On March 27, 2020, the President signed into law the “Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act.” The CARES Act, among other things, includes provisions relating to refundable payroll tax credits, deferment of employer side social security payments, net operating loss carryback periods, alternative minimum tax credit refunds, modifications to the net interest deduction limitations, increased limitations on qualified charitable contributions, and technical corrections to tax depreciation methods for qualified improvement property. While we are able to take advantage of certain of these provisions, none had a material impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity for the quarter. We will continue to monitor the impact that the CARES Act may have on our business, financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity.

Income tax expense and the effective tax rate for the three months ended March 31, 2020 and 2019 were as follows (dollar amounts in thousands):

The tax provisions for the three months ended March 31, 2020 and 2019 were computed using the estimated effective tax rates applicable to each of the domestic and international taxable jurisdictions for the full year. The Company’s tax rate is subject to management’s quarterly review and revision, as necessary.

The Company’s provision for income tax expense and effective income tax rate are significantly impacted by the mix of the Company’s domestic and foreign earnings (loss) before income taxes. In the foreign jurisdictions in which the Company has operations, the applicable statutory rates range from 0.0% to 34.0%, which is on average significantly lower than the U.S. federal and state combined statutory rate of approximately 25%.

Due to the enactment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “Tax Act”) in December 2017, the Company is subject to a tax on global intangible low-taxed income (“GILTI”). GILTI is a tax on foreign income in excess of a deemed return on tangible assets of foreign corporations. Companies subject to GILTI have the option to account for the GILTI tax as a period cost when incurred, or to recognize deferred taxes for temporary differences including outside basis differences expected to reverse as GILTI. The Company has elected to account for GILTI as a period cost, and therefore has included GILTI expense in its effective tax rate calculation for the three months ended March 31, 2020 and 2019.

For the three months ended March 31, 2020, the decrease in the effective tax rate was primarily due to reduced negative impact of $0.7 million in discrete tax expense as compared to the negative impact of $2.9 million in discrete tax expense in the three months ended March 31, 2019.

As of March 31, 2020, the Company had approximately $1,158.8 million in cash and cash equivalents, of which $476.1 million, or 41%, was held outside the U.S. Of the $476.1 million held by the Company’s non-U.S. subsidiaries, approximately $204.7 million is available for repatriation to the U.S. without incurring U.S. federal income taxes and applicable non-U.S. income and withholding taxes in excess of the amounts accrued in the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements as of March 31, 2020.

On July 27, 2015, the United States Tax Court issued a decision (the “Tax Court Decision”) in Altera Corp. v. Commissioner, which concluded that related parties in a cost sharing arrangement are not required to share expenses related to share-based compensation. The Tax Court Decision was appealed by the Commissioner to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (the “Ninth Circuit”). On June 7, 2019, a three-judge panel from the Ninth Circuit issued an opinion (the “Altera Ninth Circuit Panel Opinion”) that reversed the Tax Court Decision. Based on the Altera Ninth Circuit Panel Opinion, the Company recorded a cumulative income tax expense of $1.5 million in the second quarter of 2019. On July 22, 2019, Altera requested a rehearing before the full Ninth Circuit, but the request was rejected on November 11, 2019. Altera subsequently appealed from the Ninth Circuit to the Supreme Court. As a result, the final outcome of the case is uncertain. If the Altera Ninth Circuit Panel Opinion is reversed, we would anticipate recording an income tax benefit at that time.

The Company’s cash and cash equivalents held in the U.S. and cash provided from operations are sufficient to meet the Company’s liquidity needs in the U.S. for the next twelve months The Company has provided for the tax impact of expected distributions from its joint venture in China as well as from its subsidiary in Chile to its intermediate parent company in Switzerland. Otherwise, because of the need for cash for operating capital and continued overseas expansion, the Company does not foresee the need for any of our other foreign subsidiaries to distribute funds up to an intermediate foreign parent company in any form of taxable dividend. Under current applicable tax laws, if the Company choses to repatriate some or all of the funds it has designated as indefinitely reinvested outside the U.S., the amount repatriated would not be subject to U.S. income taxes but may be subject to applicable non-U.S. income and withholding taxes, and to certain state income taxes.