MTH-2013.9.30-10Q



	September 30, 2013		December 31, 2012
Assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	177,584	$	170,457
Investments and securities	92,846		86,074
Restricted cash	40,904		38,938
Other receivables	35,711		20,290
Real estate	1,345,214		1,113,187
Real estate not owned	481		—
Deposits on real estate under option or contract	34,911		14,351
Investments in unconsolidated entities	10,662		12,085
Property and equipment, net	18,690		15,718
Deferred tax asset	80,390		77,974
Prepaids, other assets and goodwill	36,693		26,488
Total assets	$	1,874,086	$	1,575,562
Liabilities:
Accounts payable	$	76,647	$	49,801
Accrued liabilities	178,247		96,377
Home sale deposits	28,183		12,377
Liabilities related to real estate not owned	346		—
Senior, senior subordinated, convertible senior notes and other borrowings	798,337		722,797
Total liabilities	1,081,760		881,352
Stockholders’ Equity:
Preferred stock, par value $0.01. Authorized 10,000,000 shares; none issued and outstanding at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012	—		—
Common stock, par value $0.01. Authorized 125,000,000 shares; issued 36,231,201 and 35,613,351 shares at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively	362		356
Additional paid-in capital	409,984		390,249
Retained earnings	381,980		303,605
Total stockholders’ equity	792,326		694,210
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	1,874,086	$	1,575,562



		Three Months Ended						Nine Months Ended
		September 30,						September 30,
		2013			2012			2013			2012
Homebuilding:
	Home closing revenue	$	483,147		$	334,880		$	1,249,897		$	820,242
	Land closing revenue	8,933			7,763			28,568			8,846
	Total closing revenue	492,080			342,643			1,278,465			829,088
	Cost of home closings	(372,772		)	(272,726		)	(981,557		)	(671,029		)
	Cost of land closings	(6,126		)	(7,493		)	(24,139		)	(8,833		)
	Total cost of closings	(378,898		)	(280,219		)	(1,005,696		)	(679,862		)
	Home closing gross profit	110,375			62,154			268,340			149,213
	Land closing gross profit	2,807			270			4,429			13
	Total closing gross profit	113,182			62,424			272,769			149,226
Financial Services:
	Revenue	1,684			253			3,960			253
	Expense	(901		)	(317		)	(2,229		)	(484		)
	Earnings from financial services unconsolidated entities and other, net	3,511			3,049			9,784			6,974
	Financial services profit	4,294			2,985			11,515			6,743
Commissions and other sales costs		(33,467		)	(25,855		)	(90,526		)	(67,950		)
General and administrative expenses		(24,412		)	(19,209		)	(66,587		)	(50,446		)
Earnings/(loss) from other unconsolidated entities, net		46			(74		)	(229		)	(348		)
Interest expense		(3,462		)	(5,009		)	(13,113		)	(18,718		)
Other income, net		605			(8,276		)	1,760			(7,481		)
Loss on early extinguishment of debt		—			—			(3,796		)	(5,772		)
Earnings before income taxes		56,786			6,986			111,793			5,254
(Provision for)/benefit from income taxes		(18,595		)	(202		)	(33,418		)	4,781
Net earnings		$	38,191		$	6,784		$	78,375		$	10,035
Earnings per common share:
	Basic	$	1.05		$	0.19		$	2.17		$	0.30
	Diluted	$	0.99		$	0.19		$	2.05		$	0.30
Weighted average number of shares:
	Basic	36,226			35,216			36,060			33,541
	Diluted	38,865			35,761			38,771			34,010



	Nine Months Ended September 30
	2013			2012
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net earnings	$	78,375		$	10,035
Adjustments to reconcile net earnings to net cash used in operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization	7,169			5,913
Stock-based compensation	7,040			6,095
Loss on early extinguishment of debt	3,796			5,772
Equity in earnings from unconsolidated entities	(9,555		)	(6,626		)
Deferred tax asset valuation benefit	(4,614		)	(7,709		)
Distributions of earnings from unconsolidated entities	10,796			6,118
Other	1,338			1,976
Changes in assets and liabilities:
Increase in real estate	(221,668		)	(190,509		)
(Increase)/decrease in deposits on real estate under option or contract	(20,425		)	2,192
Increase in receivables and prepaid expenses and other assets	(14,224		)	(1,882		)
Increase in accounts payable and accrued liabilities	106,862			31,204
Increase in home sale deposits	15,584			5,169
Net cash used in operating activities	(39,526		)	(132,252		)
Cash flows from investing activities:
Purchases of property and equipment	(9,717		)	(7,139		)
Maturities of investments and securities	132,900			190,701
Payments to purchase investments and securities	(139,672		)	(109,798		)
Cash paid for acquisitions	(18,379		)	—
Other	(1,955		)	(3,020		)
Net cash (used in)/provided by investing activities	(36,823		)	70,744
Cash flows from financing activities:
Repayment of senior subordinated notes	(102,822		)	(315,080		)
Proceeds from issuance of senior notes	175,000			426,500
Proceeds from issuance of common stock, net	—			87,125
Other	11,298			(5,600		)
Net cash provided by financing activities	83,476			192,945
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents	7,127			131,437
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period	170,457			173,612
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period	$	177,584		$	305,049

See supplemental disclosures of cash flow information at Note 11.

Organization. Meritage Homes is a leading designer and builder of single-family detached homes. We primarily build in the historically high-growth regions of the western and southern United States and offer a variety of homes that are designed to appeal to a wide range of homebuyers, including first-time, move-up, active adult and luxury. We have homebuilding operations in three regions: West, Central and East, which are comprised of seven states: Arizona, Texas, California, Colorado, Florida, the Carolinas and Tennessee. Operations within the Carolinas include the Raleigh and Charlotte metropolitan areas, with some Charlotte communities located across the border into South Carolina. In August 2013, we entered the Nashville, Tennessee market through the acquisition of the assets and operations of Phillips Builders LLC and selected assets of Phillips Development LLC ("Phillips Builders"). With this acquisition, we acquired approximately 500 lots, contributing 30 units in backlog as of September 30, 2013. Through our predecessors, we commenced our homebuilding operations in 1985. In 2012, we commenced limited operations of our wholly-owned title company, Carefree Title Agency, Inc. ("Carefree Title"). Carefree Title's core business consists of title insurance and closing/settlement services we offer to our homebuyers and we expect to be fully operational in applicable markets by the end of 2013. Meritage Homes Corporation was incorporated in 1988 in the state of Maryland.

Our homebuilding and marketing activities are conducted under the name of Meritage Homes in each of our homebuilding markets other than in Tennessee, where we operate under the Phillips Builders brand name. We also operate as Monterey Homes in some markets in Arizona and Texas. At September 30, 2013, we were actively selling homes in 179 communities, with base prices ranging from approximately $130,000 to $994,000.

Basis of Presentation. The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”) for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required by GAAP for complete financial statements. These financial statements should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012. The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Meritage Homes Corporation and those of our consolidated subsidiaries, partnerships and other entities in which we have a controlling financial interest, and of variable interest entities (see Note 3) in which we are deemed the primary beneficiary (collectively, “us”, “we”, “our” and “the Company”). Intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. In the opinion of management, the accompanying financial statements include all adjustments (consisting only of normal recurring entries), necessary for the fair presentation of our results for the interim periods presented. Results for interim periods are not necessarily indicative of results to be expected for the full year. Certain reclassifications have been made to the prior year income statements and footnotes to conform to the current year presentation.

Cash and Cash Equivalents. Liquid investments with an initial maturity of three months or less are classified as cash equivalents. Amounts in transit from title companies for home closings of approximately $43.2 million and $30.4 million are included in cash and cash equivalents at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively. Included in our cash and cash equivalents balance as of September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012 are $20.3 million and $0.3 million, respectively, of money market funds that are invested in short term (three months or less) U.S. government securities.

Restricted Cash. Restricted cash consists of amounts held in restricted accounts as collateral for our letter of credit arrangements. The aggregate capacity of these secured letter of credit arrangements was $60.0 million at September 30, 2013. Our restricted cash accounts invest in money market accounts and U.S. government securities and totaled $40.9 million and $38.9 million at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively.

Investments and Securities. Our investments and securities are comprised of both treasury securities and deposits with banks that are FDIC-insured and secured by U.S. government treasury-backed investments, and therefore we believe bear a limited risk of loss. All of our investments are classified as held-to-maturity and are recorded at amortized cost as we have both the ability and intent to hold them until their respective maturities. The contractual lives of these investments are greater than three months but do not exceed 18 months. Due to their short duration and low contractual interest rates, the amortized cost of the investments approximates fair value with no unrecognized gains and losses or other-than-temporary impairments.

Real Estate. Real estate is stated at cost unless the asset is determined to be impaired, at which point the inventory is written down to fair value as required by Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Subtopic 360-10, Property, Plant and Equipment (“ASC 360-10”). Inventory includes the costs of land acquisition, land development, home construction, capitalized interest, real estate taxes, capitalized direct overhead costs incurred during development and home construction that benefit the entire community, less impairments, if any. Land and development costs are typically allocated and transferred to homes under

construction when construction begins. Home construction costs are accumulated on a per-home basis, while most selling costs are expensed as incurred. Cost of home closings includes the specific construction costs of the home and all related allocated land acquisition, land development and other common costs (both incurred and estimated to be incurred) that are allocated based upon the total number of homes expected to be closed in each community or phase. Any changes to the estimated total development costs of a community or phase are allocated to the remaining homes in the community or phase. When a home closes, we may have incurred costs for goods and services that have not yet been paid. Therefore, we record an accrued liability to capture such obligations in connection with the home closing and charged directly to cost of sales.

We rely on certain estimates to determine our construction and land development costs. Construction and land costs are comprised of direct and allocated costs, including estimated future costs. In determining these costs, we compile project budgets that are based on a variety of assumptions, including future construction schedules and costs to be incurred. It is possible that actual results could differ from budgeted amounts for various reasons, including construction delays, labor or material shortages, increases in costs that have not yet been committed, changes in governmental requirements, or other unanticipated issues encountered during construction and development and other factors beyond our control. To address uncertainty in these budgets, we assess, update and revise project budgets on a regular basis, utilizing the most current information available to estimate construction and land costs.

Typically, a community’s life cycle ranges from three to five years, commencing with the acquisition of the land, continuing through the land development phase, if applicable, and concluding with the sale, construction and closing of the homes. Actual community lives will vary based on the size of the community, the sales absorption rate and whether the land purchased was raw, partially-developed or in finished status. Master-planned communities encompassing several phases and super-block land parcels may have significantly longer lives and projects involving smaller finished lot purchases may be shorter.

All of our land inventory and related real estate assets are reviewed for recoverability, as our inventory is considered “long-lived” in accordance with GAAP. Impairment charges are recorded to write down an asset to its estimated fair value if the undiscounted cash flows expected to be generated by the asset are lower than its carrying amount. Our determination of fair value is based on projections and estimates. Changes in these expectations may lead to a change in the outcome of our impairment analysis, and actual results may also differ from our assumptions. Our analysis is completed on a quarterly basis with each community or land parcel evaluated individually. For those assets deemed to be impaired, the impairment recognized is measured as the amount by which the assets’ carrying amount exceeds their fair value. The impairment of a community is allocated to each lot on a straight-line basis.

Existing and continuing communities. When projections for the remaining income expected to be earned from existing communities are no longer positive, the underlying real estate assets are not deemed fully recoverable, and further analysis is performed to determine the required impairment. The fair value of the community’s assets is determined using either a discounted cash flow model for projects we intend to build out or a market-based approach for projects to be sold. Impairments are charged to cost of home closings in the period during which it is determined that the fair value is less than the assets’ carrying amount. If a market-based approach is used, we determine fair value based on recent comparable purchase and sale activity in the local market, adjusted for variances as determined by our knowledge of the region and general real estate expertise. If a discounted cash flow approach is used, we compute fair value based on a proprietary model. Our key estimates in deriving fair value under our cash flow model are (i) home selling prices in the community adjusted for current and expected sales discounts and incentives, (ii) costs related to the community — both land development and home construction — including costs spent to date and budgeted remaining costs to spend, (iii) projected sales absorption rates, reflecting any product mix change strategies and expected cancellation rates, (iv) alternative land uses including disposition of all or a portion of the land owned and (v) our discount rate, which is currently 14-16% and varies based on the perceived risk inherent in the community’s other cash flow assumptions. These assumptions vary widely across different communities and geographies and are largely dependent on local market conditions. Community-level factors that may impact our key estimates include:

These local circumstances may significantly impact our assumptions and the resulting computation of fair value and are, therefore, closely evaluated by our division personnel in their generation of the discounted cash flow models. The models are also evaluated by regional and corporate personnel for consistency and integration, as decisions that affect pricing or absorption at one community may have resulting consequences for neighboring or nearby communities. We typically do not

Mothball communities. In certain cases, we may elect to stop development of an existing community (mothball) if we believe the economic performance of the community would be maximized by deferring development for a period of time to allow market conditions to improve. When a community is initially placed into mothball status, it is management's belief that the community is affected by local market conditions that are expected to improve within the next 1-5 years. Therefore, a temporary postponement of construction and development work is expected to yield better overall future returns. The decision may be based on financial and/or operational metrics. If we decide to mothball a community, we will, if necessary, impair it to its fair value as discussed above and then cease future development activity until such time as management believes that market conditions have improved and economic performance will be maximized. No costs are capitalized related to communities that are designated as mothballed.

In addition to our quarterly impairment analysis, which is conducted to determine if any current impairments exist, we also conduct a thorough quarterly review of our underperforming and mothballed communities to determine if they are at risk of future impairment. The financial and operational status and expectations of these communities are analyzed as well as any unique attributes that could be viewed as indicators for future impairments. Adjustments are made accordingly and incremental impairments, if any, are recorded at each re-evaluation. Based on the facts and circumstances available as of September 30, 2013, we do not believe that any of our underperforming or mothballed communities will incur material impairments in the future. Changes in market and/or economic conditions could materially impact the conclusions of this analysis, and there can be no assurances that future impairments will not occur.

Inventory assessments on inactive assets. For our mothballed communities as well as our land held for future development, our inventory assessments typically include highly subjective estimates for future performance, including the timing of development, the product to be offered, sales rates and selling prices of the product when the community is anticipated to open for sales, and the projected costs to develop and construct the community. We evaluate various factors to develop our forecasts, including the availability of and demand for homes and finished lots within the marketplace, historical, current and future sales trends, and third-party data, if available. Based on these factors, we reach conclusions for future performance based on our judgment.

Deposits. Deposits paid related to purchase contracts and land options are recorded and classified as Deposits on real estate under contract or option until the related land is purchased. Deposits are reclassified as a component of real estate inventory at the time the deposit is used to offset the acquisition price of the lots based on the terms of the underlying agreements. To the extent they are non-refundable, deposits are charged to expense if the land acquisition is terminated or no longer considered probable. Since the acquisition contracts typically do not require specific performance, we do not consider such contracts to be contractual obligations to purchase the land and our total exposure under such contracts is limited to the loss of the non-refundable deposits and any ancillary capitalized costs. The review of the likelihood of the acquisition of contracted lots is completed quarterly in conjunction with the real estate impairment analysis noted above and therefore, if impaired, the deposits are recorded at the lower of cost or fair value. Our deposits were $34.9 million and $14.4 million as of September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements —Joint Ventures. In the past, we have participated in land development joint ventures as a means of accessing larger parcels of land, expanding our market opportunities, managing our risk profile and leveraging our capital base; however, in recent years, such ventures have not been a significant avenue for us to access lots. See Note 4 for additional discussion of our investments in unconsolidated entities.

We may provide letters of credit in support of our obligations relating to the development of our projects and other corporate purposes. We may also utilize surety bonds to guarantee our performance of certain development and construction activities. Surety bonds are generally posted in lieu of letters of credit or cash deposits. The amount of these obligations outstanding at any time varies depending on the stage and level of our development activities. Bonds are generally not released until all development activities under the bond are complete. In the event a bond or letter of credit is drawn upon, we would be obligated to reimburse the issuer for any amounts advanced under the bond. We believe it is unlikely that any significant amounts of these bonds or letters of credit will be drawn upon. The table below outlines our surety bond and letter of credit obligations (in thousands):



	At September 30, 2013				At December 31, 2012
	Outstanding		Estimated work remaining to complete		Outstanding		Estimated work remaining to complete
Surety Bonds:
Surety bonds related to joint ventures	$	87	$	87	$	87	$	87
Surety bonds related to owned projects and lots under contract	165,852		85,828		87,305		38,936
Total surety bonds	$	165,939	$	85,915	$	87,392	$	39,023
Letters of Credit (“LOCs”):
LOCs in lieu of deposits for contracted lots	$	1,685	N/A		$	—	N/A
LOCs for land development	34,289		N/A		32,475		N/A
LOCs for general corporate operations	4,500		N/A		4,991		N/A
Total LOCs	$	40,474	N/A		$	37,466	N/A

Warranty Reserves. We provide home purchasers with limited warranties against certain building defects and have certain obligations related to those post-construction warranties for closed homes. The specific terms and conditions of these limited warranties vary by state, but overall the nature of the warranties include a complete workmanship and materials warranty typically during the first year after the close of the home and a structural warranty that typically extends up to 10 years subsequent to the close of the home. With the assistance of an actuary, we have estimated these reserves for the structural related warranty based on the number of homes still under warranty and historical warranty data and trends for our communities. We also use industry data with respect to similar product types and geographic areas in markets where our experience may not be sufficient to draw a meaningful conclusion. We regularly review our warranty reserves and adjust them, as necessary, to reflect current claims pace and changes in trends as information becomes available. A summary of changes in our warranty reserves follows (in thousands):

Warranty reserves are included in accrued liabilities on the accompanying consolidated balance sheets, and additions and adjustments to the reserves are included in cost of home closings within the accompanying consolidated income statements. These reserves are intended to cover costs associated with our contractual and statutory warranty obligations, which include, among other items, claims involving defective workmanship and materials. We believe that our total reserves, coupled

Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements. In April 2013, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued ASU 2013-04, Liabilities ("ASU 2013-04"), which provides guidance for the recognition, measurement, and disclosure of obligations resulting from joint and several liability arrangements for which the total amount of the obligation is fixed at the reporting date. ASU 2013-04 is effective for us beginning January 1, 2014. We do not anticipate the adoption of ASU 2013-04 to have an effect on our consolidated financial statements or disclosures.



	At September 30, 2013		At December 31, 2012
Homes under contract under construction (1)	$	316,508	$	192,948
Unsold homes, completed and under construction (1)	123,602		107,466
Model homes (1)	78,017		62,411
Finished home sites and home sites under development	721,492		634,106
Land held for development (2)	53,053		56,118
Land held for sale	19,630		21,650
Communities in mothball status (3)	32,912		38,488
	$	1,345,214	$	1,113,187

As previously noted, in accordance with ASC 360-10, each of our land inventory and related real estate assets is reviewed for recoverability when impairment indicators are present as our inventory is considered “long-lived” in accordance with GAAP. In recent years, due to the volatile economic environment, we evaluate all of our real estate assets for impairment on a quarterly basis. ASC 360-10 requires impairment charges to be recorded if the asset is not deemed fully recoverable and the fair value of such assets is less than their carrying amounts. Our determination of fair value is based on projections and estimates. We also evaluate alternative product offerings in communities where impairment indicators are present and other strategies for the land exist, such as selling the land or holding the land for sale in the future. Based on these reviews of all our communities, we recorded real-estate impairment charges of $584,000 and $776,000 during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013, respectively, as compared to $417,000 and $1.6 million for the same periods in 2012. These charges are included in Cost of closings in our income statements.

Subject to sufficient qualifying assets, we capitalize interest incurred in connection with the development and construction of real estate. Completed homes and land not actively under development do not qualify for interest capitalization. Capitalized interest is allocated to real estate when incurred and charged to cost of closings when the related property is delivered to our customers. To the extent our debt exceeds our qualified assets base, we expense a proportionate share of the interest incurred. A summary of our capitalized interest is as follows (in thousands):



	Three Months Ended						Nine Months Ended
	September 30,						September 30,
	2013			2012			2013			2012
Capitalized interest, beginning of period	$	26,294		$	17,836		$	21,600		$	14,810
Interest incurred	12,508			11,654			37,876			33,819
Interest expensed	(3,462		)	(5,009		)	(13,113		)	(18,718		)
Interest amortized to cost of home and land closings	(6,342		)	(4,296		)	(17,365		)	(9,726		)
Capitalized interest, end of period (1)	$	28,998		$	20,185		$	28,998		$	20,185

Based on the provisions of the relevant accounting guidance, we have concluded that when we enter into purchase or option agreements to acquire land or lots from an entity, a variable interest entity, or “VIE”, may be created. We evaluate all purchase and option agreements for land to determine whether they are a VIE. ASC 810, Consolidations, requires that for each VIE, we assess whether we are the primary beneficiary and, if we are, we consolidate the VIE in our financial statements and reflect such assets and liabilities as “Real estate not owned.” The liabilities related to consolidated VIEs are excluded from our debt covenant calculations.

In order to determine if we are the primary beneficiary, we must first assess whether we have the ability to control the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact its economic performance. Such activities include, but are not limited to, the ability to determine the budget and scope of land development work, if any; the ability to control financing decisions for the VIE; the ability to acquire additional land into the VIE or dispose of land in the VIE not under contract with Meritage; and the ability to change or amend the existing option contract with the VIE. If we are not determined to control such activities, we are not considered the primary beneficiary of the VIE. If we do have the ability to control such activities, we will continue our analysis by determining if we are also expected to absorb a potentially significant amount of the VIE’s losses or, if no party absorbs the majority of such losses, if we will benefit from a potentially significant amount of the VIE’s expected gains.

In substantially all cases, creditors of the entities with which we have option agreements have no recourse against us and the maximum exposure to loss in our option agreements is limited to non-refundable option deposits and any capitalized pre-acquisition costs. Often, we are at risk for items over budget related to land development on property we have under option if we are the land developer. In these cases, we have contracted to complete development at a fixed cost on behalf of the land owner and we bear any budget shortfalls and maintain any budget savings. Some of our option deposits may be refundable to us if certain contractual conditions are not performed by the party selling the lots.



	Number of Lots	Purchase Price		Option/Earnest Money Deposits Cash
Purchase and option contracts recorded on balance sheet as Real estate not owned	20	$	481	$	135
Option contracts not recorded on balance sheet - non-refundable deposits, committed (1)	3,075	231,338		22,771
Purchase contracts not recorded on balance sheet — non-refundable deposits, committed (1)	3,048	153,414		9,759
Purchase contracts not recorded on balance sheet — refundable deposits, committed	327	15,432		216
Total committed (on and off balance sheet)	6,470	400,665		32,881
Total purchase and option contracts not recorded on balance sheet — refundable deposits, uncommitted (2)	4,140	111,108		2,165
Total lots under contract or option	10,610	$	511,773	$	35,046
Total option contracts not recorded on balance sheet (3)	10,590	$	511,292	$	34,911	(4	)

Generally, our option contracts to purchase lots remain effective so long as we purchase a pre-established minimum number of lots each month or quarter, as determined by the respective agreement. The pre-established number is typically structured to approximate our expected rate of home construction starts. Purchase contracts generally involved bulk purchase terms where we purchase all or a large portion of the lots at one time and are typically short-term in nature.

In the past, we have entered into land development joint ventures as a means of accessing larger parcels of land, expanding our market opportunities, managing our risk profile and leveraging our capital base. While purchasing land through a joint venture can be beneficial, currently we do not view them as critical to the success of our homebuilding operations and have not entered into any new land joint ventures since 2008. Based on the structure of these joint ventures, they may or may not be consolidated into our results. Our joint venture partners generally are other homebuilders, land sellers or other real estate investors. We generally do not have a controlling interest in these ventures, which means our joint venture partners could cause the venture to take actions we disagree with, or fail to take actions we believe should be undertaken, including the sale of the underlying property to repay debt or recoup all or part of the partners' investments. As of September 30, 2013, we had two active equity-method land development ventures.

For land development joint ventures, we, and in some cases our joint venture partners, usually receive an option or other similar arrangement to purchase portions of the land held by the joint venture. Option prices are generally negotiated prices that approximate market value when we enter into the option contract or similar arrangement. For these ventures, our share of the joint venture profit relating to lots we purchase from the joint ventures is deferred until homes are delivered by us and title passes to a homebuyer. Therefore, we allocate the portion of such joint venture profit to the land acquired by us as a reduction in the basis of the property.

In connection with our land development joint ventures, we may also provide certain types of guarantees to lenders financing the joint ventures. These guarantees can be classified into two categories: (i) Repayment Guarantees and (ii) Completion Guarantees, described in more detail below. Additionally, we have classified a guarantee related to our minority ownership in the South Edge joint venture separately, as there is pending litigation with the venture’s lender group and other venture partners regarding that guarantee.

Repayment Guarantees. We and/or our land development joint venture partners occasionally provide limited repayment guarantees on a pro rata basis on the debt of land development joint ventures. If such a guarantee were ever to be called or triggered, the maximum exposure to Meritage would generally be only our pro-rata share of the amount of debt outstanding that was in excess of the fair value of the underlying land securing the debt. Our share of these limited pro rata repayment guarantees as of September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012 is presented in the table above (excluding any potential recoveries from the joint venture’s land assets).

Completion Guarantees. If there is development work to be completed, we and our joint venture partners are also typically obligated to the project lender(s) to complete construction of the land development improvements if the joint venture does not perform the required development. Provided we and the other joint venture partners are in compliance with these completion obligations, the project lenders are generally obligated to fund these improvements through any financing commitments available under the applicable joint venture development and construction loans. In addition, we and our joint venture partners have from time to time provided unsecured indemnities to joint venture project lenders. These indemnities generally obligate us to reimburse the project lenders only for claims and losses related to matters for which such lenders are held responsible and our exposure under these indemnities is limited to specific matters such as environmental claims. A part of our project acquisition due diligence process is to determine potential environmental risks and generally we or the joint venture entity obtain an independent environmental review. Per the guidance of ASC 460-10, Guarantees, we believe these guarantees are either not applicable or not material to our financial results.

Surety Bonds. We and our joint venture partners also indemnify third party surety providers with respect to performance bonds issued on behalf of certain of our joint ventures. If a joint venture does not perform its obligations, the surety bond could be called. If these surety bonds are called and the joint venture fails to reimburse the surety, we and our joint venture partners may be obligated to make such payments. These surety indemnity arrangements are generally joint and several obligations with our joint venture partners. Although a majority of the required work may have been performed, these bonds are typically not released until all development specifications under the bond have been met. None of these bonds have been called to date and we believe it is unlikely that any of these bonds will be called or if called, that any such amounts would be material to us. See the table in Note 1 for more information on our surety bonds.

The joint venture obligations, guarantees and indemnities discussed above are generally provided by us or one of our subsidiaries. In joint ventures involving other homebuilders or developers, support for these obligations is generally provided by the parent companies of the joint venture partners. In connection with our periodic real estate impairment reviews, we may accrue for any such commitments where we believe our obligation to pay is probable and can be reasonably estimated. In such situations, our accrual represents the portion of the total joint venture obligation related to our relative ownership percentage. We continue to monitor these matters and reserve for these obligations if and when they become probable and can be reasonably estimated. Except as noted above and in Note 13 to these unaudited consolidated financial statements, as of September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, we did not have any such reserves.

We also participate in two mortgage and one title business joint ventures. The mortgage joint ventures are engaged in mortgage activities and they provide services to both our homebuyers ad well as other buyers. Although some of these ventures originate mortgage loans, we have limited recourse related to any mortgages originated by these ventures. We intend to wind down the remaining title joint venture with the continued roll out of Carefree Title operations, as discussed earlier. Our investments in mortgage and title joint ventures as of September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012 were $1.8 million and $2.0 million, respectively.

Our investments in unconsolidated entities include $0.6 million and $0.8 million at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively, related to the difference between the amounts at which our investments are carried and the amount of our portion of the venture’s equity. These amounts are amortized as the assets of the respective joint ventures are sold. A de minimis amount of amortization was recorded for these assets in the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 with no amortization recorded for the same periods in 2012.



	At September 30, 2013		At December 31, 2012
7.731% senior subordinated notes due 2017	$	—	$	99,825
4.50% senior notes due 2018	175,000		—
7.15% senior notes due 2020. At September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, there was approximately $3,163 and $3,528 in unamortized discount, respectively	196,837		196,472
7.00% senior notes due 2022	300,000		300,000
1.875% convertible senior notes due 2032	126,500		126,500
$135 million unsecured revolving credit facility	—		—
	$	798,337	$	722,797

Borrowings under our unsecured revolving credit facility ("the Credit Facility") are subject to, among other things, a borrowing base. The Credit Facility also contains certain financial covenants, including (a) a minimum tangible net worth requirement of $360.0 million (which amount is subject to increase over time based on subsequent earnings and proceeds from equity offerings), and (b) a maximum leverage covenant that prohibits the leverage ratio (as defined therein) from exceeding 60%. In addition, we are required to maintain either (i) an interest coverage ratio (EBITDA to interest expense, as defined therein) of at least 1.50 to 1.00 or (ii) liquidity (as defined therein) of an amount not less than our consolidated interest incurred during the trailing 12 months. No amounts were drawn under the Credit Facility as of September 30, 2013 or December 31, 2012.

In March 2013, we completed an offering of $175 million aggregate principal amount of 4.50% Senior Notes due 2018. Concurrent with this offering, we announced a tender offer to repurchase all of our 7.731% Senior Subordinated Notes due 2017 ("2017 Notes") and subsequently issued a call offer to repurchase any and all remaining notes not tendered. As a result of the tender offer, as of September 30, 2013, we had repurchased all of the $99.8 million outstanding 2017 Notes. The debt redemption transactions resulted in costs and charges of $3.8 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2013 reflected as Loss on early extinguishment of debt in our consolidated income statements.

In June 2013, we amended our existing Credit Facility, to among other things, extend the facility maturity date by one year from July 24, 2015 to July 24, 2016, amend the formula for calculating the borrowing base to moderately increase the advance rate for certain categories of assets and to increase the accordion feature to $75 million. In addition, two additional lenders joined the Credit Facility lending syndicate, thereby increasing the total commitment currently available under the Credit Facility to $135 million.

Obligations to pay principal and interest on our notes listed in the table above are guaranteed by all of our wholly-owned subsidiaries (each a “Guarantor” and, collectively, the “Guarantor Subsidiaries”), each of which is directly or indirectly 100% owned by Meritage Homes Corporation. Such guarantees are full and unconditional, and joint and several. In the event of a sale or other disposition of all of the assets of any Guarantor, by way of merger, consolidation or otherwise, or a sale or other disposition of all of the equity interests of any Guarantor then held by Meritage and its subsidiaries, then that Guarantor will be released and relieved of any obligations under its note guarantee. There are no significant restrictions on our ability or the ability of any Guarantor to obtain funds from their respective subsidiaries, as applicable, by dividend or loan. We do not provide separate financial statements of the Guarantor Subsidiaries because Meritage (the parent company) has no independent assets or operations and the guarantees are full and unconditional and joint and several. Subsidiaries of Meritage Homes Corporation that are nonguarantor subsidiaries, if any, are, individually and in the aggregate, inconsequential.

We account for the non-recurring fair value measurements of our non-financial assets and liabilities in accordance with ASC 820-10, Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure. This guidance defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value and addresses required disclosures about fair value measurements. This standard establishes a three-level hierarchy for fair value measurements based upon the significant inputs used to determine fair value. Observable inputs are those which are obtained from market participants external to the company while unobservable inputs are generally developed internally, utilizing management’s estimates, assumptions and specific knowledge of the assets/liabilities and related markets. The three levels are defined as follows:

If the only observable inputs are from inactive markets or for transactions which the company evaluates as “distressed”, the use of Level 1 inputs should be modified by the company to properly address these factors, or the reliance of such inputs may be limited, with a greater weight attributed to Level 3 inputs. Refer to Notes 1 and 2 for additional information regarding the valuation of our non-financial assets.



		September 30, 2013				December 31, 2012
	Hierarchy	Aggregate Principal		Estimated Fair Value		Aggregate Principal		Estimated Fair Value
7.731% senior subordinated notes	Level 2	N/A		N/A		$	99,825	$	102,950
4.50% senior notes	Level 2	$	175,000	$	171,938	N/A		N/A
7.15% senior notes	Level 2	$	200,000	$	216,000	$	200,000	$	220,760
7.00% senior notes	Level 2	$	300,000	$	318,000	$	300,000	$	328,500
1.875% convertible senior notes	Level 2	$	126,500	$	135,829	$	126,500	$	127,449

Basic and diluted earnings per common share were calculated as follows (in thousands, except per share amounts):



	Three Months Ended September 30				Nine Months Ended September 30
	2013		2012		2013		2012
Basic weighted average number of shares outstanding	36,226		35,216		36,060		33,541
Effect of dilutive securities:
Convertible debt (1)	2,176		—		2,176		—
Stock options and unvested restricted stock	463		545		535		469
Diluted weighted average shares outstanding	38,865		35,761		38,771		34,010

Net earnings as reported	$	38,191	$	6,784	$	78,375	$	10,035
Interest attributable to convertible senior notes, net of income taxes	393		—		1,180		—
Net earnings for earnings per share	$	38,584	$	6,784	$	79,555	$	10,035
Basic earnings per share	$	1.05	$	0.19	$	2.17	$	0.30
Diluted earnings per share (1)	$	0.99	$	0.19	$	2.05	$	0.30
Antidilutive stock options not included in the calculation of diluted income per share	10		530		5		348



	Nine Months Ended September 30, 2013
	(In thousands)
	Number of Shares	Common Stock		Additional Paid-In Capital			Retained Earnings		Total
Balance at December 31, 2012	35,613	$	356	$	390,249		$	303,605	$	694,210
Net earnings	—	—		—			78,375		78,375
Exercise of stock options	335	3		11,222			—		11,225
Excess income tax benefit from stock-based awards	—	—		1,733			—		1,733
Equity award compensation expense	—	—		7,040			—		7,040
Issuance of restricted stock	283	3		(3		)	—		—
Non-controlling interest acquisition	—	—		(257		)	—		(257		)
Balance at September 30, 2013	36,231	$	362	$	409,984		$	381,980	$	792,326



	Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012
	(In thousands)
	Number of Shares		Common Stock			Additional Paid-In Capital			Retained Earnings		Treasury Stock			Total
Balance at December 31, 2011	40,377		$	404		$	478,839		$	198,442	$	(188,773	)	$	488,912
Net earnings	—		—			—			10,035		—			10,035
Exercise of stock options	259		3			3,897			—		—			3,900
Equity award compensation expense	—		—			6,095			—		—			6,095
Issuance of restricted stock	200		2			(2		)	—		—			—
Issuance of stock (1)	2,645		26			87,099			—		—			87,125
Cancellation of treasury shares (2)	(7,891	)	(79		)	(188,694		)	—		188,773			—
Balance at September 30, 2012	35,590		356			387,234			208,477		—			596,067

We have a stock compensation plan, the 2006 Stock Option Plan (the “Plan”), that was adopted in 2006, and superseded a prior stock compensation plan. The Plan has been amended from time to time. The Plan was approved by our stockholders and is administered by our Board of Directors. The provisions of the Plan allow for the grant of stock appreciation rights, restricted stock awards, performance share awards and performance-based awards in addition to non-qualified and incentive stock options. The Plan authorizes awards to officers, key employees, non-employee directors and consultants for up to 8,950,000 shares of common stock, of which 967,743 shares remain available for grant at September 30, 2013. We believe that such awards provide a means of performance-based compensation to attract and retain qualified employees and better align the interests of our employees with those of our stockholders. Non-vested stock awards and stock options granted in previous years are typically granted with a five-year ratable vesting period. Non-vested stock awards and performance-based awards granted to our executive management team and our Board of Directors are typically granted with a three-year cliff vesting.

Compensation cost related to time-based restricted stock awards are measured as of the closing price on the date of grant and are expensed on a straight-line basis over the vesting period of the award. Compensation cost related to performance-based restricted stock awards are also measured as of the closing price on the date of grant but are expensed in accordance with ASC 718-10-25-20, Compensation – Stock Compensation, which requires an assessment of probability of attainment of the performance target. As our performance targets are annual in nature, once we determine that the performance target outcome is probable, the year-to-date expense is recorded and the remaining expense is recorded on a straight-line basis through the end of the award’s vesting period.



	Three Months Ended September 30				Nine Months Ended September 30
	2013		2012		2013		2012
Stock-based compensation expense	$	3,099	$	2,822	$	7,040	$	6,095
Non-vested shares granted	3,600		16,750		345,700		386,500
Performance-based non-vested shares granted	—		—		62,500		56,250
Stock options exercised	12,400		179,832		334,500		259,132
Restricted stock awards vested (includes performance-based awards)	2,550		3,300		283,350		200,316

The effective tax rate for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 is 32.7% and 29.9%, respectively, and reflects the benefit of energy tax credit, the homebuilder manufacturing deduction, and a partial reversal of the state valuation allowance on our deferred tax assets. Due to the effects of the deferred tax asset valuation allowance and federal and state tax net operating losses (“NOLs”), the effective tax rate in 2012 is not meaningful as there is no correlation between the effective tax rate and the amount of pre-tax income or loss for that period.

At September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, we have no unrecognized tax benefits due to the lapse of the statute of limitations and completion of audits for prior years. We believe that our current income tax filing positions and deductions would be sustained on audit and do not anticipate any adjustments that would result in a material change. Our policy is to accrue interest and penalties on unrecognized tax benefits and include them in federal income tax expense.

In accordance with ASC 740-10, Income Taxes, we determine our net deferred tax assets by taxing jurisdiction. We evaluate our net deferred tax assets, including the benefit from NOLs, by jurisdiction to determine if a valuation allowance is required. Companies must assess whether a valuation allowance should be established based on the consideration of all available evidence using a “more likely than not” standard with significant weight being given to evidence that can be objectively verified. This assessment considers, among other matters, the nature, frequency and severity of cumulative losses, forecasts of future profitability, the length of statutory carryforward periods, a company's experience with operating losses and experiences of utilizing tax credit carryforwards and tax planning alternatives.

We recorded a full valuation allowance against all of our net deferred tax assets during 2008 due to economic conditions and the weight of negative evidence at that time. During the second quarter of 2012, we determined that the positive evidence exceeded the negative evidence in the tax jurisdiction of Florida and that it was more likely than not that most of the deferred tax assets and NOL carryovers for the Florida jurisdiction would be realized. In the fourth quarter of 2012, we reversed the valuation allowance against our federal deferred tax assets and those in most of our state jurisdictions because the weight of the positive evidence in those jurisdictions exceeded that of the negative evidence. However, we retained a valuation allowance for certain states which have shorter carryforward periods for utilization of NOL carryovers or lower current earnings relative to their NOL carryforward balance. A portion of this remaining allowance relating to state tax assets was released in the second and third quarters of 2013.

Our future NOL and deferred tax asset realization depends on sufficient taxable income in the carryforward periods under existing tax laws. Federal NOL carryforwards may be used to offset future taxable income for 20 years. State NOL carryforwards may be used to offset future taxable income for a period of time ranging from 5 to 20 years, depending on the state jurisdiction. At September 30, 2013, we had a federal NOL carryforward benefit of $9.1 million that expires in 2031 and federal tax credit carryforwards of $5.7 million which begin to expire in 2030. At September 30, 2013, we also had tax benefits for state NOL carryforwards of $17.9 million that expire at various times from 2013 to 2031 depending on the state jurisdiction.

The tax benefits from our NOLs, built-in losses, and tax credits would be materially reduced or potentially eliminated if we experience an “ownership change” as defined under Internal Revenue Code (“IRC”) §382. Based on our analysis performed as of September 30, 2013, we do not believe that we have experienced an ownership change. As a protective measure, our stockholders held a Special Meeting of Stockholders on February 16, 2009 and approved an amendment to our Articles of Incorporation that restricts certain transfers of our common stock. The amendment is intended to help us avoid an unintended ownership change and thereby preserve the value of our tax benefits for future utilization.

On January 1, 2013, Congress passed the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (the “Act”), which the President signed into law on January 2, 2013. The Act extended certain tax provisions which have a retroactive effect on 2012. Among other things, the Act extended for two years the availability of a business tax credit under IRC §45L for building new energy efficient homes, which originally was set to expire at the end of 2011. Under ASC 740, the effects of new legislation are recognized in the period that includes the date of enactment, regardless of the retroactive benefit. In accordance with this guidance, we recorded a tax benefit of approximately $2.6 million in the first quarter of 2013 related to the extension of the IRC §45L tax credit for the qualifying new energy efficient homes that we closed in 2012. We are currently estimating our IRC §45L qualification rates for homes closed in 2012 and 2013 based on best available information, and any additional credits will be recognized in future periods if we determine that we quality for them after completing a more in-depth analysis.

We operate with two principal business segments: homebuilding and financial services. As defined in ASC 280-10, Segment Reporting, we have seven homebuilding operating segments (the seven states in which we operate) within our homebuilding business. These segments are engaged in the business of acquiring and developing land, constructing homes, marketing and selling those homes, and providing warranty and customer service. We aggregate our homebuilding operating segments into reporting segments based on similar long-term economic characteristics and geographical proximity. In latter 2012, management's evaluation of segment reporting led to a re-grouping of our homebuilding segments to more closely align them into long-term expected profitability trends and, accordingly, all prior year segment financial information has been updated to reflect our new aggregation. Our current reportable homebuilding segments are as follows:

Management's evaluation of homebuilding segment performance is based on segment operating income, which we define as homebuilding and land revenues less cost of home construction, commissions and other sales costs, land development and other land sales costs and other costs incurred by or allocated to each segment, including impairments. Each reportable segment follows the same accounting policies described in our 2012 Form 10-K in Note 1, “Business and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.” Operating results for each segment may not be indicative of the results for such segment had it been an independent, stand-alone entity for the periods presented. The following segment information is in thousands:



	Three Months Ended September 30						Nine Months Ended September 30
	2013			2012			2013			2012
Homebuilding revenue (1):
West	$	259,669		$	186,507		$	695,615		$	415,471
Central	139,307			104,526			357,406			279,004
East	93,104			51,610			225,444			134,613
Consolidated total	$	492,080		$	342,643		$	1,278,465		$	829,088
Homebuilding segment operating income:
West	$	41,298		$	15,319		$	95,356		$	26,970
Central	12,677			5,673			22,320			11,325
East	9,990			3,691			19,991			9,768
Total homebuilding segment operating income	63,965			24,683			137,667			48,063
Financial services profit	4,294			2,985			11,515			6,743
Corporate and unallocated (2)	(8,662		)	(7,323		)	(22,011		)	(17,233		)
Earnings/(loss) from other unconsolidated entities, net	46			(74		)	(229		)	(348		)
Interest expense	(3,462		)	(5,009		)	(13,113		)	(18,718		)
Other income/(expense), net	605			(8,276		)	1,760			(7,481		)
Loss on early extinguishment of debt	—			—			(3,796		)	(5,772		)
Earnings before income taxes	$	56,786		$	6,986		$	111,793		$	5,254



	At September 30, 2013
	West		Central		East		Financial Services		Corporate and Unallocated (1)		Total
Deposits on real estate under option or contract	$	13,644	$	11,390	$	9,877	$	—	$	—	$	34,911
Real estate	738,573		370,005		236,636		—		—		1,345,214
Investments in unconsolidated entities	205		9,340		46		—		1,071		10,662
Other assets (2)	33,765		167,260		30,556		553		251,165		483,299
Total assets	$	786,187	$	557,995	$	277,115	$	553	$	252,236	$	1,874,086



	At December 31, 2012
	West		Central		East		Financial Services		Corporate and Unallocated (3)		Total
Deposits on real estate under option or contract	$	4,419	$	7,168	$	2,764	$	—	$	—	$	14,351
Real estate	647,316		305,100		160,771		—		—		1,113,187
Investments in unconsolidated entities	365		10,645		16		—		1,059		12,085
Other assets (4)	24,935		132,546		25,914		297		252,247		435,939
Total assets	$	677,035	$	455,459	$	189,465	$	297	$	253,306	$	1,575,562

We are involved in various routine legal proceedings incidental to our business. With respect to most pending litigation matters, our ultimate legal and financial responsibility, if any, cannot be estimated with certainty and our actual future expenditure to resolve those matters could prove to be different from the amount that we accrued or reserved. On a quarterly basis, our senior management and legal team conduct an in-depth review of all active legal claims and litigation matters and we record a legal or warranty accrual representing the estimated total expense required to resolve each such matter. As of September 30, 2013, we have reserved approximately $16.8 million related to non-warranty related litigation and asserted claims, which includes reserves for the Joint Venture Litigation discussed below. In addition, our $22.3 million warranty reserve includes accruals for all construction defect claims that are similarly recorded in an amount we believe will be necessary to resolve those construction defect claims. Except as may be specifically disclosed herein, we currently believe that any reasonably possible additional losses from existing claims and litigation in excess of our existing reserves and accruals would be immaterial, individually and in the aggregate, to our financial results.

We are a defendant in a lawsuit filed by the lenders related to a project known as “South Edge” or “Inspirada”. We are also a party to a demand for arbitration made by an entity controlled by certain co-venturers, which demand was made by that entity as Estate Representative of bankrupt South Edge, LLC. The project involves a large master-planned community located in Henderson, Nevada, which was acquired by an unconsolidated joint venture with capital supplied by us and our co-venturers, and a syndicated loan for the project. In connection with the loan obtained by the venture, we provided a narrowly crafted repayment guarantee that could only be triggered upon a “bankruptcy event”. That guarantee covers our 3.53% pro rata share of the project financing.

On December 9, 2010, three of the lenders filed a petition seeking to place the venture into an involuntary bankruptcy. On June 6, 2011, we received a demand letter from the lenders, requesting full payment of $13.2 million, including past-due interest and penalties, the lenders claimed to be owed under the springing repayment guarantee. The lenders claim that the involuntary bankruptcy filed by three of the lenders triggered the “springing” repayment guarantee. We do not believe the lenders have an enforceable position associated with their $13.2 million claim and do not believe we should be required to pay such amount because, among other reasons, the lenders breached their contract with us by refusing to accept the April 2008 full tender of our performance and by refusing to release their lien in connection with our second and final takedown in this project and we do not believe the repayment guarantee was triggered by the lenders’ filing of the involuntary bankruptcy. As a result, on August 19, 2011, we filed a lawsuit against JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA (“JP Morgan”) in the Court of Common Pleas in Franklin County, Ohio (Case No. 11CVH0810353) regarding the repayment guarantee. In reaction to that lawsuit, on August 25, 2011, JP Morgan filed a lawsuit against us in the US District Court of Nevada, which is currently being prosecuted in the name of JP Morgan's agent, ISG Insolvency Group, Inc. regarding the same issues addressed in the Ohio litigation. The Ohio action and the Nevada action have been consolidated. On October 26, 2011, the Bankruptcy Court approved a Plan pursuant to which (i) the lenders have received all payments to which they are entitled, (ii) the project has been conveyed to Inspirada Builders, LLC, which is an entity owned by four of the co-venturers in the South Edge entity (KB Home, Toll Brothers, Pardee Homes and Beazer Homes), and (iii) the four co-venturer builders claim to have succeeded to the lenders' repayment guarantee claim against Meritage.

On September 4, 2012, the Court ruled on a motion for summary judgment that JP Morgan has standing to pursue its repayment guarantee claims against Meritage, that Meritage was liable thereunder to JP Morgan and that the parties should be permitted to conduct discovery with respect to the amount of damages to which JP Morgan is entitled under the repayment guarantee. Following limited discovery, JP Morgan filed a motion for summary judgment with respect to damages, and on June 17, 2013 the Court granted the motion, ruling that Meritage owes JP Morgan $15,053,857. Later, on July 8, 2013, the Court entered Judgment in favor of JP Morgan in the amount of $15,753,344, which included an additional $699,487 for pre-judgment interest that accrued between December 6, 2012 and the date of the Judgment. We immediately appealed the Court's rulings, which is currently pending. On July 17, 2013 we posted a supersedeas bond in the amount of $16,050,604 staying enforcement of the Judgment, which was approved by the Court on July 17, 2013. Pursuant to a stipulation between the parties, the bond amount included the amount of the Judgment and additional sums for a potential award of post-judgment interest and attorneys' fees on appeal. We disagree with many of the conclusions and findings contained in the Court's order, and have challenged and will continue to challenge the rulings. In addition, we believe that the four above-named builders are liable to Meritage for any amounts that Meritage may ultimately be required to pay under the repayment guarantee, and we have filed claims against those builders to, among other things, recover from them any amounts Meritage is required to pay under the repayment guarantee.

In March 2012, Inspirada Builders, LLC, as Estate Representative of South Edge, LLC (the original joint venture) filed demand for arbitration in the United States Bankruptcy Court in the District of Nevada against Meritage Homes of Nevada, Inc. seeking: (1) $13.5 million, relating to alleged breaches of the Operating Agreement of South Edge, LLC, for an alleged failure to pay the amounts Meritage Homes of Nevada fully tendered but South Edge rejected in April 2008; and (2) $9.8 million relating to our supposed pro rata share of alleged future infrastructure improvement costs to be incurred by Inspirada Builders, LLC (the new owner of the project and which is owned by the four builders identified above). The $13.5 million component of this claim represents the same alleged obligation and amount that is the subject of the above described pending repayment guarantee litigation between us and JP Morgan. Meritage filed a response to Inspirada Builders' arbitration claims denying liability, together with cross-claims against each of the four above-named co-venture builders for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and indemnity. On June 27, 2013, the $9.8 million claim for future infrastructure costs was dismissed. Although the balance of the parties' claims are currently pending and were set to be resolved at a hearing in late 2013, per the parties' stipulation the Arbitration has now been stayed pending resolution of the pending appeal of the Court's rulings in favor of JP Morgan in the federal court action. In connection with these on-going legal proceedings, we have established a reserve in an amount that we believe is appropriate for this matter. Our 3.53% investment in the venture has previously been fully impaired. We do not believe that the ultimate disposition of these matters will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition.

The positive momentum the housing market has experienced in recent quarters continued into the third quarter of 2013, despite the increase in mortgage rates and the seasonally slower summer months. The market continues to be largely driven by housing affordability and decreasing levels of home inventory in many markets. While sales pace moderated in the third quarter, we are still benefiting from increased customer interest and traffic in our communities that translate into positive order trends overall as compared to the prior year.

We remain focused on strategically positioning ourselves in well-located and highly-desired communities in many of the top real-estate markets in the United States. During the last few quarters, improving demand for homes has allowed us to place more emphasis on increasing prices over sales pace in order to maximize our profitability in top producing markets. This has resulted in our sales pace decreasing in our most robust markets. We have also begun to actively acquire lot positions through option contracts, more specifically through land banking arrangements that have become more available recently and that allow us to leverage our balance sheet by securing additional land through limited initial cash outlays. (See Note 3 for additional information related to option contracts). We believe we successfully differentiate ourselves from our competition by offering a line-up of plans that highlight the benefits of our industry-leading energy efficient homes. We also offer our buyers the ability to personalize their homes and we provide a home warranty, further setting us apart from the competition we face with resale homes. Our solid operating and financial results during the first nine months of 2013 are reflected in our improved profitability and kept our balance sheet strong.

In addition to the initiatives listed above evidencing our confidence in the long-term demand for housing, we continually evaluate opportunities for expansion into new markets that indicate positive long-term growth trends. We are redeploying our capital into projects both within our geographic footprint and through entry into new markets. In connection with these efforts, in August 2013, we entered the Nashville, Tennessee market through the acquisition of the assets and operations of Phillips Builders. With this acquisition, we acquired approximately 500 lots, contributing 30 units in backlog as of September 30, 2013. We also are now closed out of the Las Vegas, Nevada market, only providing on-going warranty support for our homeowners.

In the third quarter of 2013, we opened 27 new communities while closing out 13 communities, ending the quarter with 179 active communities, three of which are from the Phillips Builders acquisition. We expect active community count to continue to grow as our new communities have longer lot positions and are not closing out at the quicker pace of some of our older active communities. We expect to end the year with approximately 185 actively-selling communities.

Over the past 18 months, we have taken steps to strengthen our balance sheet and extend debt maturities through debt transactions. Most recently, in March 2013, we concurrently issued $175.0 million of 4.50% senior notes due 2018 and redeemed $16.7 million of our $99.8 million senior subordinated notes due 2017. We redeemed the remaining balance of these notes in April 2013. In June 2013, we amended our Credit Facility to extend the facility maturity date by one year to July 2016 and increased the total commitment currently available under the Credit Facility by $10.0 million to $135.0 million. (See Note 5 to the accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements for further discussion.)

Along with most of the homebuilding industry, we continued to experience strong operating and financial performance in the third quarter of 2013. We believe our overall improving trends are attributable to our focus on community placement, coupled with our Meritage Green energy efficiency product offerings as well as the overall improvement in home demand. Demand in our markets continues to outpace supply, allowing us to benefit from price appreciation, which more than offset construction cost increases, and thereby improved our margins. We continue to focus on growing our land positions and strategically increasing our active community count in preferred locations to meet the additional demand we are experiencing and capitalize on improved consumer sentiment regarding home purchases.

In the third quarter of 2013, we benefited from gains in nearly all of our key operating and financial metrics. We recorded 1,300 orders and 1,418 closings, increases of 8.0% and 18.5%, respectively over the third quarter of 2012. Orders pace per average actively selling community slowed slightly, reflecting the effect of recent interest rate increases, home price increases, as well as the overall slower summer months. Most notably, we recorded a significant increase year-over year in home closing gross margin during the three months ended September 30, 2013, increasing 420 basis points from the same period in 2012 to 22.8%. While home closing gross margin may continue to rise slightly over the short term, we expect that home closing gross margin will normalize at a slightly lower percentage rate over the longer term. We believe our results are indicative of successful execution of business initiatives and increased housing demand. We expect the positive housing fundamentals to continue to support moderate growth in upcoming quarters. Comparative positive trends are and will continue to be increasingly more difficult as we began experiencing notable and sustained improvement in the second quarter of 2012. Accordingly, we anticipate the comparative gains to be more tempered as we experience successive quarters of the improved homebuilding environment.

Total home closing revenue was $483.1 million for the three months ended September 30, 2013, increasing 44.3% from the same period last year. The $148.3 million increase is driven by both the 221 additional closing units for the quarter ended September 30, 2013 as compared to the same period last year and the 21.8% increase in average sales prices to $340,700. The increased sales prices were partially due to a shift in order mix to communities and states that have a greater demand for larger homes with higher average home prices and partially due to price appreciation. We reported net earnings of $38.2 million for the three months ended September 30, 2013, as compared to $6.8 million for the same period in 2012. We expect improving revenue and profitability for the remainder of the year, as indicated by our higher ending backlog, average sales prices and improved margins.

Total home closing revenue for the nine months ended September, 2013 was $1.2 billion as compared to $820.2 million for the 2012 period. The 52.4% increase in year-to-date closing revenue is due to a 793-unit increase strengthened by the $56,100 increase in average sales prices. Net earnings for the year-to-date period increased more than six times from $10.0 million in 2012 to $78.4 million in 2013. The same contributing factors for third quarter results mentioned above impacted the year-to-date results.

At September, 2013, our backlog of $805.6 million reflects an increase of 64.6% or $316.1 million, when compared to backlog at September 30, 2012. The improvement reflects a 8.0% increase in unit orders, as well as higher average sales prices on home orders of 19.7% for the three months ended September 30, 2013, as compared to the same period a year ago. In the third quarter of 2013, we were also able to maintain a low cancellation rate on home orders at 14% of gross orders. Cancellations increased from 13% in the third quarter of 2012. These cancellation rates are still a bit below our historical averages.

The composition of our closings, home orders and backlog is constantly changing and is based on a dissimilar mix of communities between periods as new projects open and existing projects wind down. Further, individual homes within a community can range significantly in price due to differing square footage, option selections, lot sizes and quality of lots (e.g. cul-de-sac, view lots, greenbelt lots). These variations result in a lack of meaningful comparability between our home orders, closings and backlog due to the changing mix between periods. The tables below present operating and financial data that we consider most critical to managing our operations (dollars in thousands):

Home Closing Revenue



	Three Months Ended September 30				Quarter over Quarter
	2013		2012		Chg $			Chg %
Total
Dollars	$	483,147	$	334,880	$	148,267		44.3	%
Homes closed	1,418		1,197		221			18.5	%
Avg sales price	$	340.7	$	279.8	$	60.9		21.8	%
West Region
Arizona
Dollars	$	96,562	$	59,519	$	37,043		62.2	%
Homes closed	301		243		58			23.9	%
Avg sales price	$	320.8	$	244.9	$	75.9		31.0	%
California
Dollars	$	113,954	$	88,748	$	25,206		28.4	%
Homes closed	259		244		15			6.1	%
Avg sales price	$	440.0	$	363.7	$	76.3		21.0	%
Colorado
Dollars	$	43,033	$	27,639	$	15,394		55.7	%
Homes closed	104		83		21			25.3	%
Avg sales price	$	413.8	$	333.0	$	80.8		24.3	%
Nevada
Dollars	$	245	$	4,113	$	(3,868	)	(94.0	)%
Homes closed	1		22		(21		)	(95.5	)%
Avg sales price	$	245.0	$	187.0	$	58.0		31.0	%
West Region Totals
Dollars	$	253,794	$	180,019	$	73,775		41.0	%
Homes closed	665		592		73			12.3	%
Avg sales price	$	381.6	$	304.1	$	77.5		25.5	%
Central Region - Texas
Central Region Totals
Dollars	$	136,249	$	104,041	$	32,208		31.0	%
Homes closed	509		434		75			17.3	%
Avg sales price	$	267.7	$	239.7	$	28.0		11.7	%
East Region
Carolinas
Dollars	$	24,361	$	14,459	$	9,902		68.5	%
Homes closed	62		40		22			55.0	%
Avg sales price	$	392.9	$	361.5	$	31.4		8.7	%
Florida
Dollars	$	66,464	36,361		$	30,103		82.8	%
Homes closed	176		131		45			34.4	%
Avg sales price	$	377.6	277.6		$	100.0		36.0	%
Tennessee
Dollars	$	2,279	N/A		N/A			N/A
Homes closed	6		N/A		N/A			N/A
Avg sales price	$	379.8	N/A		N/A			N/A
East Region Totals
Dollars	$	93,104	$	50,820	$	42,284		83.2	%
Homes closed	244		171		73			42.7	%
Avg sales price	$	381.6	$	297.2	$	84.4		28.4	%



	Nine Months Ended September 30				Year over Year
	2013		2012		Chg $			Chg %
Total
Dollars	$	1,249,897	$	820,242	$	429,655		52.4	%
Homes closed	3,791		2,998		793			26.5	%
Avg sales price	$	329.7	$	273.6	$	56.1		20.5	%
West Region
Arizona
Dollars	$	233,447	$	153,190	$	80,257		52.4	%
Homes closed	744		593		151			25.5	%
Avg sales price	$	313.8	$	258.3	$	55.5		21.5	%
California
Dollars	$	329,414	$	172,575	$	156,839		90.9	%
Homes closed	784		489		295			60.3	%
Avg sales price	$	420.2	$	352.9	$	67.3		19.1	%
Colorado
Dollars	$	112,238	$	75,816	$	36,422		48.0	%
Homes closed	298		227		71			31.3	%
Avg sales price	$	376.6	$	334.0	$	42.6		12.8	%
Nevada
Dollars	$	8,900	$	7,402	$	1,498		20.2	%
Homes closed	38		39		(1		)	(2.6	)%
Avg sales price	$	234.2	$	189.8	$	44.4		23.4	%
West Region Totals
Dollars



Maryland		86-0611231
(State or Other Jurisdiction of		(I.R.S. Employer
Incorporation or Organization)		Identification No.)

17851 North 85th Street, Suite 300
Scottsdale, Arizona		85255
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)		(Zip Code)



Large accelerated filer	x	Accelerated filer	o
Non-accelerated filer	o (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)	Smaller reporting company	o



PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Financial Statements
Unaudited Consolidated Balance Sheets as of September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012	3
Unaudited Consolidated Income Statements for the Three and Nine Months Ended September 30, 2013 and 2012	4
Unaudited Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Nine Months Ended September 30, 2013 and 2012	5
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements	6
Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	24
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk	41
Item 4. Controls and Procedures	41
PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal Proceedings	42
Item 1A. Risk Factors	43
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds	43
Items 3-5. Not Applicable
Item 6. Exhibits	44
SIGNATURES	45
INDEX OF EXHIBITS	45



	At September 30, 2013		At December 31, 2012
Accruals related to real-estate development and construction activities	$	32,954	$	19,954
Payroll and other benefits	29,100		11,871
Accrued taxes	34,117		3,407
Warranty reserves	22,257		22,064
Legal reserves	16,807		16,067
Real-estate notes payable (1)	15,876		6,288
Other accruals	27,136		16,726
Total	$	178,247	$	96,377



	Three Months Ended September 30						Nine Months Ended September 30
	2013			2012			2013			2012
Balance, beginning of period	$	21,844		$	21,243		$	22,064		$	23,136
Additions to reserve from new home deliveries	2,818			2,166			8,055			5,771
Warranty claims	(2,405		)	(436		)	(7,862		)	(5,934		)
Adjustments to pre-existing reserves	—			—			—			—
Balance, end of period	$	22,257		$	22,973		$	22,257		$	22,973



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



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


•	The presence and significance of local competitors, including their offered product type and pricing, comparable lot size, and competitive actions;


•	Economic and related demographic conditions for the population of the surrounding community;


•	Desirability of the particular community, including unique amenities or other favorable or unfavorable attributes; and


•	Existing home inventory supplies, including foreclosures and short sales.


(2)	Land held for development primarily reflects land and land development costs related to land where development activity is not currently underway but is expected to begin in the future. For these parcels, we may have chosen not to currently develop certain land holdings as they typically represent a portion of a larger land parcel that we plan to build out over several years.


(1)	Approximately $511,000 and $539,000 of the capitalized interest is related to our joint venture investments and is a component of “Investments in unconsolidated entities” on our consolidated balance sheets as of September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively.


(1)	Deposits are generally non-refundable except if certain contractual conditions fail or certain contractual obligations are not performed by the selling party.


(2)	Deposits are refundable at our sole discretion. We have not completed our acquisition evaluation process and we have not internally committed to purchase these lots.


(3)	Except for our specific performance option contracts recorded on our balance sheet as Real estate not owned, none of our option agreements require us to purchase lots.


(4)	Amount is reflected in our consolidated balance sheet in the line item “Deposits on real estate under option or contract” as of September 30, 2013.


(1)	As our completion guarantees are typically backed by funding from a third party, we do not believe these guarantees represent a potential cash obligation for us, as they require only non-financial performance.


(2)	See Note 13 regarding outstanding litigation related to a joint venture project known as “South Edge” or "Inspirada" and the corresponding reserves and charges we have recorded relating thereto.


•	Level 1 — Valuation is based on quoted prices in active markets for identical assets and liabilities.


•	Level 2 — Valuation is determined from quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets, quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active, or by model-based techniques in which all significant inputs are observable in the market.


•	Level 3 — Valuation is derived from model-based techniques in which at least one significant input is unobservable and based on the company’s own estimates about the assumptions that market participants would use to value the asset or liability.


(1)	In the third quarter of 2012, we issued $126.5 million of 1.875% convertible senior notes convertible into shares of our common stock at a rate of 17.1985 shares per $1,000 principle amount. In accordance with ASC Subtopic 260-10, Earnings Per Share, ("ASC 260-10") we calculate the dilutive effect of convertible securities using the "if-converted" method.



	As of
	September 30, 2013		December 31, 2012
Unrecognized stock-based compensation cost	$	19,529	$	13,072
Weighted average years remaining vesting period	2.40		2.17
Total equity awards outstanding (1)	1,328,885		1,615,235



	September 30, 2013		December 31, 2012
State	4,051		8,666
Total valuation allowance	$	4,051	$	8,666


(1)	Homebuilding revenue includes the following land closing revenue, by segment:



	Three Months Ended September 30,				Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2013		2012		2013		2012
Land closing revenue:
West	5,875		$	6,488	$	11,616	$	6,488
Central	3,058		485		13,482		1,568
East	—		790		3,470		790
Consolidated total	$	8,933	$	7,763	$	28,568	$	8,846


(2)	Balance consists primarily of corporate costs and numerous shared service functions such as finance and treasury that are not allocated to the homebuilding or financial services reporting segments.


Item 2.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations


•	Acquiring and developing lots in high-performing markets we deem key to our success in order to maintain and grow our lot supply and active community count in existing markets as well as entry into new markets;


•	Increasing our lots under control and increasing the percentage controlled through option contracts in order to minimize initial cash outlay for land purchases;


•	Utilizing our enhanced market research to capitalize on the knowledge of our buyers' demands in each community, tailoring our pricing, product and amenities offered;


•	Continuing to innovate and promote the Meritage Green energy efficiency program, where every new home we construct, at a minimum, meets ENERGY STAR® standards, certified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, for indoor air quality, water conservation and overall energy efficiency;


•	Adapting sales and marketing efforts to generate additional traffic and successfully compete with resale homes;


•	Focusing our purchasing efforts to manage costs as homebuilding recovers and demand rises;