In June 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-07, Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718); Improvements to Nonemployee Share-Based Payment Accounting. Effective January 1, 2019, the Company adopted ASU 2018-07. The new guidance simplifies the accounting for share-based payments made to nonemployees. Under this ASU, share-based awards to nonemployees will be measured at fair value on the grant date of the awards. Entities will need to assess the probability of satisfying performance conditions if any are present, and awards will continue to be classified according to ASC 718 upon vesting, which eliminates the need to reassess classification upon vesting, consistent with awards granted to employees. The Company has not historically issued a significant amount of share-based payments to non-employees. There was no material effect on the Company’s consolidated financial statements upon adoption.

 

In January 2017, ASU No. 2017-04, “Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment” was issued. Under the amendments in this ASU, an entity should perform its annual, or interim, goodwill impairment test by comparing the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying amount. An entity should recognize an impairment charge for the amount by which the carrying amount exceeds the reporting unit's fair value; however, the loss should not exceed the total amount of goodwill allocated to that reporting unit. The ASU also eliminated the requirements for any reporting unit with a zero or negative carrying amount to perform a qualitative assessment and, if it fails that qualitative test, to perform Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test. An entity should apply this ASU on a prospective basis and for its annual or any interim goodwill impairment tests in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019. The Company adopted this guidance prospectively on January 1, 2020. Adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements.

 

Accounting Standards under Evaluation

 

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instrument (“Topic 326”). Topic 326 amends guidance on reporting credit losses for assets held at amortized cost basis and available for sale debt securities. For assets held at amortized cost basis, Topic 326 eliminates the probable initial recognition threshold in current GAAP and, instead, requires an entity to reflect its current estimate of all expected credit losses. The allowance for credit losses is a valuation account that is deducted from the amortized cost basis of the financial assets to present the net amount expected to be collected. For available for sale debt securities, credit losses should be measured in a manner similar to current GAAP, however Topic 326 will require that credit losses be presented as an allowance rather than as a write-down. This ASU update affects entities holding financial assets and net investment in leases that are not accounted for at fair value through net income. This update is effective for the company for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2022, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of the pending adoption of this new standard on its consolidated financial statements.

 

Historical Timeline

Fiscal YearFiled
2020Mar 23, 2021Showing above
2019Mar 24, 2020
2018Mar 22, 2019
2017Mar 21, 2018
2016Mar 30, 2017
2015Mar 15, 2016

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.