, that could give rise to a potential conflict of interest with respect to the compensation consultant described above. Based on this review, we are not aware of any conflict of interest that has been raised by the work performed by Radford. 36 Benchmarking In making its compensation decisions for our named executive officers for fiscal 2015, the Compensation Committee benchmarked each named executive officer’s total compensation to the compensation of individuals in comparative positions at companies in the peer group based on information that management obtained from public filings, supplemented by data Radford provided from surveys. In general, the Compensation Committee initially established base salaries at the 50th percentile of the peer group and both performance-based cash bonus awards and long-term time- and performance-based equity awards generally above the 50th percentile of the peer group. In establishing incentive opportunities, the Compensation Committee focused on corporate performance so that if our corporate performance was achieved at target levels, the Compensation Committee expected that our named executive officers’ total pay would be between the 50th percentile of the peer group and the 75th percentile of the peer group. The Compensation Committee viewed benchmarking as just the beginning, and not the end, of its discussion regarding our named executive officers’ pay opportunities for fiscal 2015, and looked to individual performance, the named executive officer’s experience in the executive role, and the executive’s scope of responsibility being narrower or broader than that of comparable positions at our peer group companies to establish final pay opportunities either above or below the initial benchmarks. The Compensation Committee believes that consideration of such factors, among others, strongly links our named executive officers’ pay to their individual and our corporate performance, and best aligns our named executive officers’ compensation interests with the interests of our stockholders. 2015 Compensation Components For fiscal 2015, the Compensation Committee allocated total compensation among various pay elements consisting of base salary, performance-based cash bonus awards, time-based equity awards, performance-based equity awards, and perquisites and other compensation. The table below provides an overview of each element of compensation and is followed by a further discussion and analysis of the specific decisions that we made for each element for fiscal 2015: Compensation Component Base salary Objective and Basis Fixed compensation that is set at a competitive level for each position to reward demonstrated experience and skills. Form Cash Performance-based cash bonus awards Semi-annual and annual incentives that drive our performance and align executives’ interests with stockholders’ interests. Cash Time-based equity awards Performance-based equity awards Perquisites and other compensation Long-term incentive that aligns executives’ interests with stockholders’ interests and helps retain executives through long-term vesting periods. Long-term incentive that drives our performance and aligns executives’ interests with stockholders’ interests and helps retain executives through long-term vesting periods. Offered to attract and retain talent and to maintain competitive compensation packages. Restricted stock units Performance stock units Various Practice Competitive market ranges are generally established at the 50th percentile, with consideration for experience and scope of role relative to comparable positions in one peer group. Target incentives are set as a percentage of base salary and are based on benchmarking from the 50th to the 75th percentile. Actual payment is calculated based on achievement of corporate and individual goals. Target equity awards (time-based plus performance- based) generally set between the 50th percentile and the 75th percentile. Target equity awards (time-based plus performance- based) generally set between the 50th percentile and the 75th percentile. Actual payment is calculated based on achievement of corporate goals. Named executive officers are eligible for certain severance benefits pursuant to their employment agreements and our 2014 Management Career Transition Plan. We do not provide any special perquisites to our named executive officers. Named executive officers are eligible to participate in health and welfare benefits and 401(k) matching available to all employees. The relative proportion of each element for fiscal 2015 was based generally on the Compensation Committee’s comparison of compensation that we offered our named executive officers against compensation offered by peer group companies to their named executive officers, the tax and accounting consequences of certain types of equity compensation, and a desire to allocate a higher proportion of total compensation to performance-based and equity incentive awards. 37 The components of compensation for the named executive officers for fiscal 2015 are set forth below. This composition is consistent with our philosophy of aligning our named executive officers’ interests with those of our stockholders by tying a significant portion of their total compensation to corporate performance goals and providing long-term incentives in the form of equity awards. 2015 Compensation Components Tom Werner 12% 24% 23% 41% 1% Chuck Boynton 22% 20% 32% 24% 2% Howard Wenger 19% 19% 23% 39% 0% Marty Neese 25% 22% 13% 39% 1% Doug Richards 24% 19% 27% 28% 2% %0 %05 %001 Base Salary Peformance-Based Cash Bonus (Target) Time-Based Equity Performance-Based Equity Perquisites and Other Analysis of Fiscal 2015 Compensation Decisions Base Salary. For fiscal 2015, Messrs. Boynton, Wenger, and Richards each received an increase in base salary after we evaluated competitive market compensation paid by companies in our competitive peer group for similar positions. We believe that base salaries for executive officers should be initially targeted at the 50th percentile of the range of salaries for executive officers in similar positions and with similar responsibilities at comparable companies. Our Chief Executive Officer’s base salary is targeted below the 50th percentile, as we believe that his compensation should be more closely aligned with our overall performance. This initial benchmarking is consistent with our overall compensation philosophy, a significant component of which is to help us best attract, retain and equitably reward our executives. The table below sets forth the salaries in effect in fiscal 2015 compared with the salaries in effect in fiscal 2014 for each of our named executive officers: Name Thomas H. Werner Charles D. Boynton Howard J. Wenger Marty T. Neese Douglas J. Richards (1) These amounts represent 2014 base salaries after April 1, 2014. (2) These amounts represent 2015 base salaries after April 1, 2015. 2014 Base Salary (1) $600,000 $425,000 $450,000 $450,000 $360,000 2015 Base Salary (2) $600,000 $450,000 $460,000 $450,000 $370,000 % Increase 0% 6% 2% 0% 3% 38 Our Compensation Committee approves the salary for each of our named executive officers. For those named executive officers below the Chief Executive Officer level, our Compensation Committee generally takes into account the Chief Executive Officer’s recommendations. In fiscal 2015, our Chief Executive Officer’s recommendations concerning the base salaries of the other named executive officers were approved by the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee reviews base salaries annually, and adjusts base salaries from time to time to align salaries with market levels, based on the information provided by Radford and after taking into account an individual’s prior performance, experience, importance of position and expected future performance. Based on information presented to our Compensation Committee by Radford regarding market ranges for salaries at peer group companies, we determined that our named executive officers’ 2014 base salaries were generally at approximately the 50th percentile of our peer group of companies. The Compensation Committee also considered the named executive officer’s experience in the executive role or the executive’s scope of responsibility compared to that of comparable positions at our peer group companies. Performance-Based Cash Bonus Awards. As in the prior fiscal year, we maintained two performance-based cash bonus programs during fiscal 2015 in order to link bonus payments both to corporate financial goals and operational objectives and to individual performance, as determined by each executive’s manager (or, in the case of our Chief Executive Officer, by the Board of Directors). The first program was our Annual Executive Bonus Plan, under which we adopted the 2015 Annual Bonus Program. The second program was our Executive Semi-Annual Incentive Bonus Plan, which replaces our former Executive Quarterly Key Initiative Bonus Plan, and which we refer to as our Semi-Annual Bonus Plan. The Semi-Annual Bonus Plan is effective semi- annually on an ongoing basis. Because we generally set base salaries for our executive officers at the 50th percentile of the range of salaries for executive officers in similar positions and with similar responsibilities at comparable companies, we rely on performance-based cash bonus awards to elevate target total cash compensation to between the 50th percentile and the 75th percentile. In fiscal 2015, target bonus opportunity was set between the 50th and 75th percentile for each named executive officer, except for Mr. Neese and our Chief Executive Officer, whose target bonus opportunities were set above the 75th percentile through our benchmarking process, and the desired position of total target cash compensation. We believe that performance-based cash bonus awards, and target total cash compensation should be closely aligned with our overall performance, and higher target bonus opportunities promote a variable, performance-oriented total compensation philosophy. In fiscal 2015, we allocated three-quarters of each named executive officer’s aggregate annual target cash bonus awards under the 2015 Annual Bonus Program and one-quarter under the Semi-Annual Bonus Plan. Our Compensation Committee chose this allocation in order to further our goal of tying a significant proportion of our named executive officers’ incentive compensation to our full fiscal year operating and financial results. Our Compensation Committee approved the individual bonus program incentive level for our Chief Executive Officer and for each named executive officer below the Chief Executive Officer level. The table below summarizes the total target payout levels for each named executive officer in each of fiscal 2014 and fiscal 2015, as well as the target payout levels under the 2015 Annual Bonus Program and the Semi-Annual Bonus Plan (for fiscal 2015), expressed as a percentage of annual base salary. For 2015, the Compensation Committee maintained target payout levels under these programs as a percentage of annual salary for each of our named executive officers after it evaluated competitive market compensation paid by companies in our peer group for similar positions, individual performance, and the scope of the named executive officer roles. Name Thomas H. Werner Charles D. Boynton Howard J. Wenger Marty T. Neese Douglas J. Richards 2014 Total Target Payout (including Annual and Quarterly Programs) as Percentage of Annual Salary 200% 90% 100% 90% 80% 2015 Total Target Payout (including Annual and Semi-Annual Programs) as Percentage of Annual Salary 200% 90% 100% 90% 80% 2015 Semi-Annual Bonus Plan Target Payout as Percentage of Annual Salary 50% 22.5% 25% 22.5% 20% 2015 Annual Bonus Program Target Payout as Percentage of Annual Salary 150% 67.5% 75% 67.5% 60% Actual bonus payments for each named executive officer under both the 2015 Annual Bonus Program and the Semi-Annual Bonus Plan are formula-driven, and the formulas are used to calculate actual bonus payments. See “Executive Compensation—Non- Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” below for more information about these formulas. 39 Payments to our named executive officers under our 2015 Annual Bonus Program required the achievement of corporate targets established in respect of our: annual revenue metric (33% of payment), annual profitability metric (33% of payment), and annual free cash flow metric (33% of payment). The targets were set by the Compensation Committee based on the operating plan approved by our Board at the beginning of fiscal 2015. The operating plan was based on our history of growth and expectations regarding our future growth, as well as potential challenges in achieving such growth. The performance targets were established at a level that the Compensation Committee determined to be challenging for our named executive officers to achieve. In fiscal 2015, we achieved 113% of the annual revenue target, 150% of the annual profitability target, and in excess of 150% of the annual free cash flow target, and the Compensation Committee utilized its negative discretion to adjust attainment to 80% of the annual free cash flow target; therefore, our named executive officers earned bonus amounts for all portions of the 2015 Annual Bonus Program. Such bonus amounts are reflected in the “2015 Total Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” table below. Payments to our named executive officers under our Semi-Annual Bonus Plan required the achievement of corporate targets set in respect of our semi-annual profitability metric and quarterly corporate milestones, as modified by an individual modifier assigned by each named executive officer’s manager (or, in the case of our Chief Executive Officer, by the Board of Directors) based on his or her individual performance. Such individual modifiers are expressed as a percentage, capped at 125%, and are combined with a Company milestone factor and the level of achievement of our corporate targets, to calculate bonus payments under the plan. Example Calculation: We incorporate a “management by objective” system throughout our organization to establish performance goals that supplement our financial goals. Management establishes five-year corporate milestones, and then derives from them annual and quarterly corporate milestones. Each milestone is reviewed, revised and approved, and subsequently the scores reviewed and approved, by our Board. In addition, for fiscal 2015, each named executive officer, other than our Chief Executive Officer, established quarterly personal Key Initiatives which were approved by the Chief Executive Officer and were in line with each quarter’s corporate milestones. Quarterly corporate milestones in fiscal 2015 included sensitive business objectives applicable to our entire company, focusing on confidential cost targets, major customer transactions, new product development, manufacturing plans, process enhancements, and inventory turns. For fiscal 2015, personal Key Initiative objectives included executing on confidential cost and revenue targets, achieving liquidity objectives, product development, market expansion, manufacturing and process efficiencies, among others. The Chief Executive Officer’s Key Initiatives consisted solely of the quarterly corporate milestones that our Board approved after discussion with the Chief Executive Officer. These corporate milestones and personal objectives are typically challenging in nature and designed to encourage the individual to achieve success in his position during the performance period. In fiscal 2013, we achieved an average of 83% of our corporate milestones and an average of 85% of the personal Key Initiatives for our 2013 named executive officers. In fiscal 2014, we achieved an average of 83% of our corporate milestones and an average of 80% of the personal Key Initiatives for our 2014 named executive officers. In fiscal 2015, we achieved an average of 74% of our corporate milestones, and the average individual modifier assigned to our named executive officers was 92%. In fiscal 2015, the thresholds in respect of our semi-annual profitability metric under our Semi-Annual Bonus Plan were exceeded and achieved at the maximum level. The threshold performance for these quarterly corporate milestone scores was achieved in four quarters of fiscal 2015. Actual payments were determined based on each named executive officer’s individual modifier. Bonus amounts paid to our named executive officers in fiscal 2015 are reflected in the following table: 40 2015 Total Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation 2015 Semi-Annual Bonus Plan Compensation 1st Half Payout ($)(1) 2nd Half Payout ($)(1) 64,280 30,735 39,089 25,313 26,223 153,725 55,858 74,640 55,858 45,628 2015 Annual Bonus Program Compensation Payout ($) Total Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation ($) 1,047,717 1,265,722 348,638 399,418 353,605 256,671 435,231 513,147 434,776 328,522 Thomas H. Werner Charles D. Boynton Howard J. Wenger Marty T. Neese Douglas J. Richards (1) The payments under the Semi-Annual Bonus Plan were made after the end of each fiscal half, after the achievement of targets in respect of the semi-annual profitability metric were measured, the named executive’s officer’s individual modifier was determined and the quarterly corporate milestone scores were measured. Equity Awards. Our Compensation Committee believes that long-term company performance is best achieved by an ownership culture that encourages long-term performance by our executive officers through the use of equity-based awards. Our SunPower Corporation 2015 Omnibus Incentive Plan, or 2015 Equity Plan, permits the grant of stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted shares, restricted stock units, performance shares, and other stock-based awards. Consistent with our goal to attract, retain and reward the best available talent, and in light of our setting our total direct compensation above the 50th percentile of our peer group, we targeted long-term equity awards generally approximating the 75th percentile of our peer group. In fiscal 2015, our long-term equity awards ranged from below the 50th percentile to the 75th percentile of our peer group. Our Chief Executive Officer’s long-term equity awards were between the 25th and 50th percentile in order to align his compensation with stockholder returns. Our other named executive officers’ long-term equity awards were above the 50th percentile if the scope of their responsibilities was significantly broader than that of executives in similar positions at peer companies. The Compensation Committee then allocated long-term equity awards between time-based and performance-based restricted stock units. We believe that time-based restricted stock units provide a more effective retention tool while performance- based restricted stock units provide a stronger performance driver. To balance the advantages of both time-based and performance- based awards, the Compensation Committee decided that annual long-term equity incentive awards granted to Mr. Boynton and Mr. Richards in fiscal 2015 would be made half in the form of performance-based restricted stock units (which could be earned in amounts between 0% and 150% of the target amount) and half in the form of time-based restricted stock units, all of which would vest over three years. The Compensation Committee also approved a special recognition grant for Mr. Boynton of 7,500 restricted stock units, which will vest over three years, in recognition for his role in closing the 8point3 transaction. The Compensation Committee decided that annual long-term equity incentive awards granted to Mr. Neese in fiscal 2015 would be made 25% in the form of time-based restricted stock units, all of which would vest over three years, and 75% in the form of performance-based restricted stock units (which could be earned in amounts between 0% and 150% of the target amount). The Compensation Committee decided that annual long-term equity incentive awards granted to Mr. Wenger in fiscal 2015 would be made 37% in the form of time-based restricted stock units, all of which would vest over three years, and 63% in the form of performance-based restricted stock units (which could be earned in amounts between 0% and 150% of the target amount). The Compensation Committee decided that annual long-term equity incentive awards granted to Mr. Werner in fiscal 2015 would be made 35% in the form of time-based restricted stock units, all of which would vest over three years, and 65% in the form of performance-based restricted stock units (which could be earned in amounts between 0% and 150% of the target amount). The Compensation Committee also approved an RSU grant for Mr. Werner of 125,178 restricted stock units, all of which would vest on September 1, 2016, in replacement of certain awards granted in 2012 and 2013 that were rescinded (see footnote 1 below). 41 Awards granted and earned in fiscal 2015 were as follows: Name Thomas H. Werner Charles D. Boynton Howard J. Wenger Marty T. Neese Douglas J. Richards Time-Based Restricted Stock Units 166,978(1) 24,200 20,000 8,400 15,000 Performance- Based Restricted Stock Units (Target) 75,100(2) 16,700 33,400 25,000 15,000 Performance- Based Restricted Stock Units Earned 48,282 19,333 36,559 — 17,370 (1) 125,178 of these RSUs were granted in replacement of certain awards granted in 2012 and 2013 that were rescinded in 2015 because, at the time of grant, such earlier awards exceeded the share limitations per recipient under the Third Amended and Restated SunPower Corporation 2005 Stock Incentive Plan. On June 3, 2015, the Company’s stockholders ratified the replacement awards. As such, while granted in 2015, the Compensation Committee did not view this award as part of Mr. Werner’s 2015 compensation package. (2) The actual award will be calculated with respect to 33,400 of these performance-based restricted stock units after the completion of fiscal 2016. Performance-based restricted stock units were used as incentive compensation during fiscal 2015 to align our named executive officers’ compensation with corporate performance. In connection with our annual review of executive officer compensation, the Compensation Committee approved performance targets in respect of our: annual revenue metric (33% of the award), annual profitability metric (33% of the award), and annual free cash flow metric (33% of the award), and a formula under which actual awards would be calculated after completion of the 2015 fiscal year. In addition, other performance targets were approved in respect of specific cost, new business development, and profit metrics, and a formula under which actual awards would be calculated after completion of the 2015 fiscal year (and after completion of the 2016 fiscal year with respect to 33,400 performance-based restricted stock units granted to Mr. Werner). See “Executive Compensation—Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” below for more information about these metrics, targets, and formulas. These performance metrics were selected on the basis of the operating plan approved by our Board after considering our history of growth and expectations regarding our future growth, as well as potential challenges in achieving such growth. The performance targets were established at a level that the Compensation Committee determined to be challenging for our named executive officers to achieve. In fiscal 2015, our named executive officers achieved 113% of the annual revenue metric target, 150% of the annual profitability metric target and 90% of the annual free cash flow metric target. The performance-based restricted stock units earned by our named executive officers began vesting in three equal annual installments, subject to continued service, starting March 1, 2016. In addition, we targeted strategic objectives in granting other performance-based restricted stock units during 2015 to each of Mr. Werner, Mr. Wenger, and Mr. Neese. These awards were only earned if each individual achieved specific performance targets set in respect of metrics tied to such individual’s specific job functions, including cost, new business development, and profit metrics. Time-based equity awards were used in fiscal 2015 as a retention tool and to align our named executive officers’ interests with long-term stockholder value creation. In connection with our annual review of executive officer compensation, we awarded restricted stock units to named executive officers in fiscal 2015 that began vesting in three equal annual installments, subject to continued service, starting March 1, 2016. Perquisites and Other Compensation. As in prior years, we did not provide any special perquisites to our named executive officers in fiscal 2015. We provided certain perquisites and other health and welfare and retirement benefits, such as health, vision, and life insurance coverage and participation in and matching contributions under our 401(k) defined contribution plan, which benefits are generally available to all employees. For more information about these arrangements and benefits, see footnote four to the “2015 Summary Compensation Table” below. Pension Benefits. None of our named executive officers participate in or have account balances in qualified or non- qualified defined benefit plans sponsored by us. Nonqualified Deferred Compensation. None of our named executive officers participate in or have account balances in non-qualified defined contribution plans or other deferred compensation plans maintained by us. 42 Employment and Severance Arrangements Change in Control Arrangements. We are party to employment agreements with certain of our executive officers, including our named executive officers, which provide severance benefits for employment terminations in connection with a change of control. The change of control severance arrangements generally entitle each named executive officer to certain calculated payments tied to base salary and bonus targets and accelerated vesting of his outstanding equity awards, but only upon termination by the us without cause or by the executive for good reason (as those terms are defined in the agreements) in connection with a change of control of the company (a “double trigger” arrangement). The Compensation Committee believes that these reinforce and encourage the continued attention and dedication of our named executive officers to their assigned duties without the distraction arising from the possibility of a change of control, and to enable and encourage our named executive officers to focus their attention on obtaining the best possible outcome for our stockholders without being influenced by personal concerns regarding the possible impact of a change of control on their job security and benefits. For more information, see “Executive Compensation—Employment Agreements” and “Executive Compensation—Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change of Control.” Severance Arrangements. We also maintain our 2016 Management Career Transition Plan, adopted in August 2015, which generally entitles each named executive officer to certain calculated payments tied to salary and bonus targets, healthcare benefits, and outplacement assistance if the individual is terminated without cause. Under his employment agreement, our Chief Executive Officer also receives limited accelerated vesting of outstanding equity awards if terminated without cause or if he resigns for good reason. The Compensation Committee believes that the 2016 Management Career Transition Plan provides benefits that are consistent with industry practice. We believe that entering into change of control and severance arrangements with certain of our executives has helped us attract and retain excellent executive talent and that offering standard packages avoids case-by-case negotiations. Without these provisions, our named executive officers may not have chosen to accept employment with us or remain employed by us. The severance arrangements also promote stability and continuity in our senior management team. For more information, please see “Executive Compensation―Employment Agreements,” “Executive Compensation—2016 Management Career Transition Plan” and “Executive Compensation―Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change of Control” below. Section 162(m) Considerations Under Section 162(m) of the Code, we are generally denied deductions for compensation paid to our Chief Executive Officer and the next three most highly compensated executive officers (other than our Chief Financial Officer) to the extent the compensation for any such individual exceeds $1 million for the taxable year, unless the compensation qualifies as “qualified performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m) of the Code. Our Compensation Committee may take action to preserve the deductibility of compensation payable to our executives, although deductibility will be only one among a number of factors considered in determining appropriate levels or methods of compensation. The Compensation Committee believes that the tax deduction limitation should not be permitted to compromise our ability to design and maintain executive compensation arrangements that will attract and retain the executive talent we need to compete successfully. Accordingly, achieving the desired flexibility in the design and delivery of compensation may result in compensation that in certain cases is not deductible for federal income tax purposes. Stock Ownership Guidelines In 2015, our Board adopted Stock Ownership Guidelines for Executives and Directors. Under these guidelines and subject to certain exceptions, our Chief Executive Officer is expected to own shares of our stock that have a value equal to five times his annual salary, with ownership measured at the end of each calendar year. Although Mr. Werner was required to satisfy the stock ownership guidelines beginning five years after their implementation in 2015, he already owns shares with a value significantly in excess of the guidelines. Other named executive officers are expected to own shares that have a value equal to their annual salary beginning five years after such officer first becomes subject to the guidelines. None of our executive officers other than Mr. Werner are currently subject to the guidelines. Shares may be owned directly by the individual, or owned by the individual’s spouse, or held in trust for the benefit of the individual’s spouse family. Other Disclosures Under our insider trading policy, our executive officers, directors and employees are prohibited from engaging in short sales of our securities, establishing margin accounts or otherwise pledging our securities, hedging our securities or buying or selling options, puts or calls on our securities. We do not have a policy regarding adjustment or recovery of awards or payments if the relevant performance goals or measures upon which they are based are restated or otherwise adjusted so that awards or payments are reduced. 43 Compensation of Named Executive Officers EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION The 2015 Summary Compensation Table below quantifies the compensation for each of our named executive officers for services rendered during fiscal 2015 and, as applicable, fiscal 2014 and fiscal 2013. The primary elements of each named executive officer’s total compensation during fiscal 2015 are reported in the table below and include, among others, base salary, performance- based cash bonuses under our 2015 Annual Bonus Program and Semi-Annual Bonus Plan, awards of restricted stock units subject to time-based vesting, and awards of performance-based restricted stock units subject to achievement of financial targets and subsequent time-based vesting. Name and Principal Position Thomas H. Werner, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board Charles D. Boynton, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Howard J. Wenger, President, Business Units Marty T. Neese, Chief Operating Officer Douglas J. Richards, Executive Vice President, Administration 2015 Summary Compensation Table Stock Awards ($)(2) 6,751,062 2,985,000 7,056,530 1,125,309 1,014,900 1,874,600 1,486,660 1,014,900 2,008,500 925,160 1,014,900 1,874,600 835,605 799,980 1,472,900 Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation ($)(3) 1,265,722 1,375,948 1,161,714 435,231 445,951 436,855 513,147 522,141 529,446 434,776 461,665 468,394 328,522 335,520 317,273 All Other Compensation ($)(4) 28,181 25,666 27,302 30,949 29,139 27,244 9,498 9,348 9,097 24,219 22,929 21,736 28,032 26,583 23,955 Salary ($)(1) 600,000 600,000 600,000 443,077 425,000 419,615 457,231 450,000 450,000 450,000 450,000 450,000 367,231 357,269 350,000 Total ($) 8,644,966 4,986,614 8,845,546 2,034,566 1,914,991 2,758,314 2,466,536 1,996,389 2,997,043 1,834,156 1,949,464 2,814,730 1,559,390 1,183,832 2,164,128 Year 2015 2014 2013 2015 2014 2013 2015 2014 2013 2015 2014 2013 2015 2014 2013 (1) The amounts reported in this column for fiscal 2015 reflect each named executive officer’s salary for fiscal 2015 plus payments for paid and unpaid time off, and holidays. (2) The amounts reported in the “Stock Awards” column for fiscal 2015 represent the aggregate grant date fair value computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718 of stock awards granted during the year (time-based and performance-based restricted stock units), excluding the effect of certain forfeiture assumptions. For the performance-based restricted stock units reported in this column for fiscal 2015, such amounts are based on the probable outcome of the relevant performance conditions as of the grant date. Assuming that the highest level of performance is achieved for these awards, the grant date fair value of the performance-based restricted stock unit awards would be: Mr. Werner, $2,862,454; Mr. Boynton, $681,379; Mr. Wenger, $1,188,860; Mr. Neese, $1,042,500; and Mr. Richards, $612,255. See Note 17 to our consolidated financial statements in our 2015 Annual Report for details as to the assumptions used to determine the aggregate grant date fair value of these awards. See also our discussion of stock-based compensation under “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Critical Accounting Estimates” in our 2015 Annual Report. (3) The amounts reported in this column for fiscal 2015 reflect the amounts earned under our 2015 Annual Bonus Program and our Semi-Annual Bonus Plan. Additional information about non-equity incentive plan compensation earned during fiscal 2015 is set forth above in the supplemental “2015 Total Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” table in our “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” and in “Executive Compensation—Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” below. 44 (4) The amounts reported in this column for fiscal 2015 as “All Other Compensation” consist of the elements summarized in the table below. Name Thomas H. Werner Charles D. Boynton Howard J. Wenger Marty T. Neese Douglas J. Richards Grants of Plan-Based Awards Health Benefits ($) 19,400 22,171 716 15,438 19,400 Group Life Insurance ($) 832 828 832 832 682 401(k) Match ($) 7,950 7,950 7,950 7,950 7,950 Total ($) 28,181 30,949 9,498 24,219 28,032 During fiscal 2015, our named executive officers were granted plan-based restricted stock units and performance stock units under our SunPower Corporation 2015 Omnibus Incentive Plan, or our “2015 Equity Plan.” They also were also granted cash bonus awards under our 2015 Annual Bonus Program and our 2015 Semi-Annual Bonus Plan. The following table sets forth information regarding the stock awards and cash bonus awards granted to each named executive officer during fiscal 2015. 2015 Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table Name Thomas H. Werner Charles D. Boynton Howard J. Wenger Marty T. Neese Grant Date —(3) —(4) 2/23/2015(5) 2/23/2015(6) 2/23/2015 2/23/2015(8) 2/23/2015(9) 3/20/2015(10) —(3) —(4) 2/3/2015(8) 2/23/2015(5) 3/20/2015(10) 7/21/2015(11) —(3) —(4) 2/3/2015(8) 2/23/2015(5) 2/23/2015(10) 3/20/2015(10) —(3) —(4) 2/3/2015(8) 2/23/2015(12) Estimated Possible Payouts Under Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards(1) Target ($) 900,000 300,000 — — — — — — Maximum ($) 1,350,000 468,750 — — — — — — Threshold ($) 720,000 300,000 — — — — — — 243,000 101,250 — — — — 276,000 115,000 — — — — 243,000 101,250 — — 303,750 101,250 — — — — 345,000 115,000 — — — — 303,750 101,250 — — 455,625 158,203 — — — — 517,500 179,688 — — — — 455,625 158,203 — — 45 Estimated Possible Payouts Under Equity Incentive Plan Awards(2) Target (#) Threshold (#) Maximum (#) — — 33,750 13,360 13,360 — — 4,200 — — — 13,500 1,700 — — — — 16,200 10,720 2,000 — — — 20,000 — — 37,500 16,700 16,700 — — 4,200 — — — 15,000 1,700 — — — — 18,000 13,400 2,000 — — — 25,000 — — 56,250 25,050 16,700 — — 4,200 — — — 22,500 1,700 — — — — 27,000 13,400 2,000 — — — 37,500 All Other Stock Awards: Number of Shares of Stock or Units (#) — — — — — 41,700 125,278 — — — 16,700 — — 7,500 — — 20,000 — — — — — 8,400 — Grant Date Fair Value of Stock and Option Awards ($) — — 1,042,500 464,260 464,260 1,159,260 3,482,728 138,054 — — 457,580 417,000 55,879 194,850 — — 548,000 500,400 372,520 65,740 — — 230,160 695,000 Name Douglas J. Richards Grant Date —(3) —(4) 2/3/2015(8) 2/23/2015(5) 3/20/2015(10) Estimated Possible Payouts Under Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards(1) Target ($) 222,000 74,000 — — — Maximum ($) 333,000 115,625 — — — Threshold ($) 177,600 74,000 — — — Estimated Possible Payouts Under Equity Incentive Plan Awards(2) Target (#) Threshold (#) Maximum (#) — — — 12,150 1,500 — — — 13,500 1,500 — — — 20,250 1,500 All Other Stock Awards: Number of Shares of Stock or Units (#) — — 15,000 — — Grant Date Fair Value of Stock and Option Awards ($) — — 411,000 375,300 49,305 (1) Additional information about estimated possible payouts under non-equity incentive plan awards is set forth below in the “Estimated Possible Payouts Under Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards Table.” (2) The amounts reported in these columns represent performance-based restricted stock unit opportunities. The Compensation Committee approved the awards on February 23 and March 20, 2015. The grant date fair value of these awards is reported based on the probable outcome of the applicable performance conditions and is consistent with the estimate of aggregate compensation cost, if any, expected to be recognized over the service period determined as of the grant date under FASB ASC Topic 718, excluding the effect of estimated forfeitures. See Note 17 to our consolidated financial statements in our 2015 Annual Report for details as to the assumptions used to determine the aggregate grant date fair value of these awards. See also our discussion of stock-based compensation under “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Critical Accounting Estimates” in our 2015 Annual Report. (3) Consists of an award under our 2015 Annual Bonus Program. Achievement levels for certain performance targets could reduce payouts to zero when the applicable formula is applied, as further described below. (4) Consists of an award under our Semi-Annual Bonus Plan. Achievement levels for certain performance targets could reduce payouts to zero when the applicable formula is applied, as further described below. (5) Consists of an award of restricted stock units, subject to achievement of specific performance metrics in addition to time-based vesting requirements, under the Third Amended and Restated SunPower Corporation 2005 Stock Incentive Plan. Failure to achieve certain performance metrics could result in zero restricted stock units being awarded. The maximum attainable award is 150% of target. The closing price of our common stock was $27.80 on February 23, 2015. Actual awards were determined in the first quarter of 2016 and are described in “Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” below. The earned award vests ratably on March 1, 2016, March 1, 2017, and March 1, 2018. (6) Consists of an award of restricted stock units, subject to achievement of specific performance metrics in addition to time-based vesting requirements, under the 2015 Equity Plan. Failure to achieve certain performance metrics could result in zero restricted stock units being awarded. The maximum attainable award is 150% of target. The earned award vests in full on March 1, 2017. (7) Consists of an award of restricted stock units, subject to achievement of specific performance metrics in addition to time-based vesting requirements, under the 2015 Equity Plan. Failure to achieve certain performance metrics could result in zero restricted stock units being awarded. The maximum attainable award is 100% of target. The earned award vests in full on March 1, 2017. (8) Consists of an award of restricted stock units, subject to time-based vesting requirements, under the Third Amended and Restated SunPower Corporation 2005 Stock Incentive Plan. The award vests ratably on March 1, 2016, March 1, 2017, and March 1, 2018. The closing price of our common stock was $27.40 on February 3, 2015, and $27.80 on February 23, 2015. (9) Consists of an award of restricted stock units, granted in replacement of certain awards granted in 2012 and 2013 that were rescinded in 2015 because, at the time of grant, such earlier awards exceeded the share limitations per recipient under the Third Amended and Restated SunPower Corporation 2005 Stock Incentive Plan. On June 3, 2015, our stockholders ratified the replacement awards. As such, while granted in 2015, the Compensation Committee did not view this award as part of Mr. Werner’s 2015 compensation package. The award vests in full on September 1, 2016. (10) Consists of an award of restricted stock units, subject to achievement of specific performance metrics in addition to time-based vesting requirements, under the 2015 Equity Plan. Failure to achieve certain performance metrics could result in zero restricted stock units being awarded. The maximum attainable award is 100% of target. The closing price of our common stock was $27.80 on February 23, 2015 and $32.87 on March 20, 2015. Actual awards were determined in the first quarter of 2016 and are described in “Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” below. The earned award vests ratably on March 1, 2016, March 1, 2017, and March 1, 2018. 46 (11) Consists of an award of restricted stock units, subject to time-based vesting requirements, under the 2015 Equity Plan. The award vests ratably on August 1, 2016, August 1, 2017, and August 1, 2018. The closing price of our common stock was $25.98 on July 21, 2015. (12) Consists of an award of restricted stock units, subject to achievement of specific performance metrics in addition to time-based vesting requirements, under the 2015 Equity Plan. Failure to achieve certain performance metrics could result in zero restricted stock units being awarded. The maximum attainable award is 150% of target. The closing price of our common stock was $27.80 on February 23, 2015. Actual awards were determined in the first quarter of 2016 and are described in “Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” below. The earned award vests ratably on March 1, 2016, March 1, 2017, and March 1, 2018. Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation During fiscal 2015, our named executive officers were eligible for cash bonus payments under our Annual Executive Bonus Plan, under which we adopted our 2015 Annual Bonus Program and our Semi-Annual Bonus Plan. The supplemental table below entitled “Estimated Possible Payouts Under Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards Table” sets forth each named executive officer’s target and maximum payout opportunities under both the 2015 Annual Bonus Program and the Semi-Annual Bonus Plan. Under the terms of both bonus plans, failure to achieve certain corporate or individual metrics could have resulted in zero payouts to an individual for a given period. The table entitled “2015 Total Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” above in “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” details the actual payouts awarded under the two bonus plans to each named executive officer for fiscal 2015. Estimated Possible Payouts Under Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards Table Name Thomas H. Werner Charles D. Boynton Howard J. Wenger Marty T. Neese Douglas J. Richards 2015 Semi-Annual Bonus Plan Target (Aggregate) ($) 300,000 101,250 115,000 101,250 74,000 2015 Semi- Annual Bonus Plan Maximum (Aggregate) ($) 468,750 158,203 179,688 158,203 115,625 2015 Annual Bonus Program Target ($) 900,000 303,750 345,000 303,750 228,000 2015 Annual Bonus Program Maximum ($) 1,350,000 455,625 517,500 455,625 333,000 2015 Annual Bonus Program. Awards under the 2015 Annual Bonus Program were formula-driven. At the beginning of fiscal 2015, the Compensation Committee established and approved minimum, target, and maximum levels in respect of three performance criteria: (1) an annual revenue metric, (2) an annual profitability metric, and (3) an annual free cash flow metric. Our annual revenue metric is based on our annual revenue, with certain adjustments such as amounts related to utility and power plant projects. Our annual profitability metric is based on our annual net income, adjusted for taxes and other items such as amounts related to utility and power plant projects and certain payments made to Total. Our annual free cash flow metric is based on our annual operating cash flow, adjusted for items such as amounts relating to investing activities and certain amounts relating to lease financing. Each named executive officer would earn 33% of his target bonus under the 2015 Annual Bonus Program upon the achievement of the revenue target, 33% upon the achievement of the profitability target, and the remaining 33% of his target bonus upon the achievement of the free cash flow target. In order to encourage our named executive officers to exceed the performance targets, our Compensation Committee set the maximum payment under the program at 150% of target. Payment for each target is determined based on performance achievement relative to minimum, target, and maximum levels, as follows: Performance Level Achieved Below minimum At minimum Between minimum and target At target Between target and maximum At or above maximum Bonus Payment as Percentage of Bonus Target No bonus paid 80% of target bonus (minimum award for minimum achievement) Prorated on a straight-line basis, between 80% and 100% 100% of target Prorated on a straight-line basis, between 100% and 150% 150% of target 47 The annual performance targets, set at the beginning of fiscal 2015, were assessed at the end of the year. Based on our actual results in fiscal 2015, bonuses were earned and paid to our named executive officers for the annual revenue target, the annual profitability target, and the annual free cash flow target, as presented below in the aggregate. Performance Criterion Annual revenue metric Annual profitability metric Annual free cash flow metric Target $2,480 million $100.6 million $(67.0) million Achievement $2,604 million $299 million $(117) million Payment as % of Target Payment 113% 150% 80% Semi-Annual Bonus Plan. Awards under the Semi-Annual Bonus Plan were also formula-driven, with targets in respect of a semi-annual profitability metric and corporate performance metrics, consisting of a set of corporate milestones representing key initiatives that would support our corporate business plan. The semi-annual profitability metric is based on our semi-annual pre-tax net income, adjusted for amounts related to utility and power plant projects, non-cash interest expense, stock-based compensation expense and other items. Each named executive officer is further assigned an individual modifier by his or her manager, or, in the case of our Chief Executive Officer, by the Board of Directors, meant to take into account individual performance and accomplishments. These three metrics were then incorporated into the plan’s formula. Each named executive officer’s individual modifier could result in no award being payable even if we achieved our quarterly profitability metric and corporate milestones targets in the event that the individual modifier was determined to be zero. If threshold corporate milestones were achieved and we exceeded our semi- annual profitability metric target, bonus payments could exceed 100% of target, up to a maximum payment of 156% (based on the semi-annual profitability metric), depending on the individual modifier. Payments under the Semi-Annual Incentive Bonus Plan were made as follows: Achievement of Semi-Annual Profitability Metric Target Under target Achievement of Corporate Milestones Under 60% Payment No payment Between target and maximum Over 60% but equal to or under 80% 50% payment Payment = 2015 semi-annual salary multiplied by Semi-Annual Bonus Plan target bonus (%) multiplied by semi-annual profitability metric achievement (up to a maximum of 125%) multiplied by individual modifier (up to a maximum of 125%) multiplied by 50% At target 80% or over 100% payment Payment = 2015 semi-annual salary multiplied by Semi-Annual Bonus Plan target bonus (%) multiplied by semi-annual profitability metric achievement (up to a maximum of 125%) multiplied by individual modifier (up to a maximum of 125%) Between target and maximum 80% or over Greater than 100% payment Payment = 2015 semi-annual salary multiplied by Semi-Annual Bonus Plan target bonus (%) multiplied by semi-annual profitability metric achievement (up to a maximum of 125%) multiplied by individual modifier (up to a maximum of 125%) Under target 80% or over No payment Our 2015 corporate milestones are confidential because disclosure of these milestones would result in competitive harm, but they generally consisted of milestones relating to cost targets, major customer transactions, new product development, manufacturing plans, process enhancements, and inventory turns. The quarterly corporate milestone scores were 74.8%, 62.3%, 76.3% and 81.6% for each quarter in fiscal 2015, respectively. Individual modifiers for the named executive officers ranged from 69% to 115%, and averaged 92% for the two halves of fiscal 2015. Equity Incentive Plan Compensation In addition to time-based restricted stock unit awards, to further align executive compensation with maximizing stockholder value, our Compensation Committee granted to our named executive officers certain performance-based equity awards, consisting of restricted stock units, or RSUs, that would be released and begin time-based vesting only upon achievement of certain corporate or individual performance objectives. 48 Our Compensation Committee met at the beginning of 2015 and established and approved target levels in respect of three performance criteria for our traditional performance-based equity awards: (1) an annual revenue metric, (2) an annual profitability metric, and (3) an annual free cash flow metric. Each eligible named executive officer would earn 33% of his target performance- based RSUs upon the achievement of the annual revenue metric target, 33% upon the achievement of the annual profitability metric target, and the remaining 33% of his target performance-based RSUs upon the achievement of the annual free cash flow metric target. The three metrics and their corresponding targets are the same as those for our 2015 Annual Bonus Program, described above in “Executive Compensation—Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation.” Payment for each target was determined based on the performance metric achieved relative to minimum, target, and maximum performance levels, as follows: Percentage of Performance Target Achieved Below minimum At minimum Between minimum and target At target Between target and maximum At or above maximum Grant of RSUs as Percentage of Target RSUs No RSUs earned 90% of target RSUs (minimum award for minimum achievement) Prorated on a straight-line basis, between 90% and 100% 100% of target Prorated on a straight-line basis, between 100% and 150% 150% of target Performance-based restricted stock units vest, if at all, in three equal annual installments, subject to continued service after achievement of the performance measures, starting March 1, 2016. In connection with our 2015 traditional performance-based equity awards, we achieved 113% of our annual revenue metric target, 150% of our annual profitability metric target, and 90% of our annual free cash flow metric target. Based on our actual results in fiscal 2015, traditional performance-based RSUs were earned by our named executive officers for achievement of the annual revenue, annual profitability, and annual free cash flow metric targets. See “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Equity Awards,” which details the actual performance-based restricted stock units earned in fiscal 2015. In addition, we awarded additional performance-based RSUs to certain of our executive officers in connection with other strategic goals. These goals are confidential because their disclosure would result in competitive harm, but they generally consisted of metrics relating to cost, new business development, and profit. The named executive officers’ targets and earned performance-based RSUs are described above in “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Analysis of Fiscal 2015 Compensation Decisions—Equity Awards.” Employment and Severance Agreements We have entered into employment agreements with certain of our executive officers, including our named executive officers. In August 2015, we adopted a severance policy entitled the 2016 Management Career Transition Plan, which replaced our 2014 Management Career Transition Plan. Additionally, our named executive officers are entitled to receive certain payments from us or our affiliates in the event of certain termination events in connection with a change of control. Employment Agreements. We are party to employment agreements with several executive officers, including the named executive officers. Each employment agreement provides that the executive’s employment is “at-will” and may be terminated at any time by either party. Each employment agreement generally provides for a three-year term that will automatically renew unless we provide notice of our intent not to renew at least 120 days before the renewal date. The agreements do not specify salary, bonus or other basic compensation terms, but instead provide that each executive’s base salary, annual bonus and equity compensation will be determined in accordance with our normal practices. The primary purpose of the agreements is to provide certain severance benefits for employment terminations in connection with a change of control (as defined in the agreement). In the event an executive’s employment is terminated by us without cause (as defined in the agreement), or if the executive resigns for good reason (as defined in the agreement), and if such termination or resignation occurs during the period three months prior to, and ending 36 months following, a change of control, then the agreements also provide that the executive is entitled to the following benefits: • • • • a lump-sum payment equivalent to 24 months of such executive’s base salary; a lump-sum payment equal to any earned but unpaid annual bonus for a completed fiscal year; a lump-sum payment equal to the product of (a) such executive’s target bonus for the then current fiscal year, multiplied by (b) two; continuation of such executive’s and such executive’s eligible dependents’ coverage under our benefit plans for up to 24 months, at our expense; 49 • • • • a lump-sum payment equal to such executive’s accrued and unpaid base salary and paid time off; reimbursement of up to $15,000 for services of an outplacement firm mutually acceptable to us and the executive; annual make-up payments for taxes incurred by the executive in connection with benefit plans’ coverage; and all of such executive’s unvested options, shares of restricted stock and restricted stock units (including performance- based restricted stock units) will become fully vested and (as applicable) exercisable as of the termination date and remain exercisable for the time period otherwise applicable to such equity awards following such termination date. In addition, Mr. Werner’s agreement provides for full accelerated vesting upon termination of employment without cause or resignation for good reason, regardless of whether such termination is in connection with a change of control; provided, however, that absent a change of control, no such accelerated vesting or lapsing shall apply to Mr. Werner’s performance-based equity awards. Under the employment agreements, “cause” means the occurrence of any of the following, as determined by us in good faith: • • • • acts or omissions constituting gross negligence or willful misconduct on the part of the executive with respect to the executive’s obligations or otherwise relating to our business, the executive’s conviction of, or plea of guilty or nolo contendere to, crimes involving fraud, misappropriation or embezzlement, or a felony crime of moral turpitude, the executive’s violation or breach of any fiduciary duty (whether or not involving personal profit) to us, except to the extent that his violation or breach was reasonably based on the advice of our outside counsel, or willful violation of any of our published policies governing the conduct of it executives or other employees, or the executive’s violation or breach of any contractual duty to us which duty is material to the performance of the executive’s duties or results in material damage to us or our business; provided that if any of the foregoing events is capable of being cured, we will provide notice to the executive describing the nature of such event and the executive will thereafter have 30 days to cure such event. In addition, under the employment agreements, “good reason” means the occurrence of any of the following without the executive’s express prior written consent: • • • • a material reduction in the executive’s position or duties, a material breach of the employment agreement, a material reduction in the executive’s aggregate target compensation, including the executive’s base salary and target bonus on a combined basis, excluding a reduction that is applied to substantially all of our other senior executives; provided, however, that for purposes of this clause, whether a reduction in target bonus has occurred shall be determined without any regard to any actual bonus payments made to the executive, or a relocation of the executive’s primary place of business for the performance of his duties to us to a location that is more than 45 miles from our current business location. The executive shall be considered to have “good reason” under the employment agreement only if, no later than 90 days following an event otherwise constituting “good reason” under the employment agreement, the executive gives notice to us of the occurrence of such event and we fail to cure the event within 30 days following its receipt of such notice from the executive, and the executive terminates service within 36 months following a change of control. If any of the severance payments, accelerated vesting and lapsing of restrictions would constitute a “parachute payment” within the meaning of Section 280G of the Code and be subject to excise tax or any interest or penalties payable with respect to such excise tax, then the executive’s benefits will be either delivered in full or delivered as to such lesser extent which would result in no portion of such benefits being subject to such taxes, interest or penalties, whichever results in the executive receiving, on an after-tax basis, the greatest amount of benefits. Before receiving the benefits described in the employment agreements, the executive will be required to sign a separation agreement and release of claims. In addition, the benefits will be conditioned upon the executive not soliciting our or our affiliates’ (as defined in the employment agreement) employees, consultants, customers or users for one year following the termination date. 50 Mr. Werner’s agreement also provides that, if his termination without cause or resignation for good reason is not in connection with a change of control, his severance benefits will be conditioned upon a non-competition arrangement lasting one year following employment termination. 2016 Management Career Transition Plan. In August 2015, we adopted the 2016 Management Career Transition Plan, (the “Severance Plan”), which replaced our 2014 Management Career Transition Plan. The Severance Plan generally terminates on the third anniversary of the effective date. The Severance Plan addresses severance for certain employment terminations, and payments are only made if the executive or employee is not already entitled to severance benefits under a separate employment agreement. Participants in the Severance Plan include our Chief Executive Officer, Thomas H. Werner, and those employees who have been employed by the Company for at least six months and report directly to him (including our other named executive officers), as well as other key employees of the Company who are provided with written notice from the Chief Executive Officer that they are Severance Plan participants. Under the terms of the Severance Plan, Mr. Werner and the other named executive officers will be eligible for benefits following a termination of employment by us without cause (as defined in the Severance Plan). Such benefits include: • • • • • • • a lump-sum payment equivalent to 12 months (or 24 months in Mr. Werner’s case) of such executive’s base salary; a lump-sum payment equal to any earned but unpaid annual bonus for a completed fiscal year; a lump-sum payment equal to the pro rata portion of such executive’s actual bonus for the then current fiscal year, based on the number of whole calendar months between the start of the fiscal year and the termination date; continuation of such executive’s and such executive’s eligible dependents’ coverage under the Company’s health benefit plans for up to 12 months (or 24 months in Mr. Werner’s case), at the Company’s expense; a lump-sum payment equal to such executive’s accrued and unpaid base salary and paid time off; annual make-up payments for taxes incurred by the executive in connection with such health benefit plans’ coverage; and reimbursement of up to $15,000 for services of an outplacement firm mutually acceptable to the Company and the executive. Outstanding Equity Awards The following table sets forth information regarding the outstanding equity awards held by our named executive officers as of January 3, 2016. Outstanding Equity Awards At 2015 Fiscal Year-End Table Option Awards Stock Awards Name Thomas H. Werner Grant Date 02/19/2013(2) 02/05/2014(3) 02/05/2014(4) 02/23/2015(5) 02/23/2015(6) 02/23/2015(7) 02/23/2015(8) 03/20/2015(9) Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#) Exercisable Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#) Unexercisable Option Exercise Price ($) Option Expiration Date — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 51 Number of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested (#) 83,148 33,333 41,447 Market Value of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested ($)(1) 2,495,271 1,000,323 1,243,824 125,278 3,759,593 41,700 44,082 — 4,200 1,251,417 1,322,901 — 126,042 Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have Not Vested (#) Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Market or Payout Value of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have Not Vested ($) — — — — — — — — — — — — 33,400 — 1,002,334 — Option Awards Stock Awards Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#) Exercisable Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#) Unexercisable Option Exercise Price ($) Option Expiration Date Number of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested (#) Market Value of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested ($)(1) Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have Not Vested (#) Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Market or Payout Value of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have Not Vested ($) Name Charles D. Boynton Howard J. Wenger Marty T. Neese Douglas J. Richards Grant Date 02/19/2013(2) 02/19/2013(10) 02/05/2014(3) 02/05/2014(4) 02/03/2015(6) 02/23/2015(7) 03/20/2015(9) 07/21/2015(11) 02/19/2013(2) 02/19/2013(10) 02/05/2014(3) 02/05/2014(4) 02/03/2015(6) 02/23/2015(7) 02/23/2015(7) 03/20/2015(9) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 07/02/2008(12) 100,000 02/19/2013(2) 02/19/2013(10) 02/05/2014(3) 02/05/2014(4) 02/03/2015(6) 02/19/2013(2) 02/19/2013(10) 02/05/2014(3) 02/05/2014(4) 02/03/2015(6) 02/23/2015(7) 03/20/2015(9) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 62.82 07/02/2018 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 23,334 32,036 11,333 14,092 16,700 17,633 1,700 7,500 23,334 32,036 11,333 14,092 20,000 21,159 13,400 2,000 — 23,334 32,036 11,333 14,092 8,400 18,334 25,171 8,933 11,108 15,000 15,870 1,500 700,253 961,400 340,103 422,901 501,167 529,166 51,017 225,075 700,253 961,400 340,103 422,901 600,200 634,982 402,134 60,020 — 700,253 961,400 340,103 422,901 252,084 550,203 755,382 268,079 333,351 450,150 476,259 45,015 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — (1) The closing price of our common stock on December 31, 2015 (the last trading day of fiscal 2015) was $30.01. (2) Each of these awards of restricted stock units provided for vesting in three equal annual installments on each of March 1, 2014, March 1, 2015, and March 1, 2016 subject to the recipient’s continued employment with us. (3) Each of these awards of restricted stock units provided for vesting in three equal annual installments on each of March 1, 2015, March 1, 2016, and March 1, 2017, subject to the recipient’s continued employment with us. (4) On February 5, 2014, the named executive officer was awarded a number of performance-based restricted stock units within a pre-set range, with the actual number earned contingent on the achievement of certain performance criteria. The actual earned award was determined in the first quarter of fiscal 2015. The earned award vests in three equal annual installments on March 1, 2015, March 1, 2016, and March 1, 2017, subject to the recipient’s continued employment with us. 52 (5) Each of these awards of restricted stock units provided for one-time vesting on September 1, 2016 subject to the recipient’s continued employment with us. (6) Each of these awards of restricted stock units provided for vesting in three equal annual installments on each of March 1, 2016, March 1, 2017, and March 1, 2018 subject to the recipient’s continued employment with us. (7) On February 23, 2015, the named executive officer was awarded a number of performance-based restricted stock units within a pre-set range, with the actual number contingent on the achievement of certain performance criteria. The actual award was determined in the first quarter of 2016 and is described in “Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” above. The earned award would vests in three equal annual installments on March 1, 2016, March 1, 2017, and March 1, 2018, subject to the recipient’s continued employment with us. (8) On February 23, 2015, the named executive officer was awarded a number of performance-based restricted stock units within a pre-set range, with the actual number earned contingent on the achievement of certain performance criteria. The actual earned award will determined in the first quarter of 2017. (9) On March 20, 2015, the named executive officer was awarded a number of performance-based restricted stock units within a pre-set range, with the actual number contingent on the achievement of certain performance criteria. The actual award was determined in the first quarter of 2016 and is described in “Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” above. The earned award would vests in three equal annual installments on March 1, 2016, March 1, 2017, and March 1, 2018, subject to the recipient’s continued employment with us. (10) On February 19, 2013, the named executive officer was awarded a number of performance-based restricted stock units within a pre-set range, with the actual number earned contingent on the achievement of certain performance criteria. The actual earned award was determined in the first quarter of 2014. The earned award vests in three equal annual installments on March 1, 2014, March 1, 2015, and March 1, 2016, subject to the recipient’s continued employment with us. (11) Each of these awards of restricted stock units provided for vesting in three equal annual installments on each of August 1, 2016, August 1, 2017, and August 1, 2018, subject to the recipient’s continued employment with us. (12) This option has a 10-year term and vests in equal annual installments over a four-year period starting on July 2, 2009. The following table sets forth the number of shares acquired pursuant to the vesting of stock awards held by our named executive officers during fiscal 2015 and the aggregate dollar amount realized by our named executive officers upon such events. Because there were no shares acquired by our named executive officers pursuant to the exercise of options during fiscal 2015, we have not included columns pertaining to option awards in the table below. 2015 Option Exercises and Stock Vested Table Name Thomas H. Werner Charles D. Boynton Howard J. Wenger Marty T. Neese Douglas J. Richards Stock Awards Number of Shares Acquired on Vesting (#) Value Realized on Vesting ($)(1) 411,354 130,245 127.160 123,826 99,979 13,434,822 4,253,802 4,153,046 4,044,157 3,265,314 (1) The aggregate dollar value realized upon the vesting of a stock award represents the fair market value of the underlying shares on the vesting date multiplied by the number of shares vested. Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change of Control Termination Payments Made in Fiscal 2015. We made no termination payments to any of our named executive officers during fiscal 2015. Tabular Disclosure of Termination Payments. Our employment agreements with our named executive officers contain provisions that provide for payments upon certain events of termination and change of control. See “Employment and Severance Agreements” above for a detailed description of these agreements. The following tables summarize the estimated payments that 53 would have been made on December 31, 2015 which our named executive officers would be eligible to receive upon the following termination events, assuming each such event had occurred on December 31, 2015, the last business day of our fiscal year ended January 3, 2016: • • • • • termination with cause or voluntary resignation without good reason; involuntary termination without cause or voluntary resignation for good reason in connection with a change of control; involuntary termination without cause or voluntarily resignation for good reason not in connection with a change of control; retirement; or discontinued service due to death or disability. The dollar value identified with respect to each type of equity award is based on each named executive officer’s accelerated restricted stock units as of December 31, 2015 is based on the $30.01 per share closing price for our common stock on December 31, 2015, the last trading day of our fiscal year ended January 3, 2016. No named executive officers held unvested stock options as of December 31, 2015. For more information on each officer’s outstanding equity awards as of January 3, 2016, please see the “Outstanding Equity Awards At 2015 Fiscal-Year End Table” above. The tables do not include unpaid regular salary, nor the impact of certain “best net” provisions of each named executive officer’s employment agreement that provides that, in the event any payments under such employment agreement would constitute parachute payments under Section 280G of the Code or be subject to the excise tax of Section 4999 of the Code, then such payments should be either delivered in full or reduced to result in no portion being subject to such tax provisions and still yield the greatest payment to the individual on an after tax basis. 54 Termination Payments Table Bonus and Accelerated Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards ($) Base Salary ($) Accelerated Restricted Stock Units ($)(1)(2) Continued Medical Benefits and Gross Up ($) Outplace- ment Services ($) Accrued Paid Time Off and Sabbatical ($) Total ($) — — — — — 69,231 69,231 1,200,000 2,400,000 12,004,179 67,420 15,000 69,231 15,755,829 1,200,000 1,200,000 10,251,595 67,420 15,000 69,231 12,803,245 Name Thomas H. Werner Termination Scenario Termination with cause or voluntary resignation without good reason Involuntary termination without cause or voluntary resignation for good reason in connection with change of control Involuntary termination without cause or voluntary resignation for good reason not in connection with change of control Charles D. Boynton Howard J. Wenger Retirement Death or disability — — — — — 7,462,287 — — — — 69,231 69,231 69,231 7,531,517 Termination with cause or voluntary resignation without good reason Involuntary termination without cause or voluntary resignation for good reason in connection with change of control Involuntary termination without cause or voluntary resignation for good reason not in connection with change of control Retirement Death or disability Termination with cause or voluntary resignation without good reason Involuntary termination without cause or voluntary resignation for good reason in connection with change of control Involuntary termination without cause or voluntary resignation for good reason not in connection with change of control Retirement Death or disability — — — — — — — 900,000 810,000 3,652,066 99,388 15,000 — 5,476,454 450,000 405,000 — — — — — — 1,306,425 49,694 15,000 — — — — — — — — — — — — — 919,694 — 1,306,425 — 920,000 920,000 4,027,191 85 15,000 — 5,882,276 460,000 460,000 — — — — — — 1,697,336 42 — — 15,000 — — — — — 935,042 — 1,697,336 55 Name Marty T. Neese Douglas J. Richards Bonus and Accelerated Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards ($) Base Salary ($) Accelerated Restricted Stock Units ($)(1)(2) Continued Medical Benefits and Gross Up ($) Outplace- ment Services ($) Accrued Paid Time Off and Sabbatical ($) Total ($) — — — — — — — 900,000 810,000 3,426,991 68,440 15,000 — 5,220,431 450,000 405,000 — — — — — — 1,002,334 34,220 15,000 — — — — — — — — — — — — — 904,220 — 1,002,334 — 740,000 592,000 2,807,315 76,094 15,000 — 4,230,409 370,000 296,000 — — — — — — 971,424 38,047 15,000 — — — — — — — 719,047 — 971,424 Termination Scenario Termination with cause or voluntary resignation without good reason Involuntary termination without cause or voluntary resignation for good reason in connection with change of control Involuntary termination without cause or voluntary resignation for good reason not in connection with change of control Retirement Death or disability Termination with cause or voluntary resignation without good reason Involuntary termination without cause or voluntary resignation for good reason in connection with change of control Involuntary termination without cause or voluntary resignation for good reason not in connection with change of control Retirement Death or disability (1) In connection with a change of control, accelerated restricted stock units’ calculation assumes that the change of control does not involve Total or one of its affiliates. (2) Awards under the SunPower Corporation 2015 Omnibus Incentive Plan provide for accelerated vesting upon death or disability. 56 The following report has been submitted by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors: COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT The Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors has reviewed and discussed our Compensation Discussion and Analysis with management. Based on this review and discussion, the Compensation Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 3, 2016 and definitive proxy statement on Schedule 14A for our 2016 Annual Meeting, each as filed with the SEC. The foregoing report was submitted by the Compensation Committee of the Board and shall not be deemed to be “soliciting material” or to be “filed” with the SEC or subject to Regulation 14A promulgated by the SEC or Section 18 of the Exchange Act, and shall not be deemed incorporated by reference into any prior or subsequent filing by us under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act. COMPENSATION COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS Thomas R. McDaniel Jean-Marc Otero del Val Humbert de Wendel Pat Wood III, Chair March 8, 2016 57 SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF MANAGEMENT AND CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS The following table sets forth certain information regarding beneficial ownership of our common stock as of February 29, 2016 (except as described below) by: • • • • each of our directors; our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and each of the three other most highly compensated individuals who served as our executive officers at the end of our fiscal year 2015, whom we collectively refer to as our “named executive officers”; our directors, director nominees and executive officers as a group; and each person (including any “group” as that term is used in Section 13(d)(3) of the Exchange Act) who is known by us to beneficially own more than 5% of any class of our common stock. Applicable beneficial ownership percentages listed below are based on 136,780,515 shares of common stock outstanding as of February 29, 2016. The business address for each of our directors and executive officers is our corporate headquarters at 77 Rio Robles, San Jose, California 95134. Directors and Named Executive Officers Common Stock Beneficially Owned (1) Number of Shares % Charles D. Boynton (2) Arnaud Chaperon Bernard Clément Denis Giorno Daniel Lauré (3) Catherine Lesjak Thomas R. McDaniel (4) Marty T. Neese (5) Douglas J. Richards (6) Humbert de Wendel Howard J. Wenger (7) Thomas H. Werner (8) Pat Wood III (9) All Directors and Executive Officers as a Group (15 persons) (10) Other Persons Total S.A. Total Energies Nouvelles Activités USA, SAS (11) 2, place Jean Millier La Défense 6 92400 Courbevoie France Wellington Management Group LLP Wellington Group Holdings LLP Wellington Investment Advisors Holdings LLP Wellington Management Company LLP (12) c/o Wellington Management Group LLP 280 Congress Street Boston, MA 02210 122,447 — — — — 19,309 105,435 259,168 123,781 — 247,177 426,087 52,553 1,455,678 * — — — * * * * * — * * * * 104,528,234 64.23% 15,210,016 11.12% * Less than 1%. (1) Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules of the SEC and generally includes voting or investment power with respect to the securities. In computing the number of shares beneficially owned by a person and the percentage ownership of that person, shares underlying restricted stock units and options held by that person that will vest or be exercisable within 60 days of February 29, 2016 are deemed to be outstanding. Such shares, however, are not deemed to be outstanding for the purpose of computing the percentage ownership of any other person. 58 (2) Includes 34,567 RSUs and 45,525 PSUs vesting within 60 days of February 29, 2016. (3) Mr. Lauré joined our Board on March 9, 2016. (4) Includes 105,319 shares of common stock held indirectly in the McDaniel Trust dtd 7/26/2000 of which Mr. McDaniel and his spouse are co-trustees. (5) Includes 100,000 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of options exercisable within 60 days of February 29, 2016 and 31,801 RSUs and 39,802 PSUs vesting within 60 days of February 29, 2016. (6) Includes 27,801 RSUs and 36,515 PSUs vesting within 60 days of February 29, 2016. (7) Includes 5,072 shares of commons stock held indirectly in The H&L Wenger 2002 Family Trust UAD 06/21/02 Howard Wenger & Lisa Wenger Trustees and 35,667 RSUs and 51,267 PSUs vesting within 60 days of February 29, 2016. (8) Includes 1,218 shares of common stock held by The Werner Family Trust (“WF Trust”), of which Mr. Werner and his wife are co-trustees and the beneficiaries are the surviving spouse between Thomas Werner and Suzanne Werner, to be followed by Jessica Werner and Katheryn Werner. Thomas and Suzanne Werner have been delegated joint control and voting power over the WF Trust. Includes 113,715 RSUs and 36,817 PSUs vesting within 60 days of February 29, 2016. (9) Includes 12,000 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of options exercisable within 60 days of February 29, 2016. (10) Includes the shares described in footnotes 2-8 plus 16,000 shares of common stock held by additional executive officers and 40,109 RSUs and 43,534 PSUs vesting within 60 days of February 29, 2016 held by an additional executive officers. (11) The ownership information set forth in the table is based on information contained in a statement on Schedule 13D/A, filed with the SEC on December 10, 2015 by Total Energies Nouvelles Activités USA, SAS (formerly known as Total Gas & Power USA, SAS) and its parent Total S.A., which indicated that the parties have shared voting and shared dispositive power with respect to said shares. Includes 9,531,677 shares of common stock issuable pursuant to a warrant issued by us to Total Gas & Power USA, SAS on February 28, 2012, 8,017,420 shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of the convertible debentures issued by us to Total Gas & Power USA, SAS on May 29, 2013, 5,126,775 shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of the convertible debentures issued by us to Total Energies Nouvelles Activités USA, SAS on June 11, 2014 and 3,275,680 shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of the convertible debentures issued by us to Total Energies Nouvelles Activités USA, SAS on December 15, 2015. (12) The ownership information set forth in the table is based on information contained in a statement on Schedule 13G/A, filed with the SEC on February 11, 2016 by Wellington Management Group LLP, Wellington Group Holdings LLP, Wellington Investment Advisors Holdings LLP and Wellington Management Company LLP. Such statement disclosed that Wellington Management Group LLP, Wellington Group Holdings LLP, Wellington Investment Advisors Holdings LLP have shared dispositive power with respect to 15,210,016 shares (or 11.12% of the shares of common stock outstanding as of February 29, 2016) and shared voting power with respect to 11,872,995 shares (or 8.68% of the shares of common stock outstanding as of February 29, 2016) and that Wellington Management Company LLP has shared dispositive power with respect to 14,495,066 shares and shared voting power with respect to 11,490,627 shares. Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 requires certain of our executive officers and our directors, and persons who own more than 10% of a registered class of our equity securities, to file an initial report of ownership on Form 3 and reports of changes in ownership on Forms 4 or 5 with the SEC and The NASDAQ Global Select Market. Such executive officers, directors and greater than 10% stockholders are also required by SEC regulations to furnish us with copies of all Section 16 forms that they file. We periodically remind our directors and executive officers of their reporting obligations and assist in making the required disclosures once we have been notified that a reportable event has occurred. We are required to report in this proxy statement any failure by any of the above-mentioned persons to make timely Section 16 reports. Based solely on our review of the copies of such forms received by us, and written representations from our directors and executive officers, we are unaware of any instances of noncompliance, or late compliance, with Section 16(a) filing requirements by our directors, executive officers or greater than 10% stockholders during fiscal 2015. COMPANY STOCK PRICE PERFORMANCE The following graph compares the performance of an investment in our common stock from January 3, 2011 through January 3, 2016, with The NASDAQ Market Index and with four comparable issuers: First Solar, Inc., SunEdison, Inc., and Trina Solar Ltd. The graph assumes $100 was invested on January 3, 2011 in our former Class A common stock at the closing price of $13.06 per share, at the closing prices of the common stock for First Solar, Inc., SunEdison, Inc. and Trina Solar Ltd., and at the closing price for The NASDAQ Market Index. In addition, the graph assumes that any dividends were reinvested on the date of payment without payment of any commissions. The performance shown in the graph represents past performance and should not be considered an indication of future performance. The following graph is not, and shall not be deemed to be, filed as part of our 59 Annual Report on Form 10-K. Such graph should not be deemed filed or incorporated by reference into any of our filings under the Securities Act of 1933, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent specifically incorporated by reference therein by us. SunPower Nasdaq First Solar SunEdison Trina $250 $200 $150 $100 $50 $- January 2, 2011 January 1, 2012 December 30, 2012 December 29, 2013 December 28, 2014 December 31, 2015 ASSUMES $100 INVESTED ON JANUARY 2, 2011 (ASSUMES DIVIDEND REINVESTED) UNTIL FISCAL YEAR ENDED JANUARY 3, 2016 SunPower Corporation Nasdaq Market Index First Solar, Inc. SunEdison, Inc. Trina Solar Ltd. January 1, 2012 December 30, 2012 December 29, 2013 December 28, 2014 December 31, 2015 $48.56 $98.20 $25.94 $34.99 $28.52 $42.79 $111.59 $22.90 $28.15 $18.02 $225.33 $156.68 $42.46 $93.98 $56.15 $205.14 $181.19 $34.07 $113.68 $56.15 $233.90 $188.75 $50.71 $45.20 $47.05 60 EQUITY COMPENSATION PLAN INFORMATION The following table provides certain information as of January 3, 2016 with respect to our equity compensation plans under which our equity securities are authorized for issuance (in thousands, except dollar figures). Plan Category Equity compensation plans approved by security holders Total(1) Number of securities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options, warrants and rights Weighted average exercise price of outstanding options, warrants and rights 135 135 $56.48 — Number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans (excluding securities reflected in the first column) 7,174 7,174 (1) This table excludes options to purchase an aggregate of approximately 15,334 shares of common stock, at a weighted average exercise price of $32.46 per share, that we assumed in connection with the acquisition of PowerLight Corporation, now known as SunPower Corporation, Systems, in January 2007. Under the terms of our three equity incentive plans, we may issue incentive or non-statutory stock options, restricted stock awards, restricted stock units, or stock purchase rights to directors, employees and consultants to purchase common stock. The SunPower Corporation 2015 Omnibus Incentive Plan includes an automatic share reserve increase feature effective for fiscal 2016 through fiscal 2025. This share reserve increase feature will cause an annual and automatic increase in the number of shares of our common stock reserved for issuance under the Stock Incentive Plan in an amount each year equal to the least of: 3% of the outstanding shares of our common stock measured on the last day of the immediately preceding fiscal year; 6,000,000 shares; and such other number of shares as determined by our Board. On January 4, 2016, the Board approved a 2,734,245 (2%) share increase for fiscal 2016. 61 PROPOSAL THREE RATIFICATION OF THE APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016 The Board of Directors, upon recommendation of the Audit Committee, has reappointed the firm of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending January 1, 2017, subject to ratification by our stockholders. Ernst & Young LLP has served as our auditor since May 3, 2012. A representative of Ernst & Young LLP is expected to be present at the Annual Meeting and will have an opportunity to make a statement if he or she desires to do so, and is expected to be available to respond to appropriate questions. Stockholder ratification of the selection of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm is not required by our By-Laws or other applicable legal requirements. However, the Board is submitting the selection of Ernst & Young LLP to the stockholders for ratification as a matter of good corporate governance. If the stockholders fail to ratify the selection of our independent registered accounting firm, the Audit Committee and the Board will reconsider whether or not to retain that firm. Even if the selection is ratified, the Board, at its discretion, may direct the appointment of a different independent registered public accounting firm at any time during the year if it determines that such a change would be in our and our stockholders’ best interests. Ernst & Young LLP Ernst & Young LLP fees incurred by us for fiscal years 2014 and 2015 were as follows: Services Audit Fees Audit-Related Fees Tax Fees All Other Fees Total 2014 ($) 2,479,728 403,750 320,200 8,165 3,213,857 2015 ($) 2,871,088 1,440,551 983,365 19,000 5,314,005 • Audit Fees: Audit fees for 2014 and 2015 were for professional services rendered in connection with audits of our consolidated financial statements, statutory audits of our subsidiary companies, quarterly reviews and assistance with documents that we filed with the SEC (including our Forms 10-Q and 8-K) for periods covering fiscal 2014 and 2015. • Audit-Related Fees: Audit-related fees for 2014 and 2015 were for professional services rendered in connection with debt offerings and consultations with management on various accounting matters. • Tax Fees: Tax fees for 2014 and 2015 were for tax consulting services. • All Other Fees: Other fees in 2014 and 2015 were for access to technical accounting services. Audit Committee Pre-Approval As required by Section 10A(i)(1) of the Exchange Act, our Audit Committee has adopted a pre-approval policy requiring that the Audit Committee pre-approve all audit and permissible non-audit services to be performed by our independent registered public accounting firm. Any proposed service that has received pre-approval but which will exceed pre-approved cost limits will require additional pre-approval by the Audit Committee. In addition, pursuant to Section 10A(i)(3) of the Exchange Act, the Audit Committee has established procedures by which the Audit Committee may from time to time delegate pre-approval authority to the Chairman of the Audit Committee. If the Chairman exercises this authority, he must report any pre-approval decisions to the full Audit Committee at its next meeting. The independent registered public accounting firm and our management are required to periodically report to the Audit Committee regarding the extent of services provided by the independent registered public accounting firm in accordance with the committee’s pre-approval, and the fees for the services performed to date. 62 During fiscal years 2014 and 2015 all services provided to us by Ernst & Young LLP were pre-approved by the Audit Committee in accordance with the pre-approval policy described above. The scope and services was reviewed and approved by the Audit Committee after the services were rendered. Ernst & Young LLP and our Audit Committee have each concluded that Ernst & Young LLP’s objectivity and ability to exercise impartial judgment on all issues encompassed with the audit engagement has not been impaired because (i) the services did not include prohibited non-audit related services; (ii) no members of the audit engagement team were aware of or involved with the provision of the services until after such services were provided; and (iii) the fees we paid were insignificant both to Ernst & Young LLP and to SunPower. Vote Required The ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for fiscal year 2016 requires the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of our stock having voting power and in attendance or represented by proxy at the Annual Meeting. We do not expect “broker non-votes” on this proposal since brokers have discretionary authority to vote on this proposal. Abstentions will have the effect of votes against this proposal. 63 [This page intentionally left blank.] [This page intentionally left blank.] Changing the Way Our World is Powered As one of the world’s most innovative and sustainable energy companies, SunPower provides residential, commercial and utility customers with complete solar solutions, services and Smart Energy choices. Our global customers rely on our more than 30 years of proven experience. From the first flip of the switch, SunPower delivers maximum value and superb performance throughout the long life of every solar system. Headquartered in Silicon Valley, SunPower has about 8,000 dedicated, customer-focused employees in Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, North and South America. Since 2011, we’ve been majority-owned by Total, the fourth largest publicly-traded energy company. We passionately believe that our company’s achievements and our individual contributions are making the world a better place. We are driven to innovate, persevere, blaze new trails, and deliver on our promises. We are changing the way our world is powered and empowering customers to realize the potential of clean, renewable solar energy. SunPower provides clean energy through residential, commercial and power plant installations worldwide. EXECUTIVE OFFICERS Thomas H. Werner President, CEO and Chairman of the Board Lisa Bodensteiner Executive Vice President and General Counsel Charles D. Boynton Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Eric Branderiz Senior Vice President, Corporate Controller and Chief Accounting Officer Marty T. Neese Chief Operating Officer Douglas J. Richards Executive Vice President Administration Howard Wenger President Business Units BOARD OF DIRECTORS Thomas H. Werner Chairman of the Board Arnaud Chaperon Director Bernard Clément Director Denis Giorno Director Daniel Lauré Director Catherine Lesjak Director Thomas R. McDaniel Director Humbert de Wendel Director Pat Wood III Director sp_annual_report_2015_cover_print.indd 2 3/8/16 4:34 PM CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS SunPower Corporation 77 Rio Robles, San Jose California 95134 USA 408.240.5500 sunpower.com Annual Report 2015 ©2016 SunPower Corporation. All Rights Reserved. SUNPOWER and the SUNPOWER logo are registered trademarks of SunPower Corporation in the U.S. and other countries as well. sp_annual_report_2015_cover_print.indd 1 3/8/16 4:34 PM 

Continue reading text version or see original annual report in PDF format above