Significant Accounting Policies and Recent Accounting Pronouncements

9 Months Ended

Sep. 29, 2019

Significant Accounting Policies and Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Significant Accounting Policies

Except for the changes below, no material changes have been made to the Company's significant accounting policies disclosed in Note 2 Significant Accounting Policies in our Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2018. The accounting policy information below is to aid in the understanding of the financial information disclosed.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842), followed in July 2018 by ASU 2018-10, Codification Improvements to Topic 842 Leases, and ASU 2018-11, Leases (Topic 842): Targeted Improvements. Under the new transition method, an entity initially applies the new leases standard at the adoption date and recognizes a cumulative-effect adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings in the period of adoption. As a result of this adoption and the required disclosures, the Company revised its accounting policy for leases as stated below.

The new standard became effective for us on January 1, 2019. Under the standard, disclosures are required to meet the objective of enabling users of financial statements to assess the amount, timing and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases. See also Note 10, Leases.

Leases

As of January 1, 2019, our impact resulting from operating leases is as follows:


•	we have recognized right-of-use (ROU) assets (within other non-current assets) and lease liabilities of $188 million;


•	the short-term portion of the lease liabilities of $53 million is classified in the condensed consolidated balance sheet in other current liabilities; and


•	the long-term portion of the lease liabilities of $135 million is classified in the condensed consolidated balance sheet in other non-current liabilities.

We elected to adopt the package of practical expedients to not reassess prior conclusions related to contracts containing leases, lease classification and initial direct costs, along with the practical expedient to use hindsight when determining the lease term.

We determine if an arrangement is a lease at inception of the arrangement. Once it is determined that an arrangement is, or contains, a lease, that determination should only be reassessed if the legal arrangement is modified. Changes to assumptions such as market-based factors do not trigger a reassessment. Determining whether a contract contains a lease requires judgement. In general, arrangements are considered to be a lease when all of the following apply:


•	it conveys the right to control the use of an identified asset for a period of time in exchange for consideration;


•	we have substantially all economic benefits from the use of the asset; and


•	we can direct the use of the identified asset.

The terms of a lease arrangement determine how a lease is classified and the resulting income statement recognition. When the terms of a lease effectively transfer control of the underlying asset, the lease represents an in substance financed purchase (sale) of an asset and the lease is classified as a finance lease by the lessee and a sales-type lease by the lessor. When a lease does not effectively transfer control of the underlying asset to the lessee, but the lessor obtains a guarantee for the value of the asset from a third party, the lessor would classify a lease as a direct financing lease. All other leases are classified as operating leases.

With the exception of two instances (with a combined value of approximately $30 million), the Company’s lease arrangements were all operating leases.

Lease assets and lease liabilities are recognized based on the present value of the future minimum lease payments over the lease term at commencement date. As our leases do not provide an implicit rate, we use our incremental borrowing rate based on the information available at January 1, 2019 or commencement date, if later, in determining the present value of future payments. The lease ROU asset includes any lease payment made and initial direct costs incurred. Our lease terms may include options to extend or terminate the lease which are included in the measurement of the ROU assets and lease liabilities when it is reasonably certain that we will exercise that option.

For operating leases the lease expense for minimum lease payments is recognized on a straight-line basis over the lease term. For finance leases each lease payment is allocated between the liability and finance cost. The finance cost is charged to the condensed consolidated statement of operations over the lease period so as to produce a constant periodic rate of interest on the remaining balance of the liability for each period. The finance lease asset is depreciated over the shorter of the asset's useful life and the lease term on a straight-line basis.

We have lease agreements with lease and non-lease components. Except for gas and chemical contracts, NXP did not make the election to treat the lease and non-lease components as a single component, and considers the non-lease components as a separate unit of account.

Accounting standards adopted in 2019

In August 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-12, Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Targeted Improvement to Accounting for Hedging Activities. ASU 2017-12 simplifies certain aspects of hedge accounting and improves disclosures of hedging arrangements through the elimination of the requirement to separately measure and report hedge ineffectiveness. The ASU 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. Entities must apply the amendments to cash flow and net investment hedge relationships that exist on the date of adoption using a modified retrospective approach. The presentation and disclosure requirements must be applied prospectively. ASU 2017-12 became effective for us on January 1, 2019. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.

Recently issued accounting standards

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-04, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment. ASU 2017-04 simplifies the subsequent measurement of goodwill by eliminating Step 2 from the goodwill impairment test. Instead, the one step quantitative impairment test calculates goodwill impairment as the excess of the carrying value of a reporting unit over its fair value, up to the carrying value of the goodwill. ASU 2017-04 is effective for annual or any interim goodwill impairment tests in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, with early adoption permitted. The ASU should be applied on a prospective basis. The Company does not expect the adoption of this guidance to have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-13, Fair Value measurement (Topic 820): Disclosure Framework – Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement. ASU 2018-13 removes certain disclosure requirements, including the amount of and reasons for transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy, the policy for timing of transfers between levels, and the valuation processes for Level 3 fair value measurements. ASU 2018-13 also adds disclosure requirements, including changes in unrealized gains and losses for the period included in other comprehensive income for recurring Level 3 fair value measurements, and the range and weighted average of significant unobservable inputs used to develop Level 3 fair value measurements. ASU 2018-13 is effective for annual reporting periods, and interim periods therein, beginning after December 15, 2019, with early adoption permitted. The amendments on changes in unrealized gains and losses, and the range and weighted average of significant unobservable inputs used to develop Level 3 fair value measurements, should be applied prospectively for only the most recent interim or annual period presented in the initial fiscal year of adoption. All other amendments should be applied retrospectively to all periods presented upon their effective date. The Company does not expect the adoption of this guidance to have a material impact on our financial statement disclosures.

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-14, Compensation – Retirement Benefits – Defined Benefit Plans – General (Subtopic 715-20): Disclosure Framework – Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Defined Benefit Plans. ASU 2018-14 removes disclosures that no longer are considered cost beneficial, clarifies the specific requirements of disclosures, and adds disclosure requirements identified as relevant. ASU 2018-14 should be applied on a retrospective basis to all periods presented and is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2020, with early adoption permitted. The Company does not expect the adoption of this guidance to have a material impact on our financial statement disclosures.

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-15, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other – Internal-Use Software (Subtopic 350-40): Customer’s Accounting for Implementation Costs Incurred in a Cloud Computing Arrangement That Is a Service Contract. ASU 2018-15 requires a customer in a hosting arrangement that is a service contract to follow the guidance in Subtopic 350-40 to determine which implementation costs to capitalize as an asset related to the service contract and which costs to expense. Therefore, a customer in a hosting arrangement that is a service contract determines which project stage an implementation activity relates to. Costs for implementation activities in the application development stage are capitalized depending on the nature of the costs, while costs incurred during the preliminary project and post-implementation stages are expensed as the activities are performed. ASU 2018-15 also requires the customer to expense the capitalized implementation costs over the term of the hosting arrangement, and to apply the existing impairment guidance in Subtopic 350-40 to the capitalized implementation costs as if the costs were long-lived assets. ASU 2018-15 can be applied either retrospectively or prospectively and is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019, and interim periods therein, with early adoption permitted. The Company does not expect the adoption of this guidance to have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.