NOTE 1 — GENERAL AND BASIS OF PRESENTATION

These unaudited condensed consolidated interim financial statements of Ormat Technologies, Inc. and its subsidiaries (collectively, the “Company”) have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S. GAAP”) and pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) for interim financial statements. Accordingly, they do not contain all information and notes required by U.S. GAAP for annual financial statements. In the opinion of management, these unaudited condensed consolidated interim financial statements reflect all adjustments, which include normal recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair statement of the Company’s consolidated financial position as of March 31, 2014, the consolidated results of operations and comprehensive income (loss) for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2014 and 2013 and the consolidated cash flows for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2014 and 2013.

The financial data and other information disclosed in the notes to the condensed consolidated financial statements related to these periods are unaudited. The results for the three-month period ended March 31, 2014 are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the year ending December 31, 2014.

These condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included in the Company’s annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013. The condensed consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 2013 was derived from the audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2013, but does not include all disclosures required by U.S. GAAP.

Dollar amounts, except per share data, in the notes to these financial statements are rounded to the closest $1,000.

Revision of previously issued financial statements

The Company identified an error in the second quarter of 2013 related to the calculation and presentation of income tax provision and the related deferred tax asset for the year ended December 31, 2012 and the three months ended March 31, 2013, which was a direct result of the deferred tax effects of the non-cash asset impairment charge recorded in the fourth quarter of 2012. The Company understated the valuation allowance against the U.S. deferred tax assets by $32.7 million and an additional $3.1 million at December 31, 2012 and March 31, 2013, respectively. As a result, for the year ended December 31, 2012 the Company revised the valuation allowance by $32.7 million, of which $26.1 million was recorded against property, plant and equipment where the Company recognized the deferred tax effects of grants received during 2012 and the remaining $6.6 million was recorded against the income tax provision. For the three months ended March 31, 2013, the Company revised the valuation allowance by an additional $3.1 million which also increased the tax provision for the period by the same amount.

The Company assessed the materiality of this error in accordance with the SEC’s Staff Accounting Bulletin 99 and concluded that the previously issued financial statements were not materially misstated. However, if the entire correction of the error was recorded during the second quarter of fiscal 2013, the impact would be significant to the quarter ended June 30, 2013. In accordance with the SEC’s Staff Accounting Bulletin 108, the Company corrected these errors by revising the affected financial statements previously included in the Company’s 2012 Annual Report on Form 10-K and its Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2013.

This revision had no impact on the Company’s revenues, gross margin, operating income (loss), income (loss) before taxes and equity income (loss) of investees. There was also no impact on the Company’s consolidated net operating, investing or financing cash flows; however, the revisions impacted line items within the balance sheet at December 31, 2012 and March 31, 2013 and cash flows from operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2012 and the three months ended March 31, 2013. The revision impacted the Company income tax benefit (provision), net income (loss) from continuing operations, net income (loss) attributable to the Company’s stockholders, comprehensive income (loss) and earnings (loss) per share (“EPS”) in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss) for the year ended December 31, 2012 and the three months ended March 31, 2013.

The consolidated statement of operations and comprehensive income (loss), consolidated balance sheet, and consolidated statement of cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2012 were revised to correct the errors described above in the Company’s 2013 Annual Report on Form 10-K and in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2014.

The effect of the revision on the line items within the Company’s consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2012 is as follows:

The effect of the revision on the line items within the Company’s consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss) for the year ended December 31, 2012 is as follows:

The effect of the revision on the line items within the Company’s consolidated statements of cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2012 is as follows:

The effect of the revision on the line items within the Company’s consolidated balance sheet as of March 31, 2013 is as follows:

The effect of the revision on the line items within the Company’s consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss) for the three months ended March 31, 2013 is as follows:

* These numbers are revised for the correction of the error but prior to the impact of discontinued operations.

The effect of the revision on the line items within the Company’s consolidated statements of cash flows for the three months ended March 31, 2013 is as follows:

Other comprehensive income

For the three months ended March 31, 2014 and 2013, the Company reclassified $36,000 and $42,000, respectively, from accumulated other comprehensive income, of which $58,000 and $70,000, respectively, were recorded to reduce interest expense and $22,000 and $28,000, respectively, were recorded against the income tax provision, in the condensed consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income.

Termination fee

          On March 15, 2013, the Company finalized the agreement with Southern California Edison Company (“Southern California Edison”), by which the current G1 and G3 Standard Offer #4 power purchase agreements (“PPAs”) were terminated and a termination fee of $9.0 million was recorded in selling and marketing expenses in the quarter ended March 31, 2013. Under the agreement, the Company will continue to sell power from G2, the third plant of the Mammoth complex, under its existing PPA with Southern California Edison, with the term of the contract extended by an additional six years until early 2027.

Solar project sale

On March 26, 2014, the Company signed an agreement with RET Holdings, LLC to sell the Heber Solar project in Imperial County, California for $35.25 million. The Company received the first payment of $15.0 million with the remainder expected to be paid in the second quarter of 2014. Due to certain contingencies in the sale agreement, the Company deferred the pre-tax gain of approximately $7.5 million until resolution of such contingencies (which is expected in the second quarter of 2014).

Concentration of credit risk

Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to a concentration of credit risk consist principally of temporary cash investments and accounts receivable.

The Company places its temporary cash investments with high credit quality financial institutions located in the United States (“U.S.”) and in foreign countries. At March 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, the Company had deposits totaling $11,476,000 and $13,805,000, respectively, in seven U.S. financial institutions that were federally insured up to $250,000 per account. At March 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, the Company’s deposits in foreign countries amounted to approximately $49,438,000 and $56,133,000, respectively.

At March 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, accounts receivable related to operations in foreign countries amounted to approximately $27,075,000 and $32,231,000, respectively. At March 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, accounts receivable from the Company’s primary customers amounted to approximately 68.3% and 35.0%, respectively, of the Company’s accounts receivable.

Sierra Pacific Power Company and Nevada Power Company (subsidiaries of NV Energy, Inc.) accounted for 15.3% and 15.5% of the Company’s total revenues for the three months ended March 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively.

Southern California Edison accounted for 12.1% and 11.7% of the Company’s total revenues for the three months ended March 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively.

Kenya Power and Lighting Co. Ltd. accounted for 14.3% and 8.4% of the Company’s total revenues for the three months ended March 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively.

The Company performs ongoing credit evaluations of its customers’ financial condition. The Company has historically been able to collect on all of its receivable balances, and accordingly, no provision for doubtful accounts has been made.

NOTE 2 — NEW ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS

New accounting pronouncements effective in the three-month period ended March 31, 2014

Reporting Discontinued Operations and Disclosures

In April 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update No 2014-08, Presentation of Financial Statements (Topic 205) and Property, Plant and Equipment (Topic 360): Reporting Discontinued Operations and Disclosures of Disposals of Components of an Entity. The amendment, required to be applied prospectively for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2014, limits discontinued operations reporting to disposals of components of an entity that represent strategic shifts that have, or will have, a major effect on operations and financial results. The amendment requires expanded disclosures for discontinued operations and also requires additional disclosures regarding disposals of individually significant components that do not qualify as discontinued operations. Early adoption is permitted, but only for disposals (or classifications as held for sale) that have not been reported in financial statements previously issued or available for issuance. This amendment has no impact on our current disclosures, but will in the future if we dispose of any individually significant components of the Company.

Presentation of Unrecognized Tax Benefits

In July 2013, the FASB clarified the accounting guidance on presentation of the unrecognized tax benefits when a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward exists. The guidance states that an unrecognized tax benefit (or a portion thereof) should be presented in the financial statements as a reduction to a deferred tax asset for a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward, except for certain exceptions specified in the guidance. The exceptions include when a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward is not available at the reporting date under the tax law of the applicable jurisdiction to reduce any income taxes that would result from the disallowance of a tax position or the tax law of the applicable jurisdiction does not require the entity to use, and the entity does not intend to use, the deferred tax asset for such purpose, the unrecognized tax benefit should be presented in the financial statements as a liability and not be combined with deferred tax assets. The assessment of whether a deferred tax asset is available is based on the unrecognized tax benefit and deferred tax asset that exist at the reporting date and is to be made assuming the disallowance of the tax position at the reporting date. This accounting update is effective for fiscal periods after December 15, 2013. The provision was applied prospectively to all unrecognized tax benefits that exist on January 1, 2014. The adoption of this guidance did have a material impact on the condensed consolidated financial statements.

NOTE 3 — INVENTORIES

Inventories consist of the following:

NOTE 4 — UNCONSOLIDATED INVESTMENTS

Unconsolidated investments, mainly in power plants, consist of the following:

The Sarulla Project

The Company (through a subsidiary) is a 12.75% equity stake member of a consortium (the “Sarulla” Consortium”) which is in the process of developing the Sarulla geothermal power project in Indonesia with expected generating capacity of approximately 330 megawatts (“MW”). The Sarulla project is located in Tapanuli Utara, North Sumatra, Indonesia and will be owned and operated by the consortium members under the framework of a Joint Operating Contract (“JOC”) and Energy Sales Contract (“ESC”) that were signed on April 4, 2013. Under the JOC, PT Pertamina Geothermal Energy, the concession holder for the project, has provided the consortium with the right to use the geothermal field, and under the ESC, PT PLN, the state electric utility, will be the off-taker at Sarulla for a period of 30 years. In addition to its equity holdings in the consortium, the Company designed the Sarulla plant and is expected to supply its Ormat Energy Converters (“OECs”) to the power plant. The supply contract was signed on October 2013. 

The consortium has started preliminary testing and development activities at the site and signed an engineering procurement and construction agreement (“EPC”) with an unrelated third party. The project will be constructed in three phases of 110 MW each, utilizing both steam and brine extracted from the geothermal field to increase the power plant’s efficiency.

On March 28, 2014, the consortium signed financing agreements in an aggregate amount of $1.17 billion to finance the development of the Sarulla project with a consortium of lenders comprised of Japan Bank for International Cooperation (“JBIC”), the Asian Development Bank and six commercial banks to obtain construction and term loan under limited-recourse financing package backed by political risk guarantee from JBIC.

Upon financing closing, the consortium is expected to begin full scope of construction with the first phase of operations expected to commence in 2016. The remaining two phases of operations are scheduled to commence within 18 months thereafter. The Company will supply its Ormat Energy Converters to the power plant and will add the $254.0 million supply contract to its product segment backlog once the Notice to Proceed is issued, upon closing of the financing. According to the current project plan we expect to recognize revenue from the project over the course of the next three to four years starting in the third quarter of 2014.  

During the first quarter of 2014, the Company made additional investment contributions of $0.6 million to the Sarulla project, consistent with its pro rata share in the consortium.

The Company’s share in the results of operations of the Sarulla project was not significant for each of the periods presented in these condensed consolidated financial statements.

NOTE 5 — FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS

The fair value measurement guidance clarifies that fair value is an exit price, representing the amount that would be received upon selling an asset or paid upon transferring a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants. As such, fair value is a market-based measurement that should be determined based on assumptions that market participants would use in pricing an asset or liability. The guidance establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurements) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurements). The three levels of the fair value hierarchy under the fair value measurement guidance are described below:

Level 1 — Unadjusted quoted prices in active markets that are accessible at the measurement date for identical assets or liabilities;

Level 2 — Quoted prices in markets that are not active, or inputs that are observable, either directly or indirectly, for substantially the full term of the asset or liability ;

Level 3 — Prices or valuation techniques that require inputs that are both significant to the fair value measurement and unobservable (supported by little or no market activity).

The following table sets forth certain fair value information at March 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013 for financial assets and liabilities measured at fair value by level within the fair value hierarchy, as well as carrying value. As required by the fair value measurement guidance, assets and liabilities are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of inputs that is significant to the fair value measurement.

The amounts set forth in the tables above include investments in debt instruments, money market funds (which are included in cash equivalents) and short-term bank deposits. Those securities and deposits are classified within Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy because they are valued using quoted market prices in an active market.

The following table presents the amounts of gain (loss) recognized in the condensed consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss) on derivative instruments not designated as hedges:

On September 3, 2013, the Company entered into an NGI swap contract with a bank for notional volume of approximately 4.4 million MMbtus for settlement effective January 1, 2014 until December 31, 2014, in order to reduce its exposure to NGI below $4.035 per MMbtu under its PPAs with Southern California Edison. The contract did not have up-front costs. Under the terms of this contract, the Company makes floating rate payments to the bank and receives fixed rate payments from the bank on each settlement date. The swap contract has monthly settlement whereby the difference between the fixed price of $4.035 per MMbtu and the market price on the first commodity business day on which the relevant commodity reference price is published in the relevant calculation period (January 1, 2014 to December 1, 2014) is being settled on a cash basis.

On October 16, 2013, the Company entered into an NGI swap contract with a bank for notional volume of approximately 4.2 million MMbtus for settlement effective January 1, 2014 until December 31, 2014, in order to reduce its exposure to NGI below $4.103 per MMbtu under its PPAs with Southern California Edison. The contract did not have any up-front costs. Under the terms of this contract, the Company makes floating rate payments to the bank and receives fixed rate payments from the bank on each settlement date. The swap contract has monthly settlements whereby the difference between the fixed price of $4.103 per MMbtu and the market price on the first commodity business day on which the relevant commodity reference price is published in the relevant calculation period (January 1, 2014 to December 1, 2014) is being settled on a cash basis.

On October 16, 2013, the Company entered into a New York Harbor ULSD swap contract with a bank for notional volume of 275,000 BBL effective from January 1, 2014 until December 31, 2014 to reduce the Company’s exposure to fluctuations in the energy rate caused by fluctuations in oil prices under the 25 MW PPA for the Puna complex. The Company entered into this contract because the swap had a high correlation with the avoided costs (which are incremental costs that the power purchaser avoids by not having to generate such electrical energy itself or purchase it from others) that HELCO uses to calculate the energy rate. The contract did not have any up-front costs. Under the term of this contract, the Company will make floating rate payments to the bank and receive fixed rate payments from the bank on each settlement date ($125.15 per BBL). The swap contract has monthly settlements whereby the difference between the fixed price and the monthly average market price will be settled on a cash basis.

On March 6, 2014, the Company entered into an NGI swap contract with a bank for notional volume of approximately 2.2 million MMbtus for settlement effective January 1, 2015 until March 31, 2015, in order to reduce its exposure to NGI below $4.95 per MMbtu under its PPAs with Southern California Edison. The contract did not have any up-front costs. Under the terms of this contract, the Company will make floating rate payments to the bank and receive fixed rate payments from the bank on each settlement date. The swap contract has monthly settlements whereby the difference between the fixed price of $4.95 per MMbtu and the market price on the first commodity business day on which the relevant commodity reference price is published in the relevant calculation period (January 1, 2015 to March 1, 2015) will be settled on a cash basis.

The foregoing swap transactions have not been designated as hedge transactions and are marked to market with the corresponding gains or losses recognized within “electricity revenues” in the condensed consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss). The Company recognized a net loss from these transactions of $2.4 million and $4.6 million in the three months ended March 31, 2014 and March 31, 2013, respectively.

There were no transfers of assets or liabilities between Level 1 and Level 2 during the three months ended March 31, 2014.

The fair value of the Company’s long-term debt approximates its carrying amount, except for the following:

The fair value of OFC Senior Secured Notes is determined using observable market prices as these securities are traded. The fair value of the other long-term debt is determined by a valuation model, which is based on a conventional discounted cash flow methodology and utilizes assumptions of current borrowing rates. The fair value of revolving lines of credit is determined using a comparison of market-based price sources that are reflective of similar credit ratings to those of the Company.

The carrying value of other financial instruments, such as revolving lines of credit, deposits, and other long-term debt approximates fair value.

The following table presents the fair value of financial instruments as of March 31, 2014:

The following table presents the fair value of financial instruments as of December 31, 2013:

NOTE 6 — STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION

The 2004 Incentive Compensation Plan

In 2004, the Company’s Board of Directors adopted the 2004 Incentive Compensation Plan (“2004 Incentive Plan”), which provides for the grant of the following types of awards: incentive stock options, non-qualified stock options, restricted stock, stock appreciation rights (“SARs”), stock units, performance awards, phantom stock, incentive bonuses, and other possible related dividend equivalents to employees of the Company, directors and independent contractors. Under the 2004 Incentive Plan, a total of 3,750,000 shares of the Company’s common stock have been reserved for issuance, all of which could be issued as options or as other forms of awards. Options and SARs granted to employees under the 2004 Incentive Plan cliff vest and are exercisable from the grant date as follows: 25% after 24 months, 25% after 36 months, and the remaining 50% after 48 months. Options granted to non-employee directors under the 2004 Incentive Plan cliff vest and are exercisable one year after the grant date. Vested stock-based awards may be exercised for up to ten years from the date of grant. The shares of common stock will be issued upon exercise of options or SARs from the Company’s authorized share capital. The 2004 Incentive Plan expired in May 2012 upon adoption of the 2012 Incentive Plan, except as to share based awards outstanding on that date.

The 2012 Incentive Compensation Plan

In May 2012, the Company’s shareholders adopted the 2012 Incentive Compensation Plan (“2012 Incentive Plan”), which provides for the grant of the following types of awards: incentive stock options, non-qualified stock options, restricted stock, SARs, stock units, performance awards, phantom stock, incentive bonuses, and other possible related dividend equivalents to employees of the Company, directors and independent contractors. Under the 2012 Incentive Plan, a total of 4,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock have been reserved for issuance, all of which could be issued as options or as other forms of awards. Options and SARs granted to employees under the 2012 Incentive Plan typically vest and become exercisable as follows: 25% vest 24 months after the grant date, an additional 25% vest 36 months after the grant date, and the remaining 50% vest 48 months after the grant date. Options granted to non-employee directors under the 2012 Incentive Plan will vest and become exercisable one year after the grant date. The term of stock-based awards typically ranges from six to ten years from the date of grant. The shares of common stock will be issued upon exercise of options or SARs from the Company’s authorized share capital.

The 2012 Incentive Plan empowers the Company's Board of Directors, in its discretion, to amend the 2012 Incentive Plan in certain respects. Consistent with its authority to amend the Incentive Plan, in February 2014 the Board adopted and approved certain amendments to the Incentive Plan. The key amendments are as follows:

Increase of per grant limit: Section 15(a) of the 2012 Incentive Plan was amended to allow the grant of up to 400,000 shares of the Company's common stock with respect to the initial grant of an equity award to newly hired executive officers in any calendar year. This amendment will become void if not adopted by the Company's stockholders by May 31, 2014; and

Acceleration of vesting: Section 15(l) of the 2012 Incentive Plan was amended to clarify the Company ability to provide in the applicable award agreement that part and/or all of the award will be accelerated upon the occurrence of certain predetermined events and/or conditions, such as a "change in control" (as defined in the 2012 Incentive Plan, as amended).

On February 11, 2014 the Company granted its Chief Financial Officer stock options to purchase 32,500 shares of common stock under the 2012 Incentive Plan. The exercise price of each option is $24.57, which represented the fair market value of the Company’s common stock on the grant date. Such options will expire five years from the date of grant and will vest in equal annual installments over a period of three years from the grant date, subject to acceleration upon a change of control.

The fair value of each SAR on the grant date was $5.78. The Company calculated the fair value of each SAR on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes valuation model based on the following assumptions:

NOTE 7 — INTEREST EXPENSE, NET

The components of interest expense, net, are as follows:

NOTE 8 — EARNINGS (LOSS) PER SHARE

Basic earnings (loss) per share attributable to the Company’s stockholders (“earnings (loss) per share”) is computed by dividing net income or loss attributable to the Company’s stockholders by the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding for the period. The Company does not have any equity instruments that are dilutive, except for employee stock-based awards.

The table below shows the reconciliation of the number of shares used in the computation of basic and diluted earnings (loss) per share:

For the three months ended March 31, 2013, the employee stock-based awards were anti-dilutive because of the Company’s net loss, and therefore they have been excluded from the diluted earnings (loss) per share calculation.

The number of stock-based awards that could potentially dilute future earnings per share and that were not included in the computation of diluted earnings (loss) per share because to do so would have been anti-dilutive was 3,349,877 and 5,161,802 for the three months ended March 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively.

NOTE 9 — BUSINESS SEGMENTS

The Company has two reporting segments: Electricity and Product Segments. These segments are managed and reported separately as each offers different products and serves different markets. The Electricity Segment is engaged in the sale of electricity from the Company’s power plants pursuant to PPAs. The Product Segment is engaged in the manufacture, including design and development, of turbines and power units for the supply of electrical energy and in the associated construction of power plants utilizing the power units manufactured by the Company to supply energy from geothermal fields and other alternative energy sources. Transfer prices between the operating segments are determined based on current market values or cost plus markup of the seller’s business segment.

Summarized financial information concerning the Company’s reportable segments is shown in the following tables:

       Reconciling information between reportable segments and the Company’s consolidated totals is shown in the following table:

NOTE 10 — COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

In December 2012, Laborers’ International Union of North America Local Union No. 783 (“LiUNA”), an organized labor union, filed a petition in Mono County Superior Court, naming Mono County, California and the Company as defendant and real party in interest, respectively. The petitioners brought this action to challenge the November 13, 2012 decision of the Mono County Board of Supervisors in adopting Resolutions No. 12-78, denying petitioners’ administrative appeal of the Planning Commission’s approval of Conditional Use Permit (“CUP”), adoption of findings under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and adoption of the final environmental impact report (“EIR”) for the Mammoth Pacific enhancement. The petition asked the court to set aside the approval of the CUP and adoption of the EIR and cause a new EIR to be prepared and circulated.

The Company believes that the petition is without merit and intends to respond and take necessary legal action to dismiss the proceedings. The Company responded to LiUNA’s petition. Filing of the petition in and of itself does not have any immediate adverse implications for the Mammoth enhancement.

In January 2014, the Company learned that two former employees alleged in a “qui tam” complaint filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California that the Company submitted fraudulent applications and certifications to obtain grants. While the United States Department of Justice has declined to intervene, the former employees may proceed on their own. In April 2014, the Company was served and does not believe that the allegations of the lawsuit have any merit and will defend itself vigorously.

In addition, from time to time, the Company is named as a party in various other lawsuits, claims and other legal and regulatory proceedings that arise in the ordinary course of its business. These actions typically seek, among other things, compensation for alleged personal injury, breach of contract, property damage, punitive damages, civil penalties or other losses, or injunctive or declaratory relief. With respect to such lawsuits, claims and proceedings, the Company accrues reserves when a loss is probable and the amount of such loss can be reasonably estimated. It is the opinion of the Company’s management that the outcome of these proceedings, individually and collectively, will not be material to the Company’s consolidated financial statements as a whole.

NOTE 11 — INCOME TAXES

The Company’s effective tax rate for the three months ended March 31, 2014 and 2013 was 22.3% and 268.5%, respectively. The effective tax rate differs from the federal statutory rate of 35% for the three months ended March 31, 2014 due to; (i)a full valuation allowance against the Company’s U.S. deferred tax assets in respect of net operating loss (“NOL”) carryforwards and unutilized tax credits (see below), (ii) lower tax rates in Israel; and (iii) a tax credit and tax exemption related to the Company’s subsidiaries in Guatemala. The effect of the tax credit and tax exemption for the three months ended March 31, 2014 and March 31, 2013 was $1,019,000 and $951,000, respectively.

At December 31, 2013, the Company had U.S. federal NOL carryforwards of approximately $235.4 million and state NOL carryforwards of approximately $218.1 available to reduce future taxable income, which expire between 2021 and 2032 for federal NOLs and between 2014 and 2032 for state NOLs. Investment tax credits in the amount of $0.7 million at December 31, 2013 are available for a 20-year period and expire between 2022 and 2024. Production tax credits in the amount of $71.3 million at December 31, 2013 are available for a 20-year period and expire between 2026 and 2032.

Realization of the deferred tax assets is dependent on generating sufficient taxable income in appropriate jurisdictions prior to expiration of the NOL carryforwards and tax credits. The scheduled reversal of deferred tax liabilities, projected future taxable income, and tax planning strategies were considered in determining the amount of valuation allowance. A full valuation allowance was recorded against the U.S. deferred tax assets as of December 31, 2013 and March 31, 2014, as at these points in time, it was more likely than not that the deferred tax assets will not be realized. If sufficient evidence of the Company’s ability to generate taxable income is established in the future, the Company may be required to reduce this valuation allowance, resulting in income tax benefits in its condensed consolidated statement of operations and comprehensive income (loss).

The Company believes that based on its plans to increase the operations outside of the U.S., the cash generated from the Company’s operations outside of the U.S. will be reinvested outside of the U.S.. In addition, the Company’s U.S. sources of cash and liquidity are sufficient to meet its needs in the U.S. and, accordingly, the Company does not currently plan to repatriate the funds it has designated as being permanently invested outside the U.S.. If the Company changes its plans, it may be required to accrue and pay U.S. taxes to repatriate these funds.

The Company’s subsidiary, Ormat Systems Ltd. (“Ormat Systems”), received “Benefited Enterprise” status under Israel’s Law for Encouragement of Capital Investments, 1959 (the “Investment Law”), with respect to two of its investment programs. As a Benefited Enterprise, Ormat Systems was exempt from Israeli income taxes with respect to income derived from the first benefited investment for a period of two years beginning in 2004, and thereafter such income was subject to reduced Israeli income tax rates, which will not exceed 25% for an additional five years until 2010. Ormat Systems was also exempt from Israeli income taxes with respect to income derived from the second benefited investment for a period of two years beginning in 2007. Thereafter, such income is subject to reduced Israeli income tax rates, which will not exceed 25% for an additional five years until 2013. These benefits are subject to certain conditions, including among other things, that all transactions between Ormat Systems and its affiliates are done on an arm’s length basis, and that the management of Ormat Systems will be located in, and the control will be conducted from, Israel during the entire period of the tax benefits. A change in control of Ormat Systems would need to be reported to the Israel Tax Authority in order for Ormat Systems to maintain the tax benefits. In January 2011, new legislation amending the Investment Law was enacted. Under the new legislation, a uniform rate of corporate tax will apply to all qualified income of certain industrial companies, as opposed to the previous law’s incentives that are limited to income from a “Benefited Enterprise” during their benefits period. According to the amendment, the uniform tax rate applicable to the zone where the production facilities of Ormat Systems are located would be 15% in 2011 and 2012, 12.5% in 2013 and 2014, and 12% in 2015 and thereafter. Under the transitory provisions of the new legislation, Ormat Systems had the option either to irrevocably comply with the new law while waiving benefits provided under the previous law or to continue to comply with the previous law during a transition period with the option to move from the previous law to the new law at any stage. Ormat Systems decided to irrevocably comply with the new law starting in 2011.

A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amounts of unrecognized tax benefits is as follows:

NOTE 12 — TAX MONETIZATION TRANSACTION

OPC TRANSACTION

In June 2007, the Company’s wholly owned subsidiary Ormat Nevada Inc. (“Ormat Nevada”) entered into agreements with affiliates of Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated and Lehman Brothers Inc. (Morgan Stanley Geothermal LLC and Lehman-OPC LLC), under which those investors purchased, for cash, interests in a newly formed subsidiary of Ormat Nevada, OPC LLC (“OPC”), entitling the investors to certain tax benefits (such as PTCs and accelerated depreciation) and distributable cash associated with four geothermal power plants.

The first closing under the agreements occurred in 2007 and covered the Company’s Desert Peak 2, Steamboat Hills, and Galena 2 power plants. The investors paid $71.8 million at the first closing. The second closing under the agreements occurred in 2008 and covered the Galena 3 power plant. The investors paid $63.0 million at the second closing.

Ormat Nevada continues to operate and maintain the power plants. Under the agreements, Ormat Nevada initially received all of the distributable cash flow generated by the power plants, while the investors received substantially all of the production tax credits and taxable income or loss (together, the “Economic Benefits”). Once Ormat Nevada recovered the capital that it has invested in the power plants, which occurred in the fourth quarter of 2010, the investors receive both the distributable cash flow and the Economic Benefits. The investors’ return is limited by the term of the transaction. Once the investors reach a target after-tax yield on their investment in OPC (the “OPC Flip Date”), Ormat Nevada will receive 95% of both distributable cash and taxable income, on a going forward basis. Following the OPC Flip Date, Ormat Nevada also has the option to buy out the investors’ remaining interest in OPC at the then-current fair market value or, if greater, the investors’ capital account balances in OPC. Should Ormat Nevada exercise this purchase option, it would thereupon revert to being sole owner of the power plants.

The Class B membership units are provided with a 5% residual economic interest in OPC. The 5% residual interest commences on achievement by the investors of a contractually stipulated return that triggers the OPC Flip Date. The actual OPC Flip Date is not known with certainty and is determined by the operating results of OPC. This residual 5% interest represents a noncontrolling interest and is not subject to mandatory redemption or guaranteed payments. Cash is distributed each period in accordance with the cash allocation percentages stipulated in the agreements. Until the fourth quarter of 2010, Ormat Nevada was allocated the cash earnings in OPC and therefore, the amount allocated to the 5% residual interest represented the noncash loss of OPC which principally represented depreciation on the property, plant and equipment. As from the fourth quarter of 2010, the distributable cash is allocated to the Class B membership units. As a result of the acquisition by Ormat Nevada, on October 30, 2009, of all of the Class B membership units of OPC held by Lehman-OPC LLC (see below), the residual interest decreased to 3.5%. Such residual interest increased to 5% on February 3, 2011 when Ormat Nevada sold its Class B membership units to JPM Capital Corporation (“JPM”) (see below).

The Company’s voting rights in OPC are based on a capital structure that is comprised of Class A and Class B membership units. Through Ormat Nevada, the Company owns all of the Class A membership units, which represent 75% of the voting rights in OPC. The investors own all of the Class B membership units, which represent 25% of the voting rights in OPC. In the period from October 30, 2009 to February 3, 2011, the Company owned, through Ormat Nevada, all of the Class A membership units, which represented 75% of the voting rights in OPC, and 30% of the Class B membership units, which represented 7.5% of the voting rights of OPC. In total the Company had 82.5% of the voting rights in OPC as of December 31, 2010. In that period, the investors owned 70% of the Class B membership units, which represented 17.5% of the voting rights of OPC. Other than in respect of customary protective rights, all operational decisions in OPC are decided by the vote of a majority of the membership units. Following the OPC Flip Date, Ormat Nevada’s voting rights will increase to 95% and the investor’s voting rights will decrease to 5%. Ormat Nevada retains the controlling voting interest in OPC both before and after the OPC Flip Date and therefore consolidates OPC.

On October 30, 2009, Ormat Nevada acquired from Lehman-OPC LLC all of the Class B membership units of OPC held by Lehman-OPC pursuant to a right of first offer for a price of $18.5 million. A substantial portion of the initial sale of the Class B membership units by Ormat Nevada was accounted for as a financing transaction. As a result, the repurchase of these interests at a discount resulted in a pre-tax gain of $13.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2009. In addition, an amount of approximately $1.1 million has been reclassified from noncontrolling interest to additional paid-in capital representing the 1.5% residual interest of Lehman-OPC’s Class B membership units.

On February 3, 2011, Ormat Nevada sold to JPM all of the Class B membership units of OPC that it had acquired on October 30, 2010 for a total sale price of $24.9 million in cash. The Company did not record any gain from the sale of its Class B membership interests in OPC to JPM. A substantial portion of the Class B membership units are accounted for as a financing transaction. As a result, the majority of these proceeds were recorded as a liability. In addition, $2.3 million has been reclassified from additional paid-in capital to noncontrolling interest representing the 1.5% residual interest of JPM’s Class B membership units.

ORTP TRANSACTION

In January  2013, Ormat Nevada entered into agreements with JP Morgan (“JPM”) under which JPM purchased interests in a newly formed subsidiary of Ormat Nevada, ORTP, LLC (“ORTP”), entitling JPM to certain tax benefits (such as PTCs and accelerated depreciation) associated with certain geothermal power plants in California and Nevada.

Under the terms of the transaction, Ormat Nevada transferred the Heber complex, the Mammoth complex, the Ormesa complex, and the Steamboat 2 and 3, Burdette (Galena 1) and Brady power plants to ORTP, and sold class B membership units in ORTP to JPM. In connection with the closing, JPM paid approximately $35.7 million to Ormat Nevada and will make additional payments to Ormat Nevada of 25% of the value of PTCs generated by the portfolio over time. The additional payments are expected to be made until December 31, 2016 up to a maximum amount of $11.0 million of which we received $2.2 million in the first quarter of 2014.

Ormat Nevada will continue to operate and maintain the power plants. Under the agreements, Ormat Nevada will initially receive all of the distributable cash flow generated by the power plants, while JPM will receive substantially all of PTCs and the taxable income or loss (together, the “Economic Benefits”). JPM’s return is limited by the terms of the transaction. Once JPM reaches a target after-tax yield on its investment in ORTP (the “ORTP Flip Date”), Ormat Nevada will receive 97.5% of the distributable cash and 95% of the taxable income, on a going forward basis. At any time during the twelve-month period after the end of the fiscal year in which the ORTP Flip Date occurs (but no earlier than the expiration of five years following the date that the last of the power plants was placed in service for purposes of federal income taxes), Ormat Nevada also has the option to buy out JPM’s remaining interest in ORTP at the then-current fair market value. If Ormat Nevada were to exercise this purchase option, it would become the sole owner of the power plants again.

The Class B membership units entitle the holder to 5.0% (allocation of income and loss) and 2.5% (allocation of cash) residual economic interest in ORTP. The 5.0% and 2.5% residual interest commences on achievement by JPM of a contractually stipulated return that triggers the ORTP Flip Date. The actual ORTP Flip Date is not known with certainty. This residual 5.0% and 2.5% interest represents a noncontrolling interest and is not subject to mandatory redemption or guaranteed payments.

The Company’s voting rights in ORTP are based on a capital structure that is comprised of Class A and Class B membership units. Through Ormat Nevada the Company owns all of the Class A membership units, which represent 75% of the voting rights in ORTP. JPM owns all of the Class B membership units, which represent 25% of the voting rights of ORTP. Other than in respect of customary protective rights, all operational decisions in ORTP are decided by the vote of a majority of the membership units. Ormat Nevada retains the controlling voting interest in ORTP both before and after the ORTP Flip Date and therefore will continue to consolidate ORTP.

NOTE 13 — DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS

On May 30, 2013, the Company’s wholly owned subsidiary, Ormat Holding Corp., sold the Momotombo Power Company (“MPC”), which operates the Momotombo power plant located in Nicaragua, to a third party for $7,751,000 approximately one year before the scheduled termination of the concession arrangement with the Nicaraguan owner. The Company recorded an after-tax gain on sale of approximately $3.6 million in June 2013.

In conjunction with the sale, the Company’s wholly owned subsidiary and the buyer signed a technical support agreement, whereby the subsidiary will provide technical consulting services, which can be terminated by either party with 60 days advance notice. The Company is of the opinion that the expected continuing cash flows from this agreement are insignificant and that there is no significant continuing involvement by the Company, including its subsidiaries, in the operations of the MPC after the sale. Therefore, the related income from operations prior to the date of the sale and the gain on the sale of the MPC have been included as discontinued operations in the condensed consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss) for all comparative periods presented.

The summarized financial information related to the discontinued operations is as follows:

The net assets of the MPC as of May 30, 2013 were as follows: