Accounting Pronouncements Not Yet Effective
In November 2024, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2024-03 “Disaggregation of Income Statement Expenses” (“ASU 2024-03”). The amendments in ASU 2024-03 aim to improve the decision usefulness of expense information on public business entities’ income statements through the disaggregation of relevant expense captions in the notes to the financial statements. ASU 2024-03 will be effective for the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2027, with early adoption permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of this update on its consolidated financial statements.
In July 2025, the FASB issued ASU No. 2025-05, Financial Instruments—Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses for Accounts Receivable and Contract Assets (“ASU 2025-05”). The amendments in ASU 2025-05 clarify and simplify the application of the current expected credit loss (CECL) model to trade receivables and contract assets arising from revenue transactions. The update permits the use of practical, historical loss-rate methods for short-term receivables and provides additional guidance on applying credit loss concepts to unbilled revenue recognized under Topic 606. ASU 2025-05 will be effective for the Company’s fiscal year ending December 31, 2026, including interim periods within that fiscal year, with early adoption permitted. The provisions of the amendments in this update are not expected to have a significant impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In September 2025, the FASB issued ASU No. 2025-06, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other—Internal-Use Software (Subtopic 350-40): Targeted Improvements to the Accounting for Internal-Use Software (“ASU 2025-06”). The amendments in ASU 2025-06 are intended to reduce diversity in practice and provide clearer
guidance on the accounting for costs incurred in the development, implementation, and maintenance of internal-use software. The update clarifies which costs should be capitalized versus expensed, refines the definition of “application development stage,” and enhances disclosure requirements regarding significant internal-use software projects. ASU 2025-06 will be effective for the Company’s fiscal year ending December 31, 2028, including interim periods within that fiscal year, with early adoption permitted. The provisions of the amendments in this update are not expected to have a significant impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements
In December 2023, the FASB issued ASU No. 2023-09, Income Taxes (Topic 740): Improvements to Income Tax Disclosures (“ASU 2023-09”). The amendments in ASU 2023-09 enhance the transparency and decision usefulness of income tax disclosures, primarily through expanded rate reconciliation and income taxes paid disclosures. The Company adopted ASU 2023-09 effective January 1, 2025, and applied the guidance on a prospective basis. The adoption of ASU 2023-09 did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements, but resulted in expanded income tax disclosures.

Historical Timeline

Fiscal YearFiled
2025Mar 10, 2026Showing above
2024Mar 11, 2025
2023Mar 7, 2024
2022Mar 31, 2023
2021Mar 10, 2022
2020Mar 15, 2021

About New Standards Disclosures

New accounting standards disclosures describe recently adopted pronouncements and those not yet effective, along with management's assessment of their expected impact. This section provides an early warning system for upcoming changes to how a company reports its financial results, often years before the new rules take effect.

Key signals: when management describes a not-yet-adopted standard's impact as "material" or "still being evaluated," it signals potential significant changes to reported metrics upon adoption. Watch for standards that affect a company's core operations — for example, revenue recognition changes for software companies or lease accounting changes for retailers with large store footprints. The transition method chosen (full retrospective versus modified retrospective) affects comparability with prior periods. Companies that delay adoption to the latest permitted date may be struggling with implementation complexity. Compare the disclosed impact assessments against peers in the same industry to gauge whether management's expectations are reasonable.