Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Description of Business

We are a leading global provider of engineering and manufacturing services for high-performance products and high-cost-of failure applications used primarily in the aerospace, defense, industrial, medical, and other industries. Our subsidiaries are organized into two primary businesses: Electronic Systems segment and Structural Systems segment, each of which is a reportable operating segment. Electronic Systems designs, engineers and manufactures high-reliability products used in worldwide technology-driven markets including aerospace, defense, industrial, medical, and other end-use markets. Electronic Systems’ product offerings range from prototype development to complex assemblies. Structural Systems designs, engineers and manufactures large, complex contoured aerospace structural components and assemblies and supplies composite and metal bonded structures and assemblies. Structural Systems’ products are used on commercial aircraft, military fixed-wing aircraft and military and commercial rotary-wing aircraft. All reportable operating segments follow the same accounting principles.

Basis of Presentation

The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Ducommun Incorporated and its subsidiaries (“Ducommun,” the “Company,” “we,” “us” or “our”), after eliminating intercompany balances and transactions.

In the opinion of management, all adjustments, consisting of recurring accruals, have been made that are necessary to fairly state our consolidated financial position, results of operations, comprehensive income (loss) and cash flows in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”).

Our fiscal quarters typically end on the Saturday closest to the end of March, June and September for the first three fiscal quarters of each year, and ends on December 31 for our fourth fiscal quarter. As a result of using fiscal quarters for the first three quarters combined with leap years, our first and fourth fiscal quarters can range between 12 1/2 weeks to 13 1/2 weeks while the second and third fiscal quarters remain at a constant 13 weeks per fiscal quarter.

Use of Estimates

Certain amounts and disclosures included in the consolidated financial statements required management to make estimates and judgments that affect the amount of assets, liabilities (including forward loss reserves), revenues and expenses, and related disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities. These estimates are based on historical experience and on various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

Reclassifications

Certain prior period amounts have been reclassified to conform to current year’s presentation.

Revision of 2015 Financial Statements

During the fourth quarter of 2016, we determined that we improperly calculated the tax impact of the goodwill impairment charge recorded in the fourth quarter of 2015. As a result, $1.6 million was incorrectly recorded as a deferred tax asset as of December 31, 2015, however, this amount should have decreased our income tax benefit for the year ended December 31, 2015. Therefore, we have revised our December 31, 2015 consolidated balance sheet to increase non-current deferred tax liabilities by $1.6 million and revised our consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2015 to increase our net loss by $1.6 million. We have also revised all related footnote disclosures in these consolidated financial statements to correct this error. This error had no effect on net cash provided by operating activities on our consolidated cash flow statement for the year ended December 31, 2015. We assessed the materiality of this error and do not believe it is material to any prior interim or annual periods.

Fair Value

We measure certain assets and liabilities at fair value based on the exchange price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability (exit price) in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants. See Note 3 for further information.

Cash Equivalents

Cash equivalents consist of highly liquid instruments purchased with original maturities of three months or less.These assets are valued at cost, which approximates fair value, which we classify as Level 1. See Fair Value above.

Derivative Instruments

We recognize derivative instruments on our consolidated balance sheets at their fair value. On the date that we enter into a derivative contract, we designate the derivative instrument as a fair value hedge, a cash flow hedge, a hedge of a net investment in a foreign operation, or a derivative instrument that will not be accounted for using hedge accounting methods. As of December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, all of our derivative instruments were designated as cash flow hedges.

We record changes in the fair value of a derivative instrument that is highly effective and that is designated and qualifies as a cash flow hedge in other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax until our earnings are affected by the variability of cash flows of the underlying hedge. We record any hedge ineffectiveness and amounts excluded from effectiveness testing in current period earnings within interest expense. We report changes in the fair values of derivative instruments that are not designated or do not qualify for hedge accounting in current period earnings. We classify cash flows from derivative instruments on the consolidated statements of cash flows in the same category as the item being hedged or on a basis consistent with the nature of the instrument.

When we determine that a derivative instrument is not highly effective as a hedge, we discontinue hedge accounting prospectively. In all situations in which we discontinue hedge accounting and the derivative instrument remains outstanding, we will carry the derivative instrument at its fair value on our consolidated balance sheets and recognize subsequent changes in its fair value in our current period earnings.

Allowance for Doubtful Accounts

We maintain an allowance for doubtful accounts for estimated losses from the inability of customers to make required payments. The allowance for doubtful accounts is evaluated periodically based on the aging of accounts receivable, the financial condition of customers and their payment history, historical write-off experience and other assumptions, such as current assessment of economic conditions.

Inventories

Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market with cost being determined using a moving average cost basis for raw materials and actual cost for work-in-process and finished goods, with units being relieved from inventory and charged to cost of sales on a first-in, first-out basis. Market value for raw materials is based on replacement cost and for other inventory classifications it is based on net realizable value. Inventoried costs include raw materials, outside processing, direct labor and allocated overhead, adjusted for any abnormal amounts of idle facility expense, freight, handling costs, and wasted materials (spoilage) incurred. Costs under long-term contracts are accumulated into, and removed from, inventory on the same basis as other contracts. We assess the inventory carrying value and record write-downs, if necessary, to its net realizable value based on customer orders on hand, and internal demand forecasts using management’s best estimates given information currently available. We maintain a reserve for excess and obsolete inventories and inventories that are carried at costs that are higher than their estimated net realizable values.

We net progress payments from customers related to inventory purchases against inventories in the consolidated balance sheets.

Production Cost of Contracts

Production cost of contracts includes non-recurring production costs, such as design and engineering costs, and tooling and other special-purpose machinery necessary to build parts as specified in a contract. Production costs of contracts are recorded to cost of goods sold using the units of delivery method. We review long-lived assets within production costs of contracts for impairment on an annual basis (which we perform during the fourth quarter) or when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of our long-lived assets may not be recoverable. An impairment charge is recognized when the carrying value of an asset exceeds the projected undiscounted future cash flows expected from its use and disposal. As of December 31, 2016 and 2015, production costs of contracts were $11.3 million and $10.3 million, respectively.

Assets Held For Sale

In the fourth quarter of 2015, we made the decision to sell our Huntsville, Alabama and Iuka, Mississippi (collectively, “Miltec”) operations and our Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania operation, both of which are part of our Electronic Systems operating segment, and as a result, we met the criteria for assets held for sale. However, the proposed sale of these two operations did not represent a strategic shift in our business and thus, were included in the ongoing operating results in the consolidated statements of operations for all periods presented.

On January 22, 2016, we entered into an agreement, and completed the sale on the same date, to sell our operation located in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania for a final sales price of $38.6 million in cash. We divested this facility as part of our overall strategy to streamline operations, which includes consolidating our footprint. Net assets sold were $24.0 million, net liabilities sold were $4.0 million, and direct transaction costs incurred were $0.3 million, resulting in a gain on divestiture of $18.3 million.

In February 2016, we entered into an agreement to sell our Miltec operation for a final sales price of $13.3 million, in cash. We divested this facility as part of our overall strategy to streamline operations, which includes consolidating our footprint. We completed the sale on March 25, 2016. Net assets sold were $15.4 million, net liabilities sold were $2.7 million, and direct transaction costs incurred were $1.3 million, resulting in a loss on divestiture of $0.7 million.

The carrying values of the major classes of assets and liabilities related to these assets held for sale were as follows:



	(In thousands)
	December 31, 2016		December 31, 2015
Assets
Accounts receivable (less allowance for doubtful accounts of zero and $24 at December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively)	$	—	$	9,395
Inventory	—		6,453
Deferred income taxes	—		1,246
Other current assets	—		3,315
Total current assets	—		20,409
Property and equipment, net of accumulated depreciation of zero and $8,509 at December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively	—		1,941
Goodwill	—		17,772
Other Intangible Assets	—		1,514
	$	—	$	41,636
Liabilities
Accounts payable	$	—	$	4,836
Accrued liabilities	—		1,944
	$	—	$	6,780

Property and Equipment and Depreciation

Property and equipment, including assets recorded under capital leases, are recorded at cost. Depreciation and amortization are computed using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the related assets, or the lease term if shorter for leasehold improvements. Repairs and maintenance are charged to expense as incurred. We evaluate long-lived assets for recoverability considering undiscounted cash flows, when significant changes in conditions occur, and recognize impairment losses if any, based upon the fair value of the assets.

Goodwill and Indefinite-Lived Intangible Asset

Goodwill is tested for impairment utilizing a two-step method. In the first step, we determine the fair value of the reporting unit using expected future discounted cash flows and market valuation approaches considering comparable Company revenue and Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization (“EBITDA”) multiples. If the carrying value of the reporting unit exceeds its fair value, we then perform the second step of the impairment test to measure the amount of the goodwill impairment loss, if any. The second step requires fair valuation of all the reporting unit’s assets and liabilities in a manner similar to a purchase price allocation, with any residual fair value being allocated to goodwill. This residual fair value of goodwill is then compared to the carrying value of goodwill to determine impairment. An impairment charge will be recognized equal to the excess of the carrying value of goodwill over the implied fair value of goodwill.

In 2015, as a result of the annual goodwill impairment test, we recorded $57.2 million of goodwill impairment to the Structural Systems operating segment reducing the goodwill carrying value to zero as of December 31, 2015. See Note 7 for further information.

We review our indefinite-lived intangible asset for impairment on an annual basis or when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of our intangible asset may not be recoverable. We may first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that an indefinite-lived intangible asset is impaired as a basis for determining whether it is necessary to perform the quantitative impairment test. Impairment indicators include, but are not limited to, cost factors, financial performance, adverse legal or regulatory developments, industry and market conditions and general economic conditions. If the carrying amount of the indefinite-lived intangible asset exceeds its fair value, we would recognize an impairment loss in the amount of such excess. In performing our annual impairment test in the fourth quarter of 2015, we concluded the fair value of the indefinite-lived trade name to be zero as a result of divesting businesses in Electronic Systems and our discontinuation of the use of the trade name. Thus, we recorded a $32.9 million of trade name impairment to the Electronic Systems trade name carrying value to decrease its trade name carrying value to zero as of December 31, 2015. See Note 7 for further information.

Other Intangible Assets

We amortize purchased other intangible assets with finite lives over the estimated economic lives of the assets, ranging from fourteen to eighteen years generally using the straight-line method. The value of other intangibles acquired through business combinations has been estimated using present value techniques which involve estimates of future cash flows. We evaluate other intangible assets for recoverability considering undiscounted cash flows, when significant changes in conditions occur, and recognize impairment losses, if any, based upon the estimated fair value of the assets.

Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss

Accumulated other comprehensive loss, as reflected in the consolidated balance sheets under the equity section, was composed of cumulative pension and retirement liability adjustments, net of tax, and change in net unrealized gains and losses on cash flow hedges, net of tax.

Revenue Recognition

Except as described below, we recognize revenue, including revenue from products sold under long-term contracts, when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, the price is fixed or determinable, collection is reasonably assured and delivery of products has occurred or services have been rendered.

We have a significant number of contracts for which we recognize revenue under the contract method of accounting and record revenues and cost of sales on each contract in accordance with the percentage-of-completion method of accounting, using the units-of-delivery method. Under the units-of-delivery method, revenue is recognized based upon the number of units delivered during a period and the costs are recognized based on the actual costs allocable to the delivered units. Costs allocable to undelivered units are reported on the balance sheet as inventory. This method is used in circumstances in which a company produces units of a basic product under production-type contracts in a continuous or sequential production process to buyers’ specifications. These contracts are primarily fixed-price contracts that vary widely in terms of size, length of performance period, and expected gross profit margins.

Provision for Estimated Losses on Contracts

We record provisions for the total anticipated losses on contracts considering total estimated costs to complete the contract compared to total anticipated revenues in the period in which such losses are identified. The provisions for estimated losses on contracts require management to make certain estimates and assumptions, including those with respect to the future revenue under a contract and the future cost to complete the contract. Management's estimate of the future cost to complete a contract may include assumptions as to improvements in manufacturing efficiency, reductions in operating and material costs, and our ability to resolve claims and assertions with our customers. If any of these or other assumptions and estimates do not materialize in the future, we may be required to record additional provisions for estimated losses on contracts.

In 2015, we recorded a charge in Structural Systems related to estimated cost overruns as a result of a change in the contract requirements for the remaining contractual period for a regional jet program of $10.0 million. This amount was recorded as part of cost of goods sold in our results of operations and increased accrued liabilities by $7.6 million and other long-term liabilities by $2.4 million.

Income Taxes

Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized, using enacted tax rates, for the expected future tax consequences of temporary differences between the book and tax bases of recorded assets and liabilities, operating losses and tax credit carryforwards. Deferred tax assets are evaluated quarterly and are reduced by a valuation allowance if it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized.

Tax positions taken or expected to be taken in a tax return are recognized when it is more-likely-than-not, based on technical merits, to be sustained upon examination by taxing authorities. The amount recognized is measured as the largest amount of benefit that is greater than 50% likely of being realized upon ultimate settlement, including resolution of related appeals and/or litigation process, if any.

We elected to early adopt ASU 2015-17, “Income Taxes (Topic 740): Balance Sheet Classification of Deferred Taxes” and on a prospective basis for the year ended December 31, 2015.

Litigation and Commitments

In the normal course of business, we are defendants in certain litigation, claims and inquiries, including matters relating to environmental laws. In addition, we make various commitments and incur contingent liabilities. Management’s estimates regarding contingent liabilities could differ from actual results.

Environmental Liabilities

Environmental liabilities are recorded when environmental assessments and/or remedial efforts are probable and costs can be reasonably estimated. Generally, the timing of these accruals coincides with the completion of a feasibility study or our commitment to a formal plan of action. Further, we review and update our environmental accruals as circumstances change and/or additional information is obtained that reasonably could be expected to have a meaningful effect on the outcome of a matter or the estimated cost thereof.

Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation

We measure and recognize compensation expense for share-based payment transactions to our employees and non-employees at their estimated fair value. The expense is measured at the grant date, based on the calculated fair value of the share-based award, and is recognized over the requisite service period (generally the vesting period of the equity award). The fair value of stock options are determined using the Black-Scholes-Merton (“Black-Scholes”) valuation model, which requires assumptions and judgments regarding stock price volatility, risk-free interest rates, and expected options terms. Management’s estimates could differ from actual results. The fair value of unvested stock awards is determined based on the closing price of the underlying common stock on the date of grant.

Earnings (Loss) Per Share

Basic earnings per share are computed by dividing income available to common shareholders by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding in each period. Diluted earnings per share are computed by dividing income available to common shareholders plus income associated with dilutive securities by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding, plus any potential dilutive shares that could be issued if exercised or converted into common stock in each period.

The net earnings (loss) and weighted-average number of common shares outstanding used to compute earnings (loss) per share were as follows:



	(In thousands, except per share data) Years Ended December 31,
	2016		2015			2014
Net income (loss)	$	25,261	$	(74,879	)	$	19,867
Weighted-average number of common shares outstanding
Basic weighted-average common shares outstanding	11,151		11,047			10,897
Dilutive potential common shares	148		—			229
Diluted weighted-average common shares outstanding	11,299		11,047			11,126
Earnings (loss) per share
Basic	$	2.27	$	(6.78	)	$	1.82
Diluted	$	2.24	$	(6.78	)	$	1.79

Potentially dilutive stock options and stock units to purchase common stock, as shown below, were excluded from the computation of diluted earnings per share because their inclusion would have been anti-dilutive. However, these shares may be potentially dilutive common shares in the future.



	(In thousands) Years Ended December 31,
	2016	2015	2014
Stock options and stock units	553	778	218

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

New Accounting Guidance Adopted in 2016

In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-15, “Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30)” (“ASU 2015-15”), which provides guidance on the presentation and subsequent measurement of debt issuance costs associated with line-of-credit arrangements. Other guidance does not address presentation or subsequent measurement of debt issuance costs related to line-of-credit arrangements. Thus, the SEC staff would not object to an entity deferring and presenting debt issuance costs as an asset and subsequently amortizing the deferred debt issuance costs ratably over the term of the line-of-credit arrangement, regardless of whether there are any outstanding borrowings on the line-of-credit arrangement. The new guidance was effective for us beginning January 1, 2016. We did not have debt issuance costs associated with line-of-credit arrangements and thus, the adoption of this new guidance did not have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In June 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-10, “Technical Corrections and Improvements” (“ASU 2015-10”), which covers a wide range of Topics in the Codification. The amendments in ASU 2015-10 represent changes to make minor corrections or minor improvements to the Codification that are not expected to have a significant effect on current accounting practice or create a significant administrative cost on most entities. The amendments in this new guidance that require transition guidance were effective for us beginning January 1, 2016. The adoption of this standard did not have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In June 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-7, “Fair Value Measurement (820): Disclosures for Investments in Certain Entities That Calculate Net Asset Value per Share (or Its Equivalent)” (“ASU 2015-7”), which permits a reporting entity, as a practical expedient, to measure the fair value of certain investments using the net asset value per share of the investment. The amendments in ASU 2015-7 remove the requirement to categorize investments for which fair values are measured using the net asset value per share practical expedient. It also limits disclosures to investments for which the entity has elected to measure the fair value using the practical expedient. The new guidance was effective for us beginning January 1, 2016.. As a result of the adoption of this new guidance, we are disclosing certain investments using the net asset value per share of the investment and prior amounts have been reclassified to conform to current year presentation. See Note 12.

In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-05, “Intangibles - Goodwill and Other - Internal-Use Software (Subtopic 350-40): Customer’s Accounting for Fees Paid in a Cloud Computing Arrangement” (“ASU 2015-05”), which provides guidance on fees paid by a customer in a cloud computing arrangement. If a cloud computing arrangement includes a software license, the customer should account for the software license element of the arrangement consistent with the acquisition of other software licenses. If a cloud computing arrangement does not include a software license, the customer should account for the arrangement as a service contract. The new guidance was effective for us beginning January 1, 2016. The adoption of this standard did not have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-03, “Interest - Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs” (“ASU 2015-03”), which changes the presentation of debt issuance costs in financial statements. Under ASU 2015-03, an entity presents such costs in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the related debt liability rather than as an asset. Amortization of those costs is reported as interest expense. The new guidance was effective for us beginning January 1, 2016. As a result of the adoption of this new guidance, we reclassed $3.1 million of debt issuance costs against $170.0 million of total debt as of December 31, 2016 and prior period amounts have been reclassified to conform to current year presentation. See Note 9.

In January 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-01, “Income Statement - Extraordinary and Unusual Items (Subtopic 225-20)” (“ASU 2015-01”), which eliminates from U.S. GAAP the concept of extraordinary items. Current guidance requires separate classification, presentation, and disclosure of extraordinary events and transactions. In addition, an event or transaction is presumed to be an ordinary and usual activity of the reporting entity unless evidence clearly supports its classification as an extraordinary item. The new guidance was effective for us beginning January 1, 2016. The adoption of this standard did not have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-15, “Presentation of Financial Statements - Going Concern (Subtopic 205-40): Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern” (“ASU 2014-15”), which defines management’s responsibility to evaluate whether there is substantial doubt about a company’s ability to continue as a going concern. ASU 2014-15 also provide principles and definitions that are intended to reduce diversity in the timing and content of disclosures in the financial statement footnotes. The new guidance was effective for us for our annual year ending December 31, 2016, and interim periods beginning January 1, 2017. The adoption of this standard did not have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In June 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-12, “Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Accounting for Share-Based Payments When the Terms of an Award Provide that a Performance Target Could be Achieved after the Requisite Service Period” (“ASU 2014-12”), which requires that a performance target that affects vesting, and that could be achieved after the requisite service period, be treated as a performance condition. Thus, the performance target should not be reflected in estimating the grant date fair value of the award. This update further clarifies that compensation cost should be recognized in the period in which it becomes probable that the performance target will be achieved and should represent the compensation cost attributable to the period(s) for which the requisite service has already been rendered. The new guidance was effective for us beginning January 1, 2016. The adoption of this standard did not have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements.

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”), which simplifies the subsequent measurement of goodwill, the amendments eliminate Step Two from the goodwill impairment test. The annual, or interim, goodwill impairment test is performed by comparing the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying amount. An impairment charge should be recognized for the amount by which the carrying amount exceeds the reporting unit’s fair value; however, the loss recognized should not exceed the total amount of goodwill allocated to that reporting unit. In addition, income tax effects from any tax deductible goodwill on the carrying amount of the reporting unit should be considered when measuring the goodwill impairment loss, if applicable. The amendments also eliminate the requirements for any reporting unit with a zero or negative carrying amount to perform a qualitative assessment and, if it fails that qualitative test, to perform Step Two of the goodwill impairment test. An entity still has the option to perform the qualitative assessment for a reporting unit to determine if the quantitative impairment test is necessary. The new guidance is effective for annual or interim goodwill impairment tests in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019. Early adoption is permitted for interim or annual goodwill impairment tests performed on testing dates after January 1, 2017. We are evaluating the impact of this standard.

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-01, “Business Combinations (Topic 805): Clarifying the Definition of a Business” (“ASU 2017-01”), which clarify the definition of a business with the objective of adding guidance to assist entities with evaluating whether transactions should be accounted for as acquisitions (or disposals) of businesses. The new guidance is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those annual periods, which will be our interim period beginning January 1, 2018. We are evaluating the impact of this standard.

In December 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-20, “Technical Corrections and Improvements to Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers” (“ASU 2016-20”), which cover a variety of Topics in the Codification related to the new revenue recognition standard (ASU 2014-09). The amendments in ASU 2016-20 represent changes to make minor corrections or minor improvements to the Codification that are not expected to have a significant effect on current accounting practice or create a significant administrative cost to most entities. The new guidance is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those annual periods, which will be our interim period beginning January 1, 2018. We are evaluating the impact of this standard.

In December 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-19, “Technical Corrections and Improvements” (“2016-19”), which cover a variety of Topics in the Codification. The amendments in ASU 2016-19 represent changes to make corrections or improvements to the Codification that are not expected to have a significant effect on current accounting practice or create a significant administrative cost to most entities. The new guidance is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those annual periods, which will be our interim period beginning January 1, 2017. We are evaluating the impact of this standard and currently do not anticipate it will have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15, “Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments” (“ASU 2016-15”), which addresses the following eight specific cash flow issues: Debt prepayment or debt extinguishment costs; settlement of zero-coupon debt instruments or other debt instruments with coupon interest rates that are insignificant in relation to the effective interest rate of the borrowing; contingent consideration payments made after a business combination; proceeds from the settlement of insurance claims; proceeds from the settlement of corporate-owned life insurance policies (“COLIs”) (including bank-owned life insurance policies [“BOLIs”]); distributions received from equity method investees; beneficial interests in securitization transactions; and separately identifiable cash flows and application of the predominance principle. The new guidance is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those annual periods, which will be our interim period beginning January 1, 2018. We are evaluating the impact of this standard.

In May 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-12, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients” (“ASU 2016-12”), which amends the guidance in the new revenue standard on collectability, noncash consideration, presentation of sales tax, and transition. The amendments are intended to address implementation issues and provide additional practical expedients to reduce the cost and complexity of applying the new revenue standard. The new guidance is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those annual periods, which will be our interim period beginning January 1, 2018. Early adoption is permitted only as of annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim reporting periods with that reporting period. We are evaluating the impact of this standard.

In May 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-11, “Revenue Recognition (Topic 605) and Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Rescission of SEC Guidance Because of Accounting Standards Updates 2014-09 and 2014-06 Pursuant to Staff Announcements at the March 3, 2016 EITF Meeting” (“ASU 2016-11”), which clarifies revenue and expense recognition for freight costs, accounting for shipping and handling fees and costs, and accounting for consideration given by a vendor to a customer. The new guidance is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those annual periods, which will be our interim period beginning January 1, 2018. Early adoption is permitted only as of annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim reporting periods with that reporting period. We are evaluating the impact of this standard.

In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-10, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing” (“ASU 2016-10”), which clarifies the following two aspects of Topic 606: (a) identifying performance obligations; and (b) the licensing implementation guidance. The amendments do not change the core principle of the guidance in Topic 606. The new guidance is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those annual periods, which will be our interim period beginning January 1, 2018. Early adoption is permitted only as of annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim reporting periods with that reporting period. We are evaluating the impact of this standard.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, “Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting” (“ASU 2016-09”), which is intended to improve the accounting for employee share-based payments. The new guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those fiscal years, which will be our interim period beginning January 1, 2017. Early adoption is permitted in any interim or annual reporting period. We are evaluating the impact of this standard and currently do not anticipate it will have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-05, “Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Effect of Derivative Contract Novations on Existing Hedge Accounting Relationships” (“ASU 2016-05”), which clarifies that a change in the counter party to a derivative instrument designated as a hedging instrument does not require dedesignation of that hedging relationship, provided that all other hedge accounting criteria are met. The new guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those fiscal years, which will be our interim period beginning January 1, 2017. Early adoption is permitted as of the beginning of an interim period on a modified retrospective basis. We are evaluating the impact of this standard and currently do not anticipate it will have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, “Leases (Topic 842)” (“ASU 2016-02”), which requires lessees to present right-of-use assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet. Lessees are required to apply a modified retrospective transition approach for leases existing at, or entered into after, the beginning of the earliest comparative period presented in the financial statements. The new guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years, which will be our interim period beginning January 1, 2019. We are evaluating the impact of this standard and currently anticipate it will impact our consolidated financial statements.

In July 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-11, “Inventory (Topic 330)” (“ASU 2015-11”), which requires inventory within the scope of ASU 2015-11 to be measured at the lower of cost and net realizable value. Subsequent measurement is unchanged for inventory measured using last-in, first-out (“LIFO”) or the retail inventory value. The new guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those fiscal years, which will be our interim period beginning January 1, 2017. Early adoption is permitted as of the beginning of an interim or annual reporting period. We are evaluating the impact of this standard, but currently do not anticipate it will have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)” (“ASU 2014-09”), which outlines a new, single comprehensive model for entities to use in accounting for revenue arising from contracts with customers and supersedes most current revenue recognition guidance, including industry-specific guidance. This new revenue recognition model provides a five-step analysis in determining when and how revenue is recognized. It requires entities to exercise judgment when considering the terms of the contract(s) which include (i) identifying the contract(s) with the customer, (ii) identifying the separate performance obligations in the contract, (iii) determining the transaction price, (iv) allocating the transaction price to the separate performance obligations, and (v) recognizing revenue when each performance obligation is satisfied. Thus, it depicts the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration an entity expects to receive in exchange for those goods or services. Companies have the option of applying the provisions of ASU 2014-09 either retrospectively to each prior reporting period presented or retrospectively with the cumulative effect of initially applying this guidance recognized at the date of initial application. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-14, “Revenue From Contracts With Customers (Topic 606)” (“ASU 2015-14”), which defer the effective date of ASU 2014-09 by one year to annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim reporting periods within that reporting period. Early adoption is permitted only as of annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim reporting periods within that reporting period. The new guidance is effective for us beginning January 1, 2018 and will provide us additional time to evaluate the method and impact that ASU 2014-09 will have on our consolidated financial statements. We are evaluating the impact of this standard, and with the percentage of completion, unit of delivery method of recognizing revenue being eliminated under ASU 2014-09, we currently anticipate our revenue, cost of sales, and related items on our consolidated financial statements will be impacted.