Recent Accounting Pronouncements (Policies)

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2016

Accounting Changes and Error Corrections [Abstract]

In February 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2016-02, “Leases (topic 842)”, to increase transparency and comparability among organizations by recognizing lease assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet and disclosing key information about leasing arrangements. This standard is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption of this standard is permitted. The Company is evaluating the impact of this standard on its financial statements.

In November 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-17, “Balance Sheet Classification of Deferred Taxes”. This amendment requires deferred tax liabilities and assets be classified as noncurrent in a classified statement of financial position. This standard is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016, and interim periods within those annual periods. Early adoption is permitted. The Company has prospectively adopted this amended guidance for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2016. Prior periods were not retrospectively adjusted. The adoption of this standard did not have a material impact on the Company's consolidated financial statements as it only pertains to a change in the balance sheet presentation of deferred taxes.

In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-03, “Interest - Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs”. This standard changes the presentation of debt issuance costs in the financial statements to present such costs as a direct deduction from the related debt liability rather than as an asset. Amortization of debt issuance costs will be reported as interest expense. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-15, “Interest - Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Presentation and Subsequent Measurement of Debt Issuance Costs Associated with Line-of-Credit Arrangements”. ASU 2015-15 clarifies that the SEC would not object to the deferral and presentation of debt issuance costs as an asset and subsequent amortization of debt issuance costs over the term of the line-of-credit arrangement, whether or there are any outstanding borrowings on the line-of-credit arrangement. These standards are effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2015. The Company has retrospectively adopted this guidance for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2016 and accordingly has reclassified $2,141 and $2,259 of deferred financing costs from other assets to long-term debt on its consolidated balance sheet as of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively. The adoption of this amended guidance did not impact our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-05, “Intangibles - Goodwill and Other - Internal-Use Software (Subtopic 35-40): Customer's Accounting for Fees Paid in a Cloud Computing Arrangement.” This ASU provides guidance to customers about whether a cloud computing arrangement includes a software license. If an arrangement includes a software license, the accounting for the license will be consistent with licenses of other intangible assets. If the arrangement does not include a license, the arrangement will be accounted for as a service contract. ASU 2015-05 is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015. The Company adopted the updated guidance for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2016 with no impact on the Company’s financial statements.

In January 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-01, “Income Statement - Extraordinary and Unusual Items (Subtopic 225-20): Simplifying Income Statement Presentation by Eliminating the Concept of Extraordinary Items.” This guidance eliminates the concept of extraordinary items from GAAP. As a result, an entity will no longer be required to segregate extraordinary items from the results of ordinary operations, to separately present an extraordinary item on its income statement, net of tax, after income from continuing operations or to disclose income taxes and earnings-per-share data applicable to an extraordinary item. However, the ASU does not affect the reporting and disclosure requirements for an event that is unusual in nature or infrequent in occurrence. This guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015. Early adoption is permitted provided that the guidance is applied from the beginning of the fiscal year of adoption. The Company adopted the updated guidance for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2016 with no impact on the Company’s financial statements.

In November 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-16, “Derivatives and Hedging” (Topic 815): “Determining Whether the Host Contract in a Hybrid Financial Instrument Issued in the Form of a Share Is More Akin to Debt or to Equity, which provides guidance on identifying whether the nature of the host contract in a hybrid instrument is in the form of debt or equity”. This standard requires management to consider the stated and implied substantive terms and features of the hybrid financial instrument, including the embedded derivative features, in order to determine whether the nature of the host contract is more akin to debt or to equity. The ASU is effective for annual periods and interim periods with those annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015, with early adoption permitted. The Company adopted the updated guidance for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2016 with no impact on the Company’s financial statements.

In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-15, “Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern.” The standard requires management to evaluate, at each annual and interim reporting period, the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year of the date the financial statements are issued and provide related disclosures. This guidance is effective for annual period ending after December 15, 2016 and for annual periods and interim periods thereafter. The adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a material impact on the Company's financial statements.

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers”. The standard provides a single, comprehensive revenue recognition model for all contracts with customers and supersedes current revenue recognition guidance. The revenue standard contains principles that an entity will apply to determine the measurement of revenue and timing of when it is recognized. The underlying principle is that an entity will recognize revenue to depict the transfer of goods or services to customers at an amount that the entity expects to be entitled to in exchange for those goods or services. The new standard also includes enhanced disclosures which are significantly more comprehensive than those in existing revenue standards. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-14, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers” (Topic 606): “Deferral of the Effective Date”, which defers the effective date of ASU No. 2014-09 for all entities by one year, to annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. Early adoption will be permitted for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016. The standard allows for either “full retrospective” adoption, meaning the standard is applied to all of the periods presented, or “modified retrospective” adoption, meaning the standard is applied only to the most current period presented in the financial statements. The Company is evaluating the impact of this standard on its financial statements.

Derivative Financial Instruments

When the Company’s derivative instrument was executed, hedge accounting was deemed appropriate and it was designated as a cash flow hedge at inception with re-designation being permitted under ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging. Interest rate swaps are designated as cash flow hedges for accounting purposes since they are being used to transform variable interest rate exposure to fixed interest rate exposure on a recognized liability (debt). On an ongoing basis, the Company performs a quarterly assessment of the hedge effectiveness of the hedge relationship and measures and recognizes any hedge ineffectiveness in the condensed consolidated statements of operations. For the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, hedge ineffectiveness was evaluated using the hypothetical derivative method. There was no hedge ineffectiveness for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015.

Accounting guidance on fair value measurements specifies a hierarchy of valuation techniques based on whether the inputs to those valuation techniques are observable or unobservable. Observable inputs reflect market data obtained from independent sources, while unobservable inputs reflect the Company’s market assumptions. These two types of inputs create the following fair value hierarchy:


•	Level 1—Quoted prices for identical instruments in active markets.


•	Level 2—Quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets; quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active; and model-derived valuations in which all significant inputs and significant value drivers are observable in active markets.


•	Level 3—Valuations derived from valuation techniques in which one or more significant inputs or significant value drivers are unobservable.

This hierarchy requires the Company to use observable market data, when available, and to minimize the use of unobservable inputs when determining fair value.

Goodwill and Other Intangibles

The Company’s annual goodwill impairment test is performed on the last day of February, or more frequently, should circumstances change which would indicate the fair value of goodwill is below its carrying amount.

The Company’s current year annual goodwill impairment test as of February 29, 2016 was performed using the two-step goodwill impairment analysis. Step 1 involves comparing the fair value of the Company’s reporting units to their carrying amounts. If the estimated fair value of the reporting unit is greater than its carrying amount, there is no requirement to perform Step 2 of the impairment test, and there is no impairment. If the reporting unit’s carrying amount is greater than the estimated fair value, the second step must be completed to measure the amount of impairment, if any. Step 2 calculates the implied fair value of goodwill by deducting the estimated fair value of all tangible and intangible assets, excluding goodwill, of the reporting unit from the estimated fair value of the reporting unit as determined in Step 1. The implied fair value of goodwill determined in this step is compared to the carrying value of goodwill. If the implied fair value of goodwill is less than the carrying value of goodwill, an impairment charge is recognized equal to the difference.