Summary of Significant Accounting Policies and Nature of Operations (Policies)

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2018

The unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements of MUFG Americas Holdings Corporation, its subsidiaries, and its consolidated variable interest entities (the Company) have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP) for interim financial reporting and the instructions to Form 10-Q and Rule 10-01 of Regulation S-X of the Rules and Regulations of the SEC. However, they do not include all of the disclosures necessary for annual financial statements. In the opinion of management, all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring accruals, considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included.

Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP also requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expense during the reporting period. Although such estimates contemplate current conditions and management’s expectations of how they may change in the future, it is reasonably possible that actual results could differ significantly from those estimates. This could materially affect the Company’s results of operations and financial condition in the near term. Critical estimates made by management in the preparation of the Company’s financial statements include, but are not limited to, the allowance for credit losses (Note 3), goodwill impairment, fair value of financial instruments (Note 8), pension accounting (Note 11), income taxes, and transfer pricing.

Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements

Accounting for Leases

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, Leases, which will require entities that lease assets (i.e., lessees) to recognize assets and liabilities on their balance sheet for the rights and obligations created by those leases. The accounting by entities that own the assets leased (i.e., lessors) will remain largely unchanged; however, leveraged lease accounting will no longer be permitted for leases that commence after the effective date. The ASU will also require qualitative and quantitative disclosures about the amount, timing and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases. The ASU is effective for interim and annual periods beginning on January 1, 2019 and requires a modified retrospective approach, with early adoption permitted. The Company plans to adopt the ASU on January 1, 2019. The Company is in the technology testing phase of this project to support the ongoing lessee accounting required under the ASU. Management is currently assessing the impact of this guidance on the Company's financial position and results of operations.

Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13, Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments, which provides new guidance on the accounting for credit losses for instruments that are within its scope. For loans and debt securities accounted for at amortized cost, certain off-balance sheet credit exposures, net investments in leases, and trade receivables, the ASU requires an entity to recognize its estimate of credit losses expected over the life of the financial instrument or exposure. Lifetime expected credit losses on purchased financial assets with credit deterioration will be recognized as an allowance with an offset to the cost basis of the asset. For available for sale debt securities, the new standard will require recognition of expected credit losses by recognizing an allowance for credit losses when the fair value of the security is below amortized cost and the recognition of this allowance is limited to the difference between the security’s amortized cost basis and fair value. The ASU is effective for interim and annual periods beginning on January 1, 2020, with early adoption permitted in 2019. The Company plans to adopt the ASU on January 1, 2020. The Company is currently collecting business and data requirements to support the project planning phase of the implementation. Management is currently assessing the impact of this guidance on the Company’s financial position and results of operations.

Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-04, Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment. The ASU removes Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test, which measures a goodwill impairment loss by comparing the implied fair value of a reporting unit’s goodwill with the carrying amount of that goodwill. Under the amendments, a goodwill impairment loss will be measured as the amount by which a reporting unit’s carrying amount exceeds its fair value; however, the loss recognized cannot exceed the total amount of goodwill allocated to that reporting unit. Additionally, an entity should consider income tax effects from any tax deductible goodwill on the carrying amount of the reporting unit when measuring the goodwill impairment loss. The ASU will be effective for MUAH beginning January 1, 2020 on a prospective basis. Early adoption is permitted for any impairment tests performed after January 1, 2017. Management does not expect the adoption of this guidance to significantly impact the Company’s financial position or results of operations.

Premium Amortization on Purchased Callable Debt Securities

In March 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-08, Premium Amortization on Purchased Callable Debt Securities, which requires premiums on certain purchased callable debt securities to be amortized to the earliest call date. Under current guidance, premiums on callable debt securities are generally amortized over the contractual life of the security. The amortization period for callable debt securities purchased at a discount will not be impacted. The ASU is effective for interim and annual periods beginning on January 1, 2019 and requires a modified retrospective approach, with early adoption permitted. Management does not expect the adoption of this guidance to significantly impact the Company’s financial position and results of operations.

Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities

In August 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-12, Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities, which will make more hedging strategies eligible for hedge accounting, simplify the application of hedge accounting, and enhance the transparency and understandability of hedge results. The guidance eliminates the requirement to separately measure and report hedge ineffectiveness and generally requires the entire change in the fair value of a hedging instrument to be presented in the same income statement line as the hedged item. It also amends the disclosure requirements and changes how entities assess effectiveness. The guidance will be effective for MUAH beginning January 1, 2019, with early adoption permitted. If the guidance is early adopted in an interim period, any adjustments would be reflected as of the beginning of the fiscal year that includes that interim period. Management is currently assessing the impact of this guidance on the Company’s financial position and results of operations.

Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements

Revenue from Contracts with Customers

Effective January 1, 2018, the Company adopted ASU 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, which provides guidance on the core principle that an entity should recognize revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. This ASU applies to all contracts with customers, except financial instruments, guarantees, lease contracts, insurance contracts and certain non-monetary exchanges. This guidance did not significantly affect the Company's financial position and results of operations. As a result of adopting this guidance, the Company's accounting policies have been updated as summarized below.

Revenues from Contracts with Customers

Revenues from contracts with customers include service charges on deposit accounts, trust and investment management fees, brokerage commissions and fees, card processing fees, net, investment banking and syndication fees, and fees from affiliates. The Company recognizes revenue from contracts with customers according to a five-step revenue recognition model: (1) identify the contract(s) with a customer, (2) identify the performance obligations in the contract, (3) determine the transaction price, (4) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract, and (5) recognize revenue when (or as) the entity satisfies a performance obligation. The Company’s contracts with customers generally contain a single performance obligation or separately identified performance obligations, each with a stated transaction price and generally do not involve a significant timing difference between satisfaction of the performance obligation and customer payment. Revenues are recognized over time or at a point in time as the performance obligations are satisfied. Certain revenues, primarily included within brokerage commissions and fees, are variable. However, recognition of these variable revenues does not involve significant estimates or constraints.

Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net)

Effective January 1, 2018, the Company adopted ASU 2016-08, Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net). The ASU amends ASU 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, with respect to assessing whether an entity is a principal (and thus presents revenue gross) or an agent (and thus presents revenue net). The amendments retain the guidance that the principal in an arrangement controls a good or service before it is transferred to a customer and clarify: (1) that an entity must first identify the specified good or service being provided to the customer; (2) that the unit of account for the principal versus agent assessment is each specified good or service promised in a contract; (3) indicators and examples to help an entity evaluate whether it is the principal; and (4) how to assess whether an entity controls services performed by another party. As a result of adopting ASU 2016-08, beginning January 1, 2018, certain expenses that were previously presented as a reduction of related fees from affiliates and investment banking and syndication fees are presented in noninterest expense.

Improving the Presentation of Net Periodic Pension Cost and Net Periodic Postretirement Benefit Cost

Effective January 1, 2018, the Company adopted ASU 2017-07, Improving the Presentation of Net Periodic Pension Cost and Net Periodic Postretirement Benefit Cost, which amended the income statement presentation of the components of net periodic benefit cost for sponsored defined benefit pension and other postretirement plans. As a result of adopting ASU 2017-07, the salaries and employee benefits expense and other expense categories in noninterest expense have been adjusted to reflect adoption of this guidance as follows.



	For the Three Months Ended							For the Six Months Ended
	June 30, 2017							June 30, 2017
(Dollars in millions)	As Previously Reported		Adjustment			As Reported Under New Guidance		As Previously Reported		Adjustment			As Reported Under New Guidance
Salaries and employee benefits	$	586	$	29		$	615	$	1,201	$	59		$	1,260
Other	112		(29		)	83		232		(59		)	173

Revenue from Contracts with Customers

Revenues from Contracts with Customers

Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net)