Note 8. Derivative Instruments and Fair Value Measurements

We measure fair value at the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. We prioritize the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability into a three-tier fair value hierarchy. This fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority (Level 1) to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities and the lowest priority (Level 3) to unobservable inputs in which little or no market data exist, requiring companies to develop their own assumptions. Observable inputs that do not meet the criteria of Level 1, which include quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets or quoted prices for identical assets and liabilities in markets that are not active, are categorized as Level 2. Level 3 inputs are those that reflect our estimates about the assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on the best information available in the circumstances. Valuation techniques for assets and liabilities measured using Level 3 inputs may include methodologies such as the market approach, the income approach or the cost approach and may use unobservable inputs such as projections, estimates and management’s interpretation of current market data. These unobservable inputs are utilized only to the extent that observable inputs are not available or cost effective to obtain.

Assets and Liabilities Recorded at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis

We manufacture and sell our products in a number of countries throughout the world, and, therefore, we are exposed to movements in foreign currency exchange rates. We primarily utilize foreign currency exchange contracts with maturities of no more than three years to manage this volatility. These contracts qualify as cash flow hedges and are intended to offset the effect of exchange rate fluctuations on forecasted sales, inventory purchases and overhead expenses. Net gains and losses recognized in earnings and Accumulated other comprehensive loss on cash flow hedges, including gains and losses related to hedge ineffectiveness, were not significant in the periods presented.

Our foreign currency exchange contracts are measured at fair value using the market method valuation technique. The inputs to this technique utilize current foreign currency exchange forward market rates published by third-party leading financial news and data providers. These are observable data that represent the rates that the financial institution uses for contracts entered into at that date; however, they are not based on actual transactions so they are classified as Level 2. At December 31, 2016 and January 2, 2016, we had foreign currency exchange contracts with notional amounts upon which the contracts were based of $665 million and $706 million, respectively. At December 31, 2016, the fair value amounts of our foreign currency exchange contracts were a $7 million asset and a $17 million liability. At January 2, 2016, the fair value amounts of our foreign currency exchange contracts were a $7 million asset and a $28 million liability.

We hedge our net investment position in major currencies and generate foreign currency interest payments that offset other transactional exposures in these currencies. To accomplish this, we borrow directly in foreign currency and designate a portion of foreign currency debt as a hedge of a net investment. We record changes in the fair value of these contracts in other comprehensive income to the extent they are effective as cash flow hedges. Currency effects on the effective portion of these hedges, which are reflected in the foreign currency translation adjustments within Accumulated other comprehensive loss, were not significant in the periods presented.

Assets Recorded at Fair Value on a Nonrecurring Basis

During the years ended December 31, 2016 and January 2, 2016, the Finance group’s impaired nonaccrual finance receivables of $44 million and $45 million, respectively, were measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3). Impaired nonaccrual finance receivables represent assets recorded at fair value on a nonrecurring basis since the measurement of required reserves on our impaired finance receivables is significantly dependent on the fair value of the underlying collateral. For impaired nonaccrual finance receivables secured by aviation assets, the fair values of collateral are determined primarily based on the use of industry pricing guides. Fair value measurements recorded on impaired finance receivables resulted in charges to provision for loan losses totaling $10 million, $13 million and $18 million for 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.

Assets and Liabilities Not Recorded at Fair Value

The carrying value and estimated fair value of our financial instruments that are not reflected in the financial statements at fair value are as follows:

		December 31, 2016				January 2, 2016
(In millions)		Carrying Value		Estimated Fair Value		Carrying Value		Estimated Fair Value
Manufacturing group
Debt, excluding leases	$	(2,690)	$	(2,809)	$	(2,628)	$	(2,744)
Finance group
Finance receivables, excluding leases		729		758		863		820
Debt		(903)		(831)		(913)		(840)

Fair value for the Manufacturing group debt is determined using market observable data for similar transactions (Level 2). The fair value for the Finance group debt was determined primarily based on discounted cash flow analyses using observable market inputs from debt with similar duration, subordination and credit default expectations (Level 2). Fair value estimates for finance receivables were determined based on internally developed discounted cash flow models primarily utilizing significant unobservable inputs (Level 3), which include estimates of the rate of return, financing cost, capital structure and/or discount rate expectations of current market participants combined with estimated loan cash flows based on credit losses, payment rates and expectations of borrowers’ ability to make payments on a timely basis.