View Filing Data

Document and Entity Information - USD ($)	3 Months Ended
Document and Entity Information - USD ($)	Mar. 31, 2010	Apr. 16, 2010	Jun. 30, 2009
Document and Entity Information [Abstract]
Entity Registrant Name	BIOGEN IDEC INC.
Entity Central Index Key	0000875045
Document Type	10-Q
Document Period End Date	Mar. 31, 2010
Amendment Flag	false
Document Fiscal Year Focus	2010
Document Fiscal Period Focus	Q1
Current Fiscal Year End Date	--12-31
Entity Well-known Seasoned Issuer	Yes
Entity Voluntary Filers	No
Entity Current Reporting Status	Yes
Entity Filer Category	Large Accelerated Filer
Entity Public Float			$ 13,005,469,098
Entity Common Stock, Shares Outstanding		266,998,007

Consolidated Statements of Income (Unaudited) - USD ($) shares in Thousands, $ in Thousands	3 Months Ended
	Mar. 31, 2010	Mar. 31, 2009
Revenues:
Product	$ 824,220	$ 733,409
Unconsolidated joint business	254,928	278,818
Other	29,712	24,257
Total revenues	1,108,860	1,036,484
Costs and expenses:
Cost of sales, excluding amortization of acquired intangible assets	97,055	98,197
Research and development	307,030	279,478
Selling, general and administrative	248,664	221,830
Collaboration profit sharing	63,557	42,773
Amortization of acquired intangible assets	48,889	89,248
Acquired in-process research and development	39,976
Total costs and expenses	805,171	731,526
Income from operations	303,689	304,958
Other income (expense), net	(8,386)	6,846
Income before income tax expense	295,303	311,804
Income tax expense	75,310	65,225
Net income	219,993	246,579
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest, net of tax	2,551	2,592
Net income attributable to Biogen Idec Inc.	$ 217,442	$ 243,987
Net income per share:
Basic earnings per share attributable to Biogen Idec Inc.	$ 0.8	$ 0.85
Diluted earnings per share attributable to Biogen Idec Inc.	$ 0.8	$ 0.84
Weighted-average shares used in calculating:
Basic earnings per share attributable to Biogen Idec Inc.	269,922	287,703
Diluted earnings per share attributable to Biogen Idec Inc.	272,703	289,744

Consolidated Balance Sheets (Unaudited) - USD ($) $ in Thousands	3 Months Ended	12 Months Ended
	Mar. 31, 2010	Dec. 31, 2009
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$ 639,559	$ 581,889
Marketable securities	513,115	681,835
Accounts receivable, net	560,777	551,208
Due from unconsolidated joint business	205,228	193,789
Inventory	280,038	293,950
Other current assets	210,295	177,924
Total current assets	2,409,012	2,480,595
Marketable securities	1,032,223	1,194,080
Property, plant and equipment, net	1,604,573	1,637,083
Intangible assets, net	1,822,133	1,871,078
Goodwill	1,138,621	1,138,621
Investments and other assets	210,761	230,397
Total assets	8,217,323	8,551,854
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable	121,356	118,534
Taxes payable	108,972	75,891
Accrued expenses and other	432,887	500,755
Current portion of notes payable and line of credit	19,115	19,762
Total current liabilities	682,330	714,942
Notes payable and line of credit	1,076,201	1,080,207
Long-term deferred tax liability	248,898	240,618
Other long-term liabilities	259,300	254,205
Total liabilities	$ 2,266,729	$ 2,289,972
Commitments and contingencies (Notes 13, 15 and 16)
Shareholders' equity:
Preferred stock, par value $0.001 per share	$ 0	$ 0
Common stock, par value $0.0005 per share	139	144
Additional paid-in capital	5,268,465	5,781,920
Accumulated other comprehensive income	22,872	50,496
Retained earnings	1,131,523	1,068,890
Treasury stock, at cost	(513,627)	(679,920)
Total Biogen Idec Inc. shareholders' equity	5,909,372	6,221,530
Noncontrolling interest	41,222	40,352
Total shareholders' equity	5,950,594	6,261,882
Total liabilities and shareholders' equity	$ 8,217,323	$ 8,551,854

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows (Unaudited) - USD ($) $ in Thousands	3 Months Ended
	Mar. 31, 2010	Mar. 31, 2009
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net income	$ 219,993	$ 246,579
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flows from operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization of property, plant and equipment and intangible assets	82,510	122,146
Acquired in-process research and development (Note 2)	39,976
Share-based compensation	51,006	37,889
Non-cash interest expense (income) and foreign exchange remeasurement, net	3,982	(10,412)
Deferred income taxes	8,042	(6,973)
Realized gain on sale of marketable securities and strategic investments	(4,985)	(4,313)
Write-down of inventory to net realizable value	2,289	9,386
Impairment of marketable securities, investments and other assets	16,111	6,021
Excess tax benefit from share-based compensation	(4,379)	(2,282)
Changes in operating assets and liabilities, net:
Accounts receivable	(20,201)	(37,935)
Due from unconsolidated joint business	(11,439)	26,259
Inventory	12,264	(12,720)
Other assets	(13,463)	(14,264)
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities	(82,854)	(120,007)
Other liabilities and taxes payable	38,043	61,376
Net cash flows provided by operating activities	336,895	300,750
Cash flows from investing activities:
Purchases of marketable securities	(699,677)	(1,110,368)
Proceeds from sales and maturities of marketable securities	1,029,307	1,057,671
Acquisitions (Note 2)	(39,976)
Purchases of property, plant and equipment	(38,209)	(37,041)
Purchases of other investments	(1,708)	(31,959)
Collateral received under securities lending		29,991
Net cash flows provided by (used in) investing activities	249,737	(91,706)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Purchase of treasury stock	(577,580)	(57,631)
Proceeds from issuance of stock for share-based compensation arrangements	52,818	17,043
Change in cash overdraft	(1,826)	1,369
Net contributions from noncontrolling interest	760
Excess tax benefit from share-based compensation	4,379	2,282
Repayment of borrowings	(2,011)
Obligation under securities lending		(29,991)
Net cash flows used in financing activities	(523,460)	(66,928)
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents	63,172	142,116
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents	(5,502)	(397)
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of the period	581,889	622,385
Cash and cash equivalents, end of the period	$ 639,559	$ 764,104

Business Overview

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2010

Business Overview [Abstract]

Business Overview


1.	Business Overview

Overview

Biogen Idec is a global biotechnology company that creates new standards of care in therapeutic areas with high unmet medical needs. We currently have four marketed products: AVONEX, RITUXAN, TYSABRI, and FUMADERM. Our marketed products are used for the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS), non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), Crohn’s disease, chronic lymphocytic leukemia and psoriasis.

Basis of Presentation

In the opinion of management, the accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements include all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring accruals, necessary for a fair presentation of our financial statements for interim periods in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (U.S. GAAP). The information included in this quarterly report on Form 10-Q should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and the accompanying notes included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 (2009 Form 10-K). Our accounting policies are described in the “Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements” in our 2009 Form 10-K and updated, as necessary, in this Form 10-Q. The year-end consolidated balance sheet data presented for comparative purposes was derived from audited financial statements, but does not include all disclosures required by U.S. GAAP. The results of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2010 are not necessarily indicative of the operating results for the full year or for any other subsequent interim period.

Consolidation

Our consolidated financial statements reflect our financial statements, those of our wholly-owned subsidiaries, certain variable interest entities in which we are the primary beneficiary and those of our joint ventures in Italy and Switzerland, Biogen Dompé SRL and Biogen Dompé Switzerland GmbH, respectively. For such consolidated entities in which we own less than a 100% interest, we record net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interest in our consolidated statements of income equal to the percentage of the economic or ownership interest retained in the collaborative arrangement or joint venture by the respective noncontrolling parties. All material intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

In determining whether we are the primary beneficiary, we consider a number of factors, including our ability to direct the activities that most significantly affect the entity’s economic success, our contractual rights and responsibilities under the arrangement and the significance of the arrangement to each party. These considerations impact the way we account for our existing collaborative and joint venture relationships and may result in the future consolidation of companies or entities with which we have collaborative or other arrangements.

Use of Estimates

The preparation of consolidated financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and judgments that may affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. On an on-going basis, we evaluate our estimates and judgments, including those related to revenue recognition and related allowances, marketable securities, derivatives and hedging activities, inventory, impairments of long-lived assets including intangible assets, impairments of goodwill, the consolidation of variable interest entities, income taxes including the valuation allowance for deferred tax assets, valuation of investments, research and development expenses, contingencies and litigation, and share-based payments. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.

Subsequent Events

We did not have any material recognizable subsequent events. However, we did have the following nonrecognizable subsequent event:


	•	In April 2010, we announced that our Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of up to $1.5 billion of our common stock. We intend to retire these shares following repurchase on the open market. This repurchase authorization does not have an expiration date.

Revenue Recognition

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2010

Revenue Recognition [Abstract]

Revenue Recognition


3.	Revenue Recognition

We recognize revenue when all of the following criteria are met: persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists; delivery has occurred or services have been rendered; the seller’s price to the buyer is fixed or determinable; and collectability is reasonably assured.

Product Revenues

Revenues from product sales are recognized when title and risk of loss have passed to the customer, which is typically upon delivery. However, sales of TYSABRI in the U.S. are recognized on the “sell-through” model, that is, upon shipment of the product by Elan Pharma International, Ltd. (Elan), an affiliate of Elan Corporation, plc, to its third party distributor rather than upon shipment to Elan.

Product revenues are recorded net of applicable reserves for trade term discounts, wholesaler incentives, Medicaid rebates, Veterans Administration (VA) and Public Health Service (PHS) discounts, managed care rebates, product returns and other applicable allowances.

Revenues from Unconsolidated Joint Business

We collaborate with the Roche Group, through its wholly-owned member Genentech, Inc., on the development and commercialization of RITUXAN. Revenues from unconsolidated joint business consist of (1) our share of pre-tax co-promotion profits in the U.S.; (2) reimbursement of our selling and development expense in the U.S.; and (3) revenue on sales of RITUXAN in the rest of world, which consists of our share of pretax co-promotion profits in Canada and royalty revenue on sales of RITUXAN outside the U.S. and Canada by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. (Roche) and its sublicensees. Pre-tax co-promotion profits are calculated and paid to us by Genentech in the U.S. and by Roche in Canada. Pre-tax co-promotion profits consist of U.S. and Canadian sales of RITUXAN to third-party customers net of discounts and allowances less the cost to manufacture RITUXAN, third-party royalty expenses, distribution, selling and marketing, and joint development expenses incurred by Genentech, Roche and us. We record our royalty and co-promotion profits revenue on sales of RITUXAN in the rest of world on a cash basis.

Royalty Revenues

We receive royalty revenues on sales by our licensees of other products covered under patents that we own. There are no future performance obligations on our part under these license arrangements. We record these revenues based on estimates of the sales that occurred during the relevant period. The relevant period estimates of sales are based on interim data provided by licensees and analysis of historical royalties that have been paid to us, adjusted for any changes in facts and circumstances, as appropriate. We maintain regular communication with our licensees in order to assess the reasonableness of our estimates. Differences between actual royalty revenues and estimated royalty revenues are adjusted for in the period in which they become known, typically the following quarter. Historically, adjustments have not been material when compared to actual amounts paid by licensees. To the extent we do not have sufficient ability to accurately estimate revenue, we record revenues on a cash basis.

Milestone Revenues

Under the terms of our collaboration agreement with Elan, once sales of TYSABRI exceeded specific thresholds, Elan was required to make milestone payments to us in order to continue sharing equally in the collaboration’s results. These amounts, recorded as deferred revenue upon receipt, are recognized as revenue in our consolidated statements of income over the term of the collaboration agreement based on a units of revenue method whereby the revenue recognized is based on the ratio of units shipped in the current period over the total units expected to be shipped over the remaining term of the collaboration.

Bad Debt Reserves

Bad debt reserves are based on our estimated uncollectible accounts receivable. Given our historical experiences with bad debts, combined with our credit management policies and practices, we do not presently maintain significant bad debt reserves.

Reserves for Discounts and Allowances

We establish reserves for trade term discounts, wholesaler incentives, Medicaid rebates, VA and PHS discounts, managed care rebates, product returns and other applicable allowances. Reserves established for these discounts and allowances are classified as reductions of accounts receivable (if the amount is payable to our customer) or a liability (if the amount is payable to a party other than our customer).

In addition, we distribute no-charge product to qualifying patients under our patient assistance and patient replacement goods program. This program is administered through one of our distribution partners, who ships product for qualifying patients from their own inventory purchased from us. Gross revenue and the related reserves are not recorded on product shipped under this program and cost of sales is recorded when the product is shipped.

Product revenue reserves are categorized as follows: discounts, contractual adjustments, and returns. An analysis of the amount of, and change in, reserves is summarized as follows:


				Contractual
(In millions)	Discounts			Adjustments			Returns			Total

Balance, as of December 31, 2009	$	13.9		$	70.3		$	18.9		$	103.1
Current provisions relating to sales in current year		19.4			59.5			4.8			83.7
Adjustments relating to prior years		(0.1	)		(3.6	)		(0.2	)		(3.9	)
Payments/returns relating to sales in current year		(8.6	)		(14.0	)		(0.5	)		(23.1	)
Payments/returns relating to sales in prior years		(8.5	)		(38.6	)		(3.5	)		(50.6	)

Balance, as of March 31, 2010	$	16.1		$	73.6		$	19.5		$	109.2

The total reserves above, included in our consolidated balance sheets, are summarized as follows:


	As of		As of
	March 31,		December 31,
(In millions)	2010		2009

Reduction of accounts receivable	$	47.0	$	43.3
Current liability		62.2		59.8

Total reserves	$	109.2	$	103.1

Healthcare Reform

In March 2010, healthcare reform legislation was enacted in the U.S. This legislation contains several provisions that impact our business.

Although many provisions of the new legislation do not take effect immediately, several provisions became effective in the first quarter of 2010. These include (1) an increase in the minimum Medicaid rebate to states participating in the Medicaid program from 15.1% to 23.1% on our branded prescription drugs; (2) the extension of the Medicaid rebate to Managed Care Organizations that dispense drugs to Medicaid beneficiaries; and (3) the expansion of the 340(B) Public Health Services drug pricing program, which provides outpatient drugs at reduced rates, to include additional hospitals, clinics, and healthcare centers.

Beginning in 2011, the new law requires that drug manufacturers provide a 50% discount to Medicare beneficiaries whose prescription drug costs cause them to be subject to the Medicare Part D coverage gap (i.e. the “donut hole”). Also, beginning in 2011, we will be assessed our share of a new fee assessed on all branded prescription drug manufacturers and importers. This fee will be calculated based upon each organization’s percentage share of total branded prescription drug sales to U.S. government programs (such as Medicare, Medicaid and VA and PHS discount programs) made during the previous year. The aggregated industry wide fee is expected to total $28 billion through 2019, ranging from $2.5 billion to $4.1 billion annually.

Presently, uncertainty exists as many of the specific determinations necessary to implement this new legislation have yet to be decided and communicated to industry participants. For example, we do not yet know when and how discounts will be provided to the additional hospitals eligible to participate under the 340(B) program. In addition, determinations as to how the Medicare Part D coverage gap will operate and how the annual fee on branded prescription drugs will be calculated and allocated remain to be clarified, though, as noted above, these programs will not be effective until 2011. We have made several estimates with regard to important assumptions relevant to determining the financial impact of this legislation on our business due to the lack of availability of both certain information and complete understanding of how the process of applying the legislation will be implemented.

Fair Value Measurements

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2010

Fair Value Measurements [Abstract]

Fair Value Measurements


6.	Fair Value Measurements

In January 2010, we adopted a newly issued accounting standard which requires additional disclosure about the amounts of and reasons for significant transfers in and out of Level 1 and Level 2 fair value measurements. This standard also clarifies existing disclosure requirements related to the level of disaggregation of fair value measurements for each class of assets and liabilities and disclosures about inputs and valuation techniques used to measure fair value for both recurring and nonrecurring Level 2 and Level 3 measurements. As this newly issued accounting standard only requires enhanced disclosure, the adoption of this standard did not impact our financial position or results of operations. In addition, effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2010, this standard will require additional disclosure and require an entity to present disaggregated information about activity in Level 3 fair value measurements on a gross basis, rather than as one net amount.

The tables below present information about our assets and liabilities that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009 and indicate the fair value hierarchy of the valuation techniques we utilized to determine such fair value. In general, fair values determined by Level 1 inputs utilize quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. Fair values determined by Level 2 inputs utilize data points that are observable, such as quoted prices, interest rates and yield curves. Fair values determined by Level 3 inputs utilize unobservable data points for the asset or liability.

A majority of our financial assets and liabilities have been classified as Level 2. Our financial assets and liabilities (which include our cash equivalents, derivative contracts, marketable debt securities, and plan assets for deferred compensation) have been initially valued at the transaction price and subsequently valued, at the end of each reporting period, typically utilizing third party pricing services or other market observable data. The pricing services utilize industry standard valuation models, including both income and market based approaches and observable market inputs to determine value. These observable market inputs include reportable trades, benchmark yields, credit spreads, broker/dealer quotes, bids, offers, current spot rates and other industry and economic events. We validate the prices provided by our third party pricing services by reviewing their pricing methods and matrices, obtaining market values from other pricing sources, analyzing pricing data in certain instances and confirming that the relevant markets are active. After completing our validation procedures, we did not adjust or override any fair value measurements provided by our pricing services as of March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009.

Our strategic investments in publicly traded equity securities are classified as Level 1 assets as their fair values are readily determinable and based on quoted market prices.

Our venture capital investments represent investments in equity securities of certain privately held biotechnology companies or biotechnology oriented venture capital funds which primarily invest in small privately-owned, venture-backed biotechnology companies. These investments are the only assets for which we used Level 3 inputs to determine the fair value and represented approximately 0.3% of total assets as of March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively. The fair value of our investments in these venture capital funds has been estimated using the net asset value of the fund. The investments cannot be redeemed within the funds. Distributions from each will be received as the underlying investments of the fund are liquidated. The funds and therefore a majority of the underlying assets of the funds will not be liquidated in the near future. The underlying assets in these funds are initially measured at transaction prices and subsequently valued using the pricing of recent financing or by reviewing the underlying economic fundamentals and liquidation value of the companies. Gains and losses (realized and unrealized) included in earnings for the period are reported in other income (expense), net.

There have been no transfers of assets or liabilities between the fair value measurement classifications.

The following tables set forth our financial assets and liabilities that were recorded at fair value:


							Significant
	Balance as of		Quoted Prices in		Significant Other		Unobservable
	March 31,		Active Markets		Observable Inputs		Inputs
(In millions)	2010		(Level 1)		(Level 2)		(Level 3)

Assets:
Cash equivalents	$	532.7	$	—	$	532.7	$	—
Marketable debt securities:
Corporate debt securities		484.0		—		484.0		—
Government securities		853.1		—		853.1		—
Mortgage and other asset backed securities		208.2		—		208.2		—
Strategic investments		30.8		30.8		—		—
Venture capital investments		20.8		—		—		20.8
Derivative contracts		35.0		—		35.0		—
Plan assets for deferred compensation		14.4		—		14.4		—

Total	$	2,179.0	$	30.8	$	2,127.4	$	20.8

Liabilities:
Derivative contracts		2.2		—		2.2		—

Total	$	2.2	$	—	$	2.2	$	—


							Significant
	Balance as of		Quoted Prices in		Significant Other		Unobservable
	December 31,		Active Markets		Observable Inputs		Inputs
(In millions)	2009		(Level 1)		(Level 2)		(Level 3)

Assets:
Cash equivalents	$	476.4	$	—	$	476.4	$	—
Marketable debt securities:
Corporate debt securities		504.1		—		504.1		—
Government securities		1,133.5		—		1,133.5		—
Mortgage and other asset backed securities		238.3		—		238.3		—
Strategic investments		5.9		5.9		—		—
Venture capital investments		21.9		—		—		21.9
Derivative contracts		15.8		—		15.8		—
Plan assets for deferred compensation		13.6		—		13.6		—

Total	$	2,409.5	$	5.9	$	2,381.7	$	21.9

Liabilities:
Derivative contracts		11.1		—		11.1		—

Total	$	11.1	$	—	$	11.1	$	—

The following table provides a roll forward of the fair value of our venture capital investments, where fair value is determined by Level 3 inputs:


	For the Three Months
	Ended March 31,
(In millions)	2010			2009

Beginning balance, January 1	$	21.9		$	23.9
Total net unrealized losses included in earnings		(1.5	)		(0.3	)
Net purchases, issuances, and settlements		0.4			0.7

Ending balance, March 31	$	20.8		$	24.3

The fair and carrying value of our debt instruments are summarized as follows:


	As of March 31, 2010				As of December 31, 2009
	Fair		Carrying		Fair		Carrying
(In millions)	Value		Value		Value		Value

Credit line from Dompé	$	14.3	$	14.1	$	17.2	$	17.2
Notes payable to Fumedica		31.7		29.6		31.3		30.0
6.0% Senior Notes due 2013		486.4		449.7		475.7		449.6
6.875% Senior Notes due 2018		603.3		601.9		589.1		603.2

Total	$	1,135.7	$	1,095.3	$	1,113.3	$	1,100.0

The fair values of our credit line from Dompé and our note payable to Fumedica were estimated using an income-based approach with market observable inputs including current interest and foreign currency exchange rates. The fair value of our Senior Notes was determined through a market-based approach using observable and corroborated sources; within the hierarchy of fair value measurements, these are classified as Level 2 fair values.

Financial Instruments

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2010

Financial Instruments [Abstract]

Financial Instruments


7.	Financial Instruments

Marketable Securities, including Strategic Investments

The following tables summarize our marketable securities and strategic investments:


			Gross		Gross
	Fair		Unrealized		Unrealized			Amortized
As of March 31, 2010 (In millions):	Value		Gains		Losses			Cost

Available-for-sale
Corporate debt securities
Current	$	153.7	$	1.5	$	—		$	152.2
Non-current		330.3		4.5		(0.4	)		326.2
Government securities
Current		356.0		0.8		(0.1	)		355.3
Non-current		497.1		2.0		(0.4	)		495.5
Mortgage and other asset backed securities
Current		3.4		0.1		—			3.3
Non-current		204.8		4.0		(0.3	)		201.1

Total available-for-sale securities	$	1,545.3	$	12.9	$	(1.2	)	$	1,533.6

Other Investments
Strategic investments, non-current	$	30.8	$	2.0	$	(0.4	)	$	29.2


			Gross		Gross
	Fair		Unrealized		Unrealized			Amortized
As of December 31, 2009 (In millions):	Value		Gains		Losses			Cost

Available-for-sale
Corporate debt securities
Current	$	177.2	$	1.5	$	—		$	175.7
Non-current		326.9		5.7		(0.3	)		321.5
Government securities
Current		501.6		1.2		—			500.4
Non-current		631.9		4.1		(0.5	)		628.3
Mortgage and other asset backed securities
Current		3.0		0.1		—			2.9
Non-current		235.3		4.1		(0.5	)		231.7

Total available-for-sale securities	$	1,875.9	$	16.7	$	(1.3	)	$	1,860.5

Other Investments
Strategic investments, non-current	$	5.9	$	2.7	$	(0.3	)	$	3.5

In the tables above, as of March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, government securities included $229.9 million and $298.8 million, respectively, of Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) guaranteed senior notes issued by financial institutions under the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program.

Certain commercial paper and short-term debt securities with original maturities of less than 90 days are included in cash and cash equivalents on the accompanying consolidated balance sheets and are not included in the tables above. As of March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, the commercial paper, including accrued interest, had fair and carrying values of $169.9 million and $76.9 million, respectively, and short-term debt securities had fair and carrying values of $362.8 million and $399.5 million, respectively.

Summary of Contractual Maturities: Available-for-Sale Securities

The estimated fair value and amortized cost of securities, excluding strategic investments, available-for-sale by contractual maturity are summarized as follows:


	As of March 31, 2010				As of December 31, 2009
	Estimated		Amortized		Estimated		Amortized
(In millions)	Fair Value		Cost		Fair Value		Cost

Due in one year or less	$	454.0	$	451.8	$	522.0	$	519.5
Due after one year through five years		911.4		904.8		1,143.7		1,133.4
Due after five years		179.9		177.0		210.2		207.6

Total	$	1,545.3	$	1,533.6	$	1,875.9	$	1,860.5

The weighted average maturity of our marketable securities as of March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, was 16 months and 15 months, respectively.

Proceeds from Marketable Securities, excluding Strategic Investments

The proceeds from maturities and sales of marketable securities, excluding strategic investments, which were primarily reinvested, and resulting realized gains and losses are summarized as follows:


	For the Three Months
	Ended March 31,
(In millions)	2010		2009

Proceeds from maturities and sales	$	1,029.3	$	1,057.7
Realized gains	$	5.7	$	5.7
Realized losses	$	0.7	$	1.4

Realized losses for the three months ended March 31, 2010 primarily relate to the sale of agency mortgage-backed securities. The realized losses for the three months ended March 31, 2009 primarily relate to losses on the sale of corporate debt securities and non-agency mortgage-backed securities.

Impairments

Evaluating Investments for Other-than-Temporary Impairments

We conduct periodic reviews to identify and evaluate each investment that has an unrealized loss, in accordance with the meaning of other-than-temporary impairment and its application to certain investments. An unrealized loss exists when the current fair value of an individual security is less than its amortized cost basis. Unrealized losses on available-for-sale debt securities that are determined to be temporary, and not related to credit loss, are recorded, net of tax, in accumulated other comprehensive income.

For available-for-sale debt securities with unrealized losses, management performs an analysis to assess whether we intend to sell or whether we would more likely than not be required to sell the security before the expected recovery of the amortized cost basis. Where we intend to sell a security, or may be required to do so, the security’s decline in fair value is deemed to be other-than-temporary and the full amount of the unrealized loss is recorded within earnings as an impairment loss.

Regardless of our intent to sell a security, we perform additional analysis on all securities with unrealized losses to evaluate losses associated with the creditworthiness of the security. Credit losses are identified where we do not expect to receive cash flows sufficient to recover the amortized cost basis of a security and are recorded within earnings as an impairment loss.

For equity securities, when assessing whether a decline in fair value below our cost basis is other-than-temporary, we consider the fair market value of the security, the duration of the security’s decline, and the financial condition of the issuer. We then consider our intent and ability to hold the equity security for a period of time sufficient to recover our carrying value. Where we have determined that we lack the intent and ability to hold an equity security to its expected recovery, the security’s decline in fair value is deemed to be other-than-temporary and is recorded within earnings as an impairment loss.

Recognition and Measurement of Other-than-Temporary Impairment

For the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, we recognized $15.8 million and $2.5 million, respectively, in charges for the other-than-temporary impairment of our publicly held strategic investments and investments in privately-held companies. The increase in the three months ended March 31, 2010 compared to the same period in 2009 was primarily the result of AVEO Pharmaceuticals, Inc., one of our strategic investments, executing an equity offering at an amount below our cost basis.

For the three months ended March 31, 2009, we recognized other-than-temporary impairment charges of $3.6 million on our marketable debt securities. No impairments were recognized related to our marketable debt securities for the three months ended March 31, 2010.

Derivative Instruments

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2010

Derivative Instruments [Abstract]

Derivative Instruments


8.	Derivative Instruments

Our primary market exposure is to foreign exchange rates. We use certain derivative instruments to help manage this exposure. We execute these instruments with financial institutions we judge to be creditworthy and the majority of the foreign currencies are denominated in currencies of major industrial countries. We do not hold or issue derivative instruments for trading or speculative purposes.

We recognize all derivative instruments as either assets or liabilities at fair value in our consolidated balance sheets. We classify the cash flows from these instruments in the same category as the cash flows from the hedged items.

Foreign Currency Forward Contracts

Due to the global nature of our operations, portions of our revenues are earned in currencies other than the U.S. dollar. The value of revenues measured in U.S. dollars is subject to changes in currency exchange rates. In order to mitigate these changes we use foreign currency forward contracts to lock in exchange rates.

Foreign currency forward contracts in effect as of March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009 had remaining durations of 1 to 9 months. These contracts have been designated as cash flow hedges and accordingly, to the extent effective, any unrealized gains or losses on these foreign currency forward contracts are reported in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). Realized gains and losses for the effective portion of such contracts are recognized in revenue when the sale of product in the currency being hedged is recognized. To the extent ineffective, hedge transaction gains and losses are reported in other income (expense), net at each reporting date.

The notional value of foreign currency forward contracts that were entered into to hedge forecasted revenue are summarized as follows:


	Notional Amount
Foreign Currency: (In millions)	As of March 31, 2010		As of December 31, 2009

Euro	$	481.4	$	495.9
Canadian Dollar		37.3		22.3

Total	$	518.7	$	518.2

The portion of the fair value of these foreign currency forward contracts that was included in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) within total equity reflected net gains of $32.0 million and $1.2 million as of March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively. We consider the impact of our and our counterparties’ credit risk on the fair value of the contracts as well as the ability of each party to execute its obligations under the contract. As of March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively, credit risk did not materially change the fair value of our forward contracts.

In relation to our foreign currency forward contracts, we recognize gains and losses in earnings due to hedge ineffectiveness. During the three months ended March 31, 2010, we recognized a net gain of $0.1 million. During the three months ended March 31, 2009, we recognized a net loss of $2.5 million. In addition, we recognized $0.2 million of gains in product revenue for the settlement of certain effective cash flow hedge forward contracts for the three months ended March 31, 2010 as compared to losses recognized in the amount of $3.1 million during the three months ended March 31, 2009. These settlements were recorded in the same period as the related forecasted revenue.

Summary of Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments

The following table summarizes the fair value and presentation in the consolidated balance sheets for derivatives designated as hedging instruments as of March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009:

Foreign Currency Forward Contracts

Asset Derivatives

Liability Derivatives

(In millions)

Balance Sheet Location

Fair Value

Balance Sheet Location

Fair Value

March 31, 2010

Other Current Assets

33.9

Accrued Expenses and Other

2.2

December 31, 2009

Other Current Assets

10.8

Accrued Expenses and Other

9.8

The following table summarizes the effect of derivatives designated as hedging instruments on the consolidated statements of income for the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009:

Amount

Recognized in

Reclassified from

Accumulated

Other

Comprehensive

Income

Amount of

on Derivative

Statement

into Income

Statement

Gain/(Loss)

Location

Gain/(Loss)

Location

Recorded

(In millions)

(Effective Portion)

(Ineffective Portion)

For the Three Months Ended

March 31, 2010:

Foreign currency contracts

32.0

Revenue

0.2

Other income (expense)

0.1

March 31, 2009:

Foreign currency contracts

(12.8

)

Revenue

(3.1

)

Other income (expense)

(2.5

)

Other Derivatives

We enter into foreign currency forward contracts, with one month durations, to mitigate the foreign currency risk related to certain balance sheet items. We have not elected hedge accounting for these transactions. As of March 31, 2010, the aggregate notional amount of our outstanding foreign currency contracts was $184.2 million. The fair value of these contracts was a net gain of $1.0 million. Net gains of $5.2 million related to these contracts were recognized as a component of other income (expense), net, in the three months ended March 31, 2010. As this program commenced subsequent to March 31, 2009, no gains or losses were recognized related to these types of contracts for the three months ended March 31, 2009.

Share-Based Payments

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2010

Share-Based Payments [Abstract]

Share-Based Payments


12.	Share-based Payments

Share-based Compensation Expense

The following table summarizes share-based compensation expense included within our consolidated statements of income:


	For the Three Months
	Ended March 31,
(In millions)	2010			2009

Research and development	$	16.7		$	16.3
Selling, general and administrative		36.2			23.2

Subtotal		52.9			39.5
Capitalized share-based payment costs		(0.9	)		(1.6	)

Share-based compensation expense included in total costs and expenses		52.0			37.9
Income tax effect		(16.7	)		(11.6	)

Share-based compensation expense included in net income attributable to Biogen Idec	$	35.3		$	26.3

The following table summarizes share-based compensation expense associated with each of our share-based compensation programs:


	For the Three Months
	Ended March 31,
(In millions)	2010			2009

Stock options	$	10.8		$	5.2
Market stock units		3.6			—
Time-vested restricted stock units		33.5			31.5
Performance-vested restricted stock units settled in shares		2.4			1.2
Performance-vested restricted stock units settled in cash		1.0			—
Employee stock purchase plan		1.6			1.6

Subtotal	$	52.9		$	39.5
Capitalized share-based payment costs		(0.9	)		(1.6	)

Share-based compensation expense included in total costs and expenses	$	52.0		$	37.9

Stock Options

In the first quarter of 2010, approximately 120,000 stock options were granted with a weighted average exercise price of $57.38 and weighted average grant date fair value of $15.62. In the first quarter of 2009, approximately 825,000 stock options were granted with a weighted average exercise price of $49.51 and weighted average grant date fair value of $17.72. The fair values of our stock option grants are estimated as of the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option valuation model. The estimated fair values of the stock options, including the effect of estimated forfeitures, are then expensed over the options’ requisite service period, which is typically the vesting period.

Market Stock Units and Cash Settled Performance Shares

Beginning in the first quarter of 2010, we revised our long term incentive program to include two new forms of equity-based compensation awards to certain employees: restricted stock units which will vest based on stock price performance, referred to as Market Stock Units (MSUs) and performance-vested restricted stock units which will be settled in cash, referred to as Cash Settled Performance Shares (CSPSs). We will apply forfeiture rate assumptions to these types of awards similar to those utilized by us when accounting for our other share-based compensation programs.

Market Stock Units

In the first quarter of 2010, approximately 333,000 MSUs were granted with a weighted average grant date fair value of $61.87. MSU awards vest in four equal annual increments beginning on the anniversary of the grant date. The vesting of these awards is subject to the respective employee’s continued employment. The number of MSUs reflected as granted represents the target number of units that are eligible to be earned based on the attainment of certain market-based criteria involving our stock price. The number of MSUs earned is calculated at each annual anniversary from the date of grant over the respective vesting periods, resulting in multiple performance periods. Participants may ultimately earn between 0% and 150% of the target number of units granted based on actual stock performance. Accordingly, additional MSUs may be issued or currently outstanding MSUs may be cancelled upon final determination of the number of awards earned.

We have valued the granted MSUs using a lattice model with a Monte Carlo simulation. This valuation methodology utilizes several key assumptions, including the 60 calendar day average closing stock price on grant date, expected volatility of our stock price, risk-free rates of return and expected dividend yield. The assumptions used in our valuation are summarized as follows:


Expected dividend yield		0%
Range of expected stock price volatility		28.60% - 36.48%
Range of risk-free rates of return		0.37% - 1.98%
60 calendar day average closing stock price on grant date		$54.12

We apply a graded vesting expense methodology when accounting for MSUs. The probability of actual shares expected to be earned is considered in the grant date valuation, therefore the expense will not be adjusted to reflect the actual units earned.

Cash Settled Performance Shares

In the first quarter of 2010, approximately 370,000 CSPSs were granted. CSPS awards vest in three equal annual increments beginning on the anniversary of the grant date. The vesting of these awards is subject to the respective employee’s continued employment. The number of CSPSs reflected as granted in 2010 represents the target number of units that are eligible to be earned based on the attainment of certain performance measures established at the beginning of the performance period, which ends December 31, 2010. Participants may ultimately earn between 0% and 200% of the target number of units granted based on the degree of actual performance metric achievement. Accordingly, additional CSPSs may be issued or currently outstanding CSPSs may be cancelled upon final determination of the number of units earned. CSPSs are settled in cash based on the 60 calendar day average closing stock price through each vesting date once the actual vested and earned number of units is known.

We apply a graded vesting expense methodology when accounting for the CSPSs and the fair value of the liability is remeasured at the end of each reporting period through expected cash settlement. Compensation expense associated with CSPS awards is based upon the stock price and the number of units expected to be earned after assessing the probability that certain performance criteria will be met and the associated targeted payout level that is forecasted will be achieved, net of estimated forfeitures. Cumulative adjustments are recorded each quarter to reflect changes in the stock price and estimated outcome of the performance-related conditions until the date results are determined and settled.

Time-Vested Restricted Stock Units

The fair values of our time-vested restricted stock units (RSUs) are based on the market value of our stock on the date of grant and are recognized over the applicable service period, adjusted for the effect of estimated forfeitures. In the first quarter of 2010, approximately 1.6 million RSUs were granted with a weighted average grant date fair value of $55.28. In the first quarter of 2009, approximately 2.3 million RSUs were granted with a weighted average grant date fair value of $49.33.

Performance-Vested Restricted Stock Units

In the first quarter of 2010, approximately 4,000 performance-vested restricted stock units (PVRSUs) were granted with a weighted average grant date fair value of $53.64. The PVRSUs granted in 2010 are subject to the attainment of certain performance criteria established at the beginning of the performance period, which ends December 31, 2010. In the first quarter of 2009, approximately 307,000 PVRSUs were granted with a weighted average grant date fair value of $49.50. The number of PVRSUs earned was subject to the attainment of certain performance criteria during 2009. Based on our 2009 performance, 99% of the granted PVRSUs were earned. These awards vest in three equal increments on (1) the later of the first anniversary of the grant date or the date of results determination; (2) the second anniversary of the grant date; and (3) the third anniversary of the grant date, and are also subject to the respective employee’s continued employment.

We apply a graded vesting expense methodology when accounting for our PVRSUs. Compensation expense associated with PVRSU awards is initially based upon the number of shares expected to vest after assessing the probability that certain performance criteria will be met and the associated targeted payout level that is forecasted will be achieved, net of estimated forfeitures. Cumulative adjustments are recorded quarterly to reflect subsequent changes in the estimated outcome of performance-related condition until the date results are determined.

Employee Stock Purchase Plan

The purchase price of common stock under the employee stock purchase plan (ESPP) is equal to 85% of the lower of (i) the market value per share of the common stock on the participant’s entry date into an offering period or (ii) the market value per share of the common stock on the purchase date. However, for each participant whose entry date is other than the start date of the offering period, the amount shall in no event be less than the market value per share of the common stock as of the beginning of the related offering period. The fair value of the discounted purchases made under the ESPP is calculated using the Black-Scholes model. The fair value of the look-back provision plus the 15% discount is recognized as compensation expense over the purchase period. We apply a graded vesting approach since our ESPP provides for multiple purchase periods and is, in substance, a series of linked awards.

For the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, approximately 200,000 shares of common shares were issued in each period, under our ESPP.

CEO Retirement

On January 4, 2010, we announced that James C. Mullen will retire as our President and Chief Executive Officer on June 8, 2010 and that we entered into a transition agreement with Mr. Mullen. Under the terms of the agreement, we agreed with Mr. Mullen, amongst other provisions, to vest all of Mr. Mullen’s then-unvested equity awards on the date of his retirement and allow Mr. Mullen to exercise his vested stock options until June 8, 2013 or their expiration, whichever is earlier. The modifications to Mr. Mullen’s existing stock options, RSUs and PVRSUs resulted in an incremental charge of approximately $18.6 million, which will be recognized evenly over the requisite service period as per the terms of the transition agreement.

Income Taxes

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2010

Income Taxes [Abstract]

Income Taxes


13.	Income Taxes

Tax Rate

For the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, our effective tax rates were 25.5% and 21.0%, respectively. The increase in our tax rate for the three months ended March 31, 2010 compared to the same period in 2009 was primarily a result of the expiration of the federal research and development tax credit at the end of 2009 and, in the first quarter of 2009, a favorable change in certain state tax laws. As a result of the 2009 changes in tax law we reduced our first quarter 2009 tax expense by $30.2 million. The federal research and development tax credit had a 1.6% favorable impact on our effective tax rate for first quarter of 2009. The unfavorable impact of not having these benefits recur in 2010 was partially offset by a higher percentage of our profits being earned in lower rate international jurisdictions. This change is caused by lower 2010 domestic earnings, as a proportion of total consolidated earnings due to the recently enacted U.S. healthcare reform legislation, the growth in our international operations and a reorganization of our international operations. During 2010, we also had a favorable impact from a statutory increase in the U.S. manufacturers tax deduction.

Reconciliation between the U.S. federal statutory tax rate and our effective tax rate is summarized as follows:


	For the Three Months
	Ended March 31,
	2010			2009

Statutory rate		35.0	%		35.0	%
State taxes		1.9			(1.1	)
Taxes on foreign earnings		(9.8	)		(5.8	)
Credits and net operating loss utilization		(1.6	)		(9.4	)
Purchased intangible assets		1.5			1.6
IPR&D		0.8			1.1
Permanent items		(1.6	)		(1.1	)
Other		(0.7	)		0.7

Effective tax rate		25.5	%		21.0	%

Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes

We and our subsidiaries are routinely examined by various taxing authorities. We file income tax returns in the U.S. federal jurisdiction, and various states and foreign jurisdictions. With few exceptions, we are no longer subject to U.S. federal tax examination for years before 2007 or state, local, or non-U.S. income tax examinations by tax authorities for years before 2001.

In 2006, the Massachusetts Department of Revenue (DOR) issued a Notice of Assessment against Biogen Idec MA Inc. for $38.9 million of corporate excise tax for 2002, which includes associated interest and penalties. The assessment asserts that the portion of sales attributable to Massachusetts, the computation of Biogen Idec MA’s research and development credits and the availability of certain claimed deductions were not appropriate, resulting in unpaid taxes for 2002. In December 2006, we filed an abatement application with the DOR, seeking abatement for 2001-2003, which was denied. In July 2007, we filed a petition with the Massachusetts Appellate Tax Board, seeking among other items, abatements of corporate excise tax for 2001-2003 and adjustments in certain credits and credit carryforwards for 2001-2003. We anticipate that the hearing will take place in 2010. In the fourth quarter of 2009, the DOR completed its audit fieldwork of our 2004, 2005 and 2006 tax filings. The DOR may make an assessment for taxes, interest, and penalties claiming that our computation and deductions for these periods were also inappropriate. We believe that positions taken in our tax filings are valid and we intend to contest this matter vigorously.

Our tax filings for 2007 and 2008 have not yet been audited by the DOR but have been prepared in a manner consistent with prior filings which may result in an assessment for those years. Due to tax law changes effective January 1, 2009, the computations and deductions at issue in previous tax filings will not be part of our tax filings starting in 2009.

There is a possibility that we may not prevail in defending all of our assertions with the DOR. If these matters are resolved unfavorably in the future, the resolution could have a material adverse impact on our future effective tax rate and our results of operations.

Investments in Variable Interest Entities

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2010

Investments in Variable Interest Entities [Abstract]

Investments in Variable Interest Entities


15.	Investments in Variable Interest Entities

Effective January 1, 2010, we adopted a newly issued accounting standard which provides guidance for the consolidation of variable interest entities and requires an enterprise to determine whether its variable interest or interests give it a controlling financial interest in a variable interest entity. This amended consolidation guidance for variable interest entities replaces the existing quantitative approach for identifying which enterprise should consolidate a variable interest entity, which was based on which enterprise is exposed to a majority of the risks and rewards, with a qualitative approach, based on which enterprise has both (1) the power to direct the economically significant activities of the entity and (2) the obligation to absorb losses of, or the right to receive benefits from, the entity that could potentially be significant to the variable interest entity. The adoption of this standard did not have an impact on our financial position or results of operations. Determination about whether an enterprise should consolidate a variable interest entity is required to be evaluated continuously as changes to existing relationships or future transactions may result in us consolidating or deconsolidating our partner(s) to collaborations and other arrangements.

Consolidated Variable Interest Entities

Our consolidated financial statements include the financial results of variable interest entities in which we are the primary beneficiary.

Investments in Joint Ventures

We consolidate the operations of Biogen Dompé SRL and Biogen Dompé Switzerland GmbH, our respective sales affiliates in Italy and Switzerland, as we retain the contractual power to direct the activities of these entities which most significantly and directly impact their economic performance. The activity of each of these joint ventures is significant to our overall operations. The assets of these joint ventures are restricted, from the standpoint of Biogen Idec, in that they are not available for our general business use outside the context of each joint venture. The holders of the liabilities of each joint venture, including the credit line from Dompe described in our 2009 Form 10-K, have no recourse to Biogen Idec.

Included within our consolidated balance sheet at March 31, 2010 are total joint venture assets and liabilities of $111.5 million and $26.9 million, respectively, the most significant of which are accounts receivable from the ordinary course of business of $102.3 million.

We have provided no financing to these joint ventures other than previously contractually required amounts.

Neurimmune

We have a collaboration agreement with Neurimmune SubOne AG (Neurimmune), a subsidiary of Neurimmune Therapeutics AG, for the development and commercialization of antibodies for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease. Neurimmune conducts research to identify potential therapeutic antibodies and we are responsible for the development, manufacturing and commercialization of all products. We may pay Neurimmune up to $360.0 million in remaining milestone payments, as well as royalties on sales of any resulting commercial products.

We have determined that we are the primary beneficiary of Neurimmune because we control the activities of the collaboration and are required to fund 100% of the research and development costs incurred in support of the collaboration agreement. As such, we consolidate the results of Neurimmune. The assets and liabilities of Neurimmune are not significant as it is a research and development organization. Amounts that we reimburse Neurimmune for research and development expense incurred in support of the collaboration are reflected in research and development expense in our consolidated statements of income.

A summary of activity related to this collaboration is as follows:


	For the Three Months
	Ended March 31,
(In millions)	2010		2009

Milestone payments made to Neurimumune	$	—	$	5.0
Total development expense incurred by the collaboration	$	5.1	$	1.8
Total expense reflected within our consolidated statements of income	$	5.1	$	6.8

We have provided no financing to Neurimmune other than previously contractually required amounts.

Cardiokine

We collaborate with Cardiokine Biopharma LLC (Cardiokine), a subsidiary of Cardiokine Inc., on the joint development of Lixivaptan, an oral compound for the potential treatment of hyponatremia in patients with congestive heart failure. Based upon our current development plans, we may pay up to $125.0 million in remaining development milestone payments, as well as royalties on commercial sales under the terms of our collaboration agreement.

We have determined that we are the primary beneficiary of Cardiokine because we control the activities of the collaboration and are required to fund 90% of the development costs under the collaboration agreement. As such, we consolidate the results of Cardiokine. The assets and liabilities of Cardiokine are not significant as it is a research and development organization. Amounts that we reimburse Cardiokine for research and development expense incurred in support of the collaboration are reflected in research and development expense in our consolidated statements of income.

A summary of activity related to this collaboration is as follows:


	For the Three Months
	Ended March 31,
(In millions)	2010		2009

Milestone payments made to Cardiokine	$	—	$	—
Total development expense incurred by the collaboration	$	17.4	$	13.7
Total Biogen Idec’s share of expense reflected within our consolidated statements of income	$	15.7	$	12.3
Collaboration expense allocated to noncontrolling interests, net of tax	$	1.7	$	1.4

We have provided no financing to Cardiokine other than previously contractually required amounts.

Unconsolidated Variable Interest Entities

We have relationships with other variable interest entities which we do not consolidate as we lack the power to direct the activities that significantly impact the economic success of these entities. These relationships include investments in certain biotechnology companies and research collaboration agreements.

At March 31, 2010 the total carrying value of our investments in biotechnology companies that we have determined to be variable interest entities is $23.4 million. Our maximum exposure to loss related to these variable interest entities is limited to the carrying value of our investments.

We have entered into research collaborations with certain variable interest entities where we are required to share or fund certain development activities. These development activities are included in research and development expense within our consolidated statements of income, as they are incurred. Depending on the collaborative arrangement, we may record funding receivables or payable balances with our partners, based on the nature of the cost-sharing mechanism and activity within the collaboration. At March 31, 2010 we have recorded a receivable of $5.6 million related to a cost sharing arrangement with one of our collaborative relationships.

We have provided no financing to these variable interest entities other than previously contractually required amounts.

Litigation

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2010

Litigation [Abstract]

Litigation


16.	Litigation

Along with several other major pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, Biogen, Inc. (now Biogen Idec MA Inc., one of our wholly-owned subsidiaries) or, in some cases, Biogen Idec Inc., was named as a defendant in lawsuits filed by the City of New York and numerous Counties of the State of New York. All of the cases — except for cases filed by the County of Erie, County of Oswego and County of Schenectady (Three County Actions) — are the subject of a Consolidated Complaint, first filed on September 15, 2005 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts in Multi-District Litigation No. 1456 (MDL proceedings). The complaints allege that the defendants (i) fraudulently reported (or caused others to report incorrectly) the Average Wholesale Price for certain drugs for which Medicaid provides reimbursement (Covered Drugs); (ii) marketed and promoted the sale of Covered Drugs to providers based on the providers’ ability to collect inflated payments from the government and Medicaid beneficiaries that exceeded payments possible for competing drugs; (iii) provided financing incentives to providers to over-prescribe Covered Drugs or to prescribe Covered Drugs in place of competing drugs; and (iv) overcharged Medicaid for illegally inflated Covered Drugs reimbursements. Among other things, the complaints allege violations of New York state law and advance common law claims for unfair trade practices, fraud, and unjust enrichment. In addition, the amended Consolidated Complaint alleges that the defendants failed to accurately report the “best price” on the Covered Drugs to the Secretary of Health and Human Services pursuant to rebate agreements, and excluded from their reporting certain discounts and other rebates that would have reduced the “best price.” With respect to the MDL proceedings, some of the plaintiffs’ claims were dismissed, and the parties, including Biogen Idec, began a mediation of the outstanding claims on July 1, 2008. We have not formed an opinion that an unfavorable outcome is either “probable” or “remote” in any of these cases, and do not express an opinion at this time as to their likely outcome or as to the magnitude or range of any potential loss. We believe that we have good and valid defenses to each of these complaints and are vigorously defending against them.

In 2006, the Massachusetts Department of Revenue (DOR) issued a Notice of Assessment against Biogen Idec MA Inc. for $38.9 million of corporate excise tax for 2002, which includes associated interest and penalties. On December 6, 2006, we filed an abatement application with the DOR, seeking abatements for 2001, 2002 and 2003. The abatement application was denied on July 24, 2007. On July 25, 2007, we filed a petition with the Massachusetts Appellate Tax Board, seeking, among other items, abatements of corporate excise tax for 2001, 2002 and 2003 and adjustments in certain credits and credit carryforwards for 2001, 2002 and 2003. Issues before the Board include the computation of Biogen Idec MA’s sales factor for 2001, 2002 and 2003, computation of Biogen Idec MA’s research credits for those same years, and the availability of deductions for certain expenses and partnership flow-through items. We anticipate that the hearing will take place in 2010. We intend to contest this matter vigorously.

On October 27, 2008, Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH (Sanofi) filed suit against Genentech and Biogen Idec in federal court in Texas (E.D. Tex.) (Texas Action) claiming that RITUXAN and certain other Genentech products infringe U.S. Patents 5,849,522 (‘522 patent) and 6,218,140 (‘140 patent). Sanofi seeks preliminary and permanent injunctions, compensatory and exemplary damages, and other relief. On October 27, 2008, Genentech and Biogen Idec filed a complaint against Sanofi, Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC, and Sanofi-Aventis U.S., Inc. in federal court in California (N.D. Cal.) (California Action) seeking a declaratory judgment that RITUXAN and other Genentech products do not infringe the ‘522 patent or the ‘140 patent, and a declaratory judgment that those patents are invalid. (Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC and Sanofi-Aventis U.S., Inc. were later dismissed voluntarily.) On May 22, 2009, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit granted Genentech’s and our petition for a writ of mandamus transferring the Texas Action to the federal court in California, and denied Sanofi’s petition for rehearing on August 10, 2009. The Texas Action has been consolidated with the California Action and we refer to the two actions together as the Consolidated Actions. We have not formed an opinion that an unfavorable outcome in the Consolidated Actions is either “probable” or “remote,” and do not express an opinion at this time as to the likely outcome of the matters or as to the magnitude or range of any potential loss. We believe that we have good and valid defenses and intend vigorously to defend against the allegations against us.

On October 24, 2008, Hoechst GmbH filed with the ICC International Court of Arbitration (Paris) a request for arbitration against Genentech, relating to a terminated license agreement between Hoechst’s predecessor and Genentech that pertained to the above-referenced patents and related patents outside the U.S. The license was entered as of January 1, 1991 and was terminated by Genentech on October 27, 2008. We understand that Hoechst seeks payment of royalties on sales of Genentech products, including RITUXAN, damages for breach of contract, and other relief. Although we are not a party to the arbitration, any damages awarded to Hoescht based on sales of RITUXAN may be a cost allocable to our collaboration with Genentech. Under the collaboration agreement, we may be responsible for a portion of any such damages. We have not formed an opinion that an unfavorable outcome in the arbitration is either “probable” or “remote,” and do not express an opinion at this time as to the likely outcome of the matter or as to the magnitude or range of any potential loss.

In addition, we are involved in product liability claims and other legal proceedings generally incidental to our normal business activities. While the outcome of any of these proceedings cannot be accurately predicted, we do not believe the ultimate resolution of any of these existing matters would have a material adverse effect on our business or financial conditions.

New Accounting Pronouncements

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2010

New Accounting Pronouncements [Abstract]

New Accounting Pronouncements


18.	New Accounting Pronouncements

From time to time, new accounting pronouncements are issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) or other standard setting bodies that are adopted by the Company as of the specified effective date. Unless otherwise discussed, we believe that the impact of recently issued standards that are not yet effective will not have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations upon adoption.

Recently Issued Accounting Standards

In October 2009, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2009-13, Multiple-Deliverable Revenue Arrangements (ASU No. 2009-13). ASU No. 2009-13, which amends existing revenue recognition accounting pronouncements and provides accounting principles and application guidance on whether multiple deliverables exist, how the arrangement should be separated, and the consideration allocated. This guidance eliminates the requirement to establish the fair value of undelivered products and services and instead provides for separate revenue recognition based upon management’s estimate of the selling price for an undelivered item when there is no other means to determine the fair value of that undelivered item. Previous accounting principles required that the fair value of the undelivered item be the price of the item either sold in a separate transaction between unrelated third parties or the price charged for each item when the item is sold separately by the vendor. This was difficult to determine when the product was not individually sold because of its unique features. If the fair value of all of the elements in the arrangement was not determinable, then revenue was deferred until all of the items were delivered or fair value was determined. This new approach is effective prospectively for revenue arrangements entered into or materially modified in fiscal years beginning on or after June 15, 2010, which for Biogen Idec means no later than January 1, 2011. Early adoption is permitted; however, adoption of this guidance as of a date other than January 1, 2011, will require us to apply this guidance retrospectively effective as of January 1, 2010 and will require disclosure of the effect of this guidance as applied to all previously reported interim periods in the fiscal year of adoption. While we do not expect the adoption of this standard to have a material impact on our financial position and results of operations, this standard may impact us in the event we complete future transactions or modify existing collaborative relationships.

In June 2009, the FASB issued ASU No. 2009-16, Accounting for Transfers of Financial Assets (ASU No. 2009-16). ASU No. 2009-16 prescribes the information that a reporting entity must provide in its financial reports about a transfer of financial assets; the effects of a transfer on its financial position, financial performance, and cash flows; and a transferor’s continuing involvement in transferred financial assets. Specifically, among other aspects, this standard amends previously issued accounting guidance, modifies the financial-components approach and removes the concept of a qualifying special purpose entity when accounting for transfers and servicing of financial assets and extinguishments of liabilities, and removes the exception from applying the general accounting principles for the consolidation of variable interest entities that are qualifying special-purpose entities. This new accounting standard is effective for transfers of financial assets occurring on or after January 1, 2010. The adoption of this standard did not have an impact on our financial position or results of operations.

Consolidated Balance Sheets (Unaudited) (Parenthetical) - USD ($)	Mar. 31, 2010	Dec. 31, 2009
Shareholders' equity:
Preferred stock, par value	$ 0.001	$ 0.001
Common stock, par value	$ 0.0005	$ 0.0005