2. Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Boston Properties, Inc. does not have any other significant assets, liabilities or operations, other than its investment in Boston Properties Limited Partnership, nor does it have employees of its own. Boston Properties Limited Partnership, not Boston Properties, Inc., generally executes all significant business relationships other than transactions involving securities of Boston Properties, Inc. All majority-owned subsidiaries and joint ventures over which the Company has financial and operating control and variable interest entities (“VIEs”) in which the Company has determined it is the primary beneficiary are included in the consolidated financial statements. All significant intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. The Company accounts for all other unconsolidated joint ventures using the equity method of accounting. Accordingly, the Company’s share of the earnings of these joint ventures and companies is included in consolidated net income.

The accompanying interim financial statements are unaudited; however, the financial statements have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) for interim financial information and in conjunction with the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Accordingly, they do not include all of the disclosures required by GAAP for complete financial statements. In the opinion of management, all adjustments (consisting solely of normal recurring matters) necessary for a fair statement of the financial statements for these interim periods have been included. The results of operations for the interim periods are not necessarily indicative of the results to be obtained for other interim periods or for the full fiscal year. The year-end consolidated balance sheet data was derived from audited financial statements, but does not include all disclosure required by GAAP. These financial statements should be read in conjunction with the Company’s financial statements and notes thereto contained in the Company’s Annual Report in the Company’s Form 10-K for its fiscal year ended December 31, 2016.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

The Company determines the fair value of its unsecured senior notes using market prices. The inputs used in determining the fair value of the Company’s unsecured senior notes are categorized at a level 1 basis (as defined in the accounting standards for Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures) due to the fact that the Company uses quoted market rates to value these instruments. However, the inputs used in determining the fair value could be categorized at a level 2 basis (as defined in the accounting standards for Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures) if trading volumes are low. The Company determines the fair value of its mortgage notes payable using discounted cash flow analysis by discounting the spread between the future contractual interest payments and hypothetical future interest payments on mortgage debt based on current market rates for similar securities. In determining the current market rates, the Company adds its estimates of market spreads to the quoted yields on federal government treasury securities with similar maturity dates to its debt. The inputs used in determining the fair value of the Company’s mortgage notes payable and mezzanine notes payable are categorized at a level 3 basis (as defined in the accounting standards for Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures) due to the fact that the Company considers the rates used in the valuation techniques to be unobservable inputs. To the extent that there are outstanding borrowings under the unsecured line of credit, the Company utilizes a discounted cash flow methodology in order to estimate the fair value. To the extent that credit spreads have changed since the origination, the net present value of the difference between future contractual interest payments and future interest payments based on the Company’s estimate of a current market rate would represent the difference between the book value and the fair value. The Company’s estimate of a current market rate is based upon the rate, considering current market conditions and the Company’s specific credit profile, at which it estimates it could obtain similar borrowings. To the extent there are outstanding borrowings, this current market rate is internally estimated and therefore would be primarily based upon a level 3 input.

Because the Company’s valuations of its financial instruments are based on these types of estimates, the actual fair values of its financial instruments may differ materially if the Company’s estimates do not prove to be accurate, and the Company’s estimated fair values for these instruments as of the end of the applicable reporting period are not necessarily indicative of estimated or actual fair values in future reporting periods. The following table presents the aggregate carrying value of the Company’s mortgage notes payable, net, mezzanine notes payable, unsecured line of credit and unsecured senior notes, net and the Company’s corresponding estimate of fair value as of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016 (in thousands):



	March 31, 2017				December 31, 2016
	Carrying Amount		Estimated Fair Value		Carrying Amount		Estimated Fair Value
Mortgage notes payable, net	$	2,046,959	$	2,074,954	$	2,063,087	$	2,092,237
Mezzanine notes payable	306,734		307,600		307,093		308,344
Unsecured line of credit	105,000		105,099		—		—
Unsecured senior notes, net	7,248,152		7,460,437		7,245,953		7,428,077
Total	$	9,706,845	$	9,948,090	$	9,616,133	$	9,828,658

The Company uses interest rate swap agreements to manage its interest rate risk. The valuation of these instruments is determined using widely accepted valuation techniques, including discounted cash flow analysis on the expected cash flows of each derivative. This analysis reflects the contractual terms of the derivatives, including the period to maturity, and uses observable market-based inputs, including interest rate curves. To comply with the provisions of Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 820, the Company incorporates credit valuation adjustments to appropriately reflect both its own nonperformance risk and the respective counterparty’s nonperformance risk in the fair value measurements. Although the Company has determined that the majority of the inputs used to value its derivatives fall within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy, the credit valuation adjustments associated with its derivatives utilize Level 3 inputs, such as estimates of current credit spreads to evaluate the likelihood of default by the Company and its counterparties. However, as of March 31, 2017, the Company has assessed the significance of the impact of the credit valuation adjustments on the overall valuation of its derivative positions and has determined that the credit valuation adjustments are not significant to the overall valuation of its derivatives. As a result, the Company has determined that its derivative valuations in their entirety are classified in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.

Variable Interest Entities (VIEs)

Consolidated VIEs are those where the Company is considered to be the primary beneficiary of a VIE. The primary beneficiary is the entity that has a controlling financial interest in the VIE, which is defined by the entity having both of the following characteristics: (1) the power to direct the activities that, when taken together, most significantly impact the VIE’s performance and (2) the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive the returns from the VIE that could potentially be significant to the VIE. The Company has determined that it is the primary beneficiary for seven of the eight entities that are VIEs.

Consolidated Variable Interest Entities

As of March 31, 2017, Boston Properties, Inc. has identified seven consolidated VIEs, including Boston Properties Limited Partnership. The VIEs own (1) the following five in-service properties: 767 Fifth Avenue (the General Motors Building), Time Square Tower, 601 Lexington Avenue, Atlantic Wharf Office Building and 100 Federal Street and (2) the entity that owns Salesforce Tower, which is currently under development.

The Company consolidates these VIEs because it is the primary beneficiary. The third parties’ interests in these consolidated entities, with the exception of Boston Properties Limited Partnership, are reflected as noncontrolling interest in property partnerships in the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements (See Note 7).

In addition, Boston Properties, Inc.’s significant asset is its investment in Boston Properties Limited Partnership and, consequently, substantially all of Boston Properties, Inc.’s assets and liabilities are the assets and liabilities of Boston Properties Limited Partnership. All of Boston Properties, Inc.’s debt is an obligation of Boston Properties Limited Partnership.

Variable Interest Entities Not Consolidated

The Company has determined that its BNY Tower Holdings LLC joint venture, which owns Dock 72 at the Brooklyn Navy Yard, is a VIE. The Company does not consolidate this entity because the Company does not have the power to direct the activities that, when taken together, most significantly impact the VIE’s performance and, therefore, the Company is not considered to be the primary beneficiary.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In May 2014, the Financial Standards Accounting Board (“FASB”) issued ASU 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)” (“ASU 2014-09”). The objective of ASU 2014-09 is to establish a single comprehensive model for entities to use in accounting for revenue arising from contracts with customers and will supersede most of the existing revenue recognition guidance, including industry-specific guidance. The core principle is 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. In applying ASU 2014-09, companies will perform a five-step analysis of transactions to determine when and how revenue is recognized. ASU 2014-09 applies to all contracts with customers except those that are within the scope of other topics in the FASB’s ASC. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-14, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Deferral of the Effective Date” (“ASU 2015-14”), which delayed the effective date of ASU 2014-09 by one year making it effective for the first interim period within annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. Early adoption is permitted as of the original effective date. In May 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-12, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients” (“ASU 2016-12”). ASU 2016-12 is intended to clarify and provide practical expedients for certain aspects of ASU 2014-09, which outlines a single comprehensive model for entities to use in accounting for revenues arising from contracts with customers and notes that lease contracts with customers are a scope exception. The Company may elect to adopt ASU 2016-12 as of the original effective date; however, adoption is required for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. The Company has commenced the process of adopting ASU 2014-09 for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including forming a project team and compiling an inventory of the sources of revenue the Company expects will be impacted by the adoption of ASU 2014-09. The Company expects that executory costs and certain non-lease components of revenue from leases (upon the adoption of ASU 2016-02), tenant service revenue, development and management services revenue, parking revenue and gains on sales of real estate may be impacted by the adoption of ASU 2014-09, although the Company expects that the impact will be to the pattern of revenue recognition and not the total revenue recognized over time. The Company is in the process of evaluating the significance of the impact on the changes in the recognition pattern of its revenue and is still completing its assessment of the overall impact of adopting ASU 2014-09.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, “Leases (Topic 842)” (“ASU 2016-02”), which sets out the principles for the recognition, measurement, presentation and disclosure of leases for both parties to a contract (i.e., lessees and lessors). ASU 2016-02 requires lessees to apply a dual approach, classifying leases as either finance or operating leases based on the principle of whether or not the lease is effectively a financed purchase of the leased asset by the lessee. This classification will determine whether the lease expense is recognized based on an effective interest method or on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease. A lessee is also required to record a right-of-use asset and a lease liability for all leases with a term of greater than 12 months regardless of their classification. Leases with a term of 12 months or less will be accounted for similar to existing guidance for operating leases today. The new standard requires lessors to account for leases using an approach that is substantially equivalent to existing guidance for sales-type leases, direct financing leases and operating leases. ASU 2016-02 supersedes previous leasing standards. ASU 2016-02 is effective for the Company for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018, with early adoption permitted. The Company has commenced the process of adopting ASU 2016-02 by forming a project team and beginning to compile an inventory of its leases that will be impacted by the adoption of ASU 2016-02. The Company is still assessing the impact of adopting ASU 2016-02. However, the Company expects that its operating leases where it is the lessor will be accounted for on its balance sheet similar to its current accounting with the underlying leased asset recognized as real estate. The Company expects that executory costs and certain other non-lease components will need to be accounted for separately from the lease component of the lease with the lease component continuing to be recognized on a straight-line basis over the lease term and the executory costs and certain other non-lease components being accounted for under the new revenue recognition guidance in ASU 2014-09. For leases in which the Company is the lessee, primarily consisting of ground leases, the Company expects to recognize a right-of-use asset and a lease liability equal to the present value of the minimum lease payments with rental payments being applied to the lease liability and to interest expense and the right-of-use asset being amortized to expense on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease. In addition, under ASU 2016-02, lessors may only capitalize incremental direct leasing costs. As a result, the Company expects that it will no longer be able to capitalize its internal leasing wages and instead will expense these costs as incurred.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, “Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting” (“ASU 2016-09”). ASU 2016-09 is intended to improve the accounting for share-based payments and affects all organizations that issue share-based payment awards to their employees. Several aspects of the accounting for share-based payment awards are simplified with ASU 2016-09, including income tax consequences, classification of awards as equity or liabilities and classification on the statement of cash flows. ASU 2016-09 is effective for the Company for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, with early adoption permitted. On January 1, 2017, the Company adopted ASU 2016-09 and elected to make an accounting policy change to its method of accounting for forfeitures on its awards of stock-based compensation including the issuance of shares of restricted common stock, LTIP Units and MYLTIP Units. The Company now accounts for forfeitures as they occur instead of estimating the number of forfeitures upon the issuance of such awards of stock-based compensation. The adoption resulted in the Company recognizing cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle adjustments to its consolidated balance sheets totaling approximately $0.3 million to Dividends in Excess of Earnings and Partners’ Capital for Boston Properties, Inc. and Boston Properties Limited Partnership, respectively, and approximately $1.8 million to noncontrolling interests - common units of Boston Properties Limited Partnership and noncontrolling interests - redeemable partnership units for Boston Properties, Inc. and Boston Properties Limited Partnership, respectively.

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-01, “Business Combinations (Topic 805): Clarifying the Definition of a Business” (“ASU 2017-01”). ASU 2017-01 clarifies the framework for determining whether an integrated set of assets and activities meets the definition of a business. The revised framework establishes a screen for determining whether an integrated set of assets and activities is a business and narrows the definition of a business, which is expected to result in fewer transactions being accounted for as business combinations. Acquisitions of integrated sets of assets and activities that do not meet the definition of a business are accounted for as asset acquisitions. This update is effective for fiscal years, and for interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted for transactions that have not been reported in previously issued (or available to be issued) financial statements and shall be applied on a prospective basis. The Company early adopted ASU 2017-01 during the first quarter of 2017. The Company expects that acquisitions of real estate or in-substance real estate will not meet the revised definition of a business because substantially all of the fair value is concentrated in a single identifiable asset or group of similar identifiable assets (i.e. land, buildings, and related intangible assets) or because the acquisition does not include a substantive process in the form of an acquired workforce or an acquired contract that cannot be replaced without significant cost, effort or delay.

In February 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-05, “Other Income - Gains and Losses from the Derecognition of Nonfinancial Assets (Subtopic 610-20): Clarifying the Scope of Asset Derecognition Guidance and Accounting for Partial Sales of Nonfinancial Assets” (“ASU 2017-05”). ASU 2017-05 updates the definition of an “in substance nonfinancial asset” and clarifies the derecognition guidance for nonfinancial assets to conform with the new revenue recognition standard. The effective date and transition methods of ASU 2017-05 are aligned with ASU 2014-09 described above and are effective for the first interim period within annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. The Company is currently assessing the potential impact that the adoption of ASU 2017-05 will have on its consolidated financial statements.