Note 2: Impact of Accounting Pronouncements

In August 2014, Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2014-15, Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern. The Update provides U.S. GAAP guidance on management’s responsibility in evaluating whether there is substantial doubt about a company’s ability to continue as a going concern and about related footnote disclosures. For each reporting period, management will be required to evaluate whether there are conditions or events that raise substantial doubt about a company’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year from the date the financial statements are issued.

The amendments in this Update are effective for annual reporting periods ending after December 15, 2016, and for annual and interim periods thereafter. Early adoption is permitted. The Company will adopt the methodologies prescribed by this ASU by the date required, and does not anticipate that the ASU will have a material effect on its financial position or results of operations.

In August 2014, FASB, issued ASU 2014-14, Classification of Certain Government-Guaranteed Mortgage Loans upon Foreclosure. The objective of this Update is to reduce diversity in practice by addressing the classification of foreclosed mortgage loans that are fully or partially guaranteed under government programs. Currently, some creditors reclassify those loans to real estate as with other foreclosed loans that do not have guarantees; others reclassify the loans to other receivables. The amendments affect creditors that hold government-guaranteed mortgage loans, including those guaranteed by the FHA and the VA.

The amendments in this Update are effective for annual reporting periods ending after December 15, 2015 and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2015. An entity should adopt the amendments in this Update using either a prospective transition method or a modified retrospective transition method. For prospective transition, an entity should apply the amendments in this Update to foreclosures that occur after the date of adoption. For the modified retrospective transition, an entity should apply the amendments in the Update by means of a cumulative-effect adjustment (through a reclassification to a separate other receivable) as of the beginning of the annual period of adoption. Prior periods should not be adjusted. However, a reporting entity must apply the same method of transition as elected under ASU No. 2014-04. Early adoption, including adoption in an interim period, is permitted if the entity already has adopted Update 2014-04. The Company will adopt the methodologies prescribed by this ASU by the date required, and does not anticipate that the ASU will have a material effect on its financial position or results of operations.

In June 2014, (FASB) issued (ASU) 2014-12 “Compensation – Stock Compensation”. This update defines the accounting treatment for share-based payments and “resolves the diverse accounting treatment of those awards in practice.” The new requirement mandates that “a performance target that affects vesting and that could be achieved after the requisite service period be treated as a performance condition.” Compensation cost will now be recognized in the period in which it becomes likely that the performance target will be met.

The amendments in this Update are effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2015. Early adoption is permitted. The Company will adopt the methodologies prescribed by this ASU by the date required, and does not anticipate that the ASU will have a material effect on its financial position or results of operations.

In June 2014, FASB, issued ASU 2014-11 “Transfers and Servicing”. This update addresses the concerns of stakeholders’ by changing the accounting practices surrounding repurchase agreements. The new guidance changes the “accounting for repurchase-to-maturity transactions and linked repurchase financings to secured borrowing accounting, which is consistent with the accounting for other repurchase agreements.”

The amendments in this Update are effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2015. Early adoption is prohibited. The Company will adopt the methodologies prescribed by this ASU by the date required, and does not anticipate that the ASU will have a material effect on its financial position or results of operations.

In May 2014, FASB, in joint cooperation with IASB, issued ASU 2014-09 “Revenue from Contracts with Customers”. The topic of Revenue Recognition had become broad, with several other regulatory agencies issuing standards which lacked cohesion. The new guidance establishes a “common framework” and “reduces the number of requirements to which an entity must consider in recognizing revenue” and yet provides improved disclosures to assist stakeholders reviewing financial statements.

The amendments in this Update are effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016. Early adoption is not permitted. The Company will adopt the methodologies prescribed by this ASU by the date required, and does not anticipate that the ASU will have a material effect on its financial position or results of operations.

In April 2014, FASB issued ASU 2014-08 “Reporting Discontinued Operations and Disclosures of Disposals of Components of an Entity”. This update seeks to better define the groups of assets which qualify for discontinued operations, in order to ease the burden and cost for prepares and stakeholders. This issue changed “the criteria for reporting discontinued operations” and related reporting requirements, including the provision for disclosures about the “disposal of and individually significant component of an entity that does not qualify for discontinued operations presentation.”

The amendments in this Update are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2014. Early adoption is permitted only for disposals or classifications as held for sale. The Company will adopt the methodologies prescribed by this ASU by the date required, and does not anticipate that the ASU will have a material effect on its financial position or results of operations.

In January 2014, FASB issued ASU 2014-04, "Reclassification of Residential Real Estate Collateralized Consumer Mortgage Loans upon Foreclosure,” to reduce diversity by clarifying when a creditor should be considered to have received physical possession of residential real estate property collateralizing a consumer mortgage loan such that the loan receivable should be derecognized and the real estate property recognized. The ASU is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2014. Adoption of the ASU is not expected to have a significant effect on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In January 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-01, "Accounting for Investments in Qualified Affordable Housing Projects,” to permit entities to make an accounting policy election to account for their investments in qualified affordable housing projects using the proportional amortization method if certain conditions are met. The ASU modifies the conditions that an entity must meet to be eligible to use a method other than the equity or cost methods to account for qualified affordable housing project investments. The ASU is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2014. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of this new accounting standard on the consolidated financial statements.

Recently the FASB and the Internal Accounting Standards Board (IASB) (the Boards) have published for public comment revised Exposure Drafts outlining proposed changes to the accounting for leases. The proposals aim to improve the quality and comparability of financial reporting by providing greater transparency about leverage, the assets an organization uses in its operations and the risks to which it is exposed from entering into leasing transactions. Under existing accounting standards, a majority of leases are not reported on a lessee’s balance sheet. The amounts involved can be substantial. Additionally, the existing accounting models for leases require lessees and lessors to classify their leases as either capital leases (e.g., a lease of equipment for nearly all of its economic life) or operating leases (e.g., a lease of office space for 10 years) and to account for those leases differently.

For capital leases, a lessee recognizes lease assets and liabilities on the balance sheet. For operating leases, a lessee does not recognize lease assets or liabilities on the balance sheet. The existing standards have been criticized for failing to meet the needs of users of financial statements because they do not always provide a complete representation of leasing transactions. In response to this criticism, in 2006 the Boards initiated a joint project to improve the financial reporting of leasing activities under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs) and U.S. GAAP. The Boards have developed an approach to lease accounting that would require a lessee to recognize assets and liabilities for the rights and obligations created by leases. A lessee would recognize assets and liabilities for leases of more than 12 months.

Stakeholders have informed the Boards that there are a wide variety of lease transactions with different economics. To better reflect those differing economics, the revised Exposure Drafts propose a dual approach to the recognition, measurement, and presentation of expenses and cash flows arising from a lease. For most real estate leases, a lessee would report a straight-line lease expense in its income statement. For most other leases, such as equipment or vehicles, a lessee would report amortization of the asset separately from interest on the lease liability. The Boards are also proposing disclosures that should enable investors and other users of financial statements to understand the amount, timing, and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases.

The leases project is a converged effort between the Boards. The revised Exposure Drafts for both organizations are nearly identical. The differences between the two proposals are primarily related to existing differences between U.S. GAAP and IFRS and decisions the FASB made related to nonpublic entities.

The Boards are also proposing changes to how equipment and vehicle lessors would account for leases that are off balance sheet. Those changes would provide greater transparency about such lessors’ exposure to credit risk and asset risk.

Comments were due by September 13, 2013.