Summary of Significant Accounting Policies	3 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2018
Accounting Policies [Abstract]
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies	Summary of Significant Accounting Policies For a detailed discussion about the Company’s significant accounting policies, see Note 2, “Summary of Significant Accounting Policies,” in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in the 2018 Form 10-K. During the three months ended September 30, 2018, other than as set forth below and the adoption of Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2017-07, “Compensation—Retirement Benefits (Topic 715): Improving the Presentation of Net Periodic Pension Cost and Net Periodic Postretirement Benefit Cost” (“ASU 2017-07”), ASU No. 2017-01, “Business Combinations (Topic 805): Clarifying the Definition of a Business” (“ASU 2017-01”), ASU No. 2016-18, “Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Restricted Cash” (“ASU 2016-18”), ASU No. 2016-15, “Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments” (“ASU 2016-15”), and ASU No. 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)” (“ASU 2014-09”), there were no significant updates made to the Company’s significant accounting policies. Concentration of Credit Risk At September 30, 2018 and June 30, 2018, the financial instruments which potentially expose the Company to concentration of credit risk consist of cash in financial institutions (in excess of federally insured limits), derivative instruments and trade receivables. The Company does not have any credit-risk related contingent features that would require it to post additional collateral in support of its net derivative liability positions. At September 30, 2018, $2.6 million in cash in the Company’s coffee-related derivative margin accounts was restricted due to the net loss position exceeding the credit limit in such accounts at September 30, 2018. At June 30, 2018, none of the cash in the Company’s coffee-related derivative margin accounts was restricted due to the net loss position not exceeding the credit limit in such accounts at June 30, 2018. Further changes in commodity prices and the number of coffee-related derivative instruments held could have a significant impact on cash deposit requirements under the Company's broker and counterparty agreements. Concentration of credit risk with respect to trade receivables for the Company is limited due to the large number of customers comprising the Company’s customer base and their dispersion across many different geographic areas. The trade receivables are generally short-term and all probable bad debt losses have been appropriately considered in establishing the allowance for doubtful accounts. Coffee Brewing Equipment and Service The Company capitalizes coffee brewing equipment and depreciates it over five years and reports the depreciation expense in cost of goods sold. See Note 10. Further, the Company classifies certain expenses related to coffee brewing equipment provided to customers as cost of goods sold. These costs include equipment depreciation as well as the cost of servicing that equipment (including service employees’ salaries, cost of transportation and the cost of supplies and parts) and are considered directly attributable to the generation of revenues from its customers. Accordingly, such costs included in cost of goods sold in the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements in the three months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017 were $8.5 million and $6.6 million, respectively. Revenue Recognition The Company’s significant accounting policy for revenue was updated as a result of the adoption of ASU 2014-09. The Company recognizes revenue in accordance with the five-step model as prescribed by ASU 2014-09 in which the Company evaluates the transfer of promised goods or services and recognizes revenue when its customer obtains control of promised goods or services in an amount that reflects the consideration which the Company expects to be entitled to receive in exchange for those goods or services. To determine revenue recognition for the arrangements that the Company determines are within the scope of ASU 2014-09, the Company performs the following five steps: (1) identify the contract(s) with a customer, (2) identify the performance obligations in the contract, (3) determine the transaction price, (4) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract and (5) recognize revenue when (or as) the entity satisfies a performance obligation. See Note 19. Shipping and Handling Costs The Company’s shipping and handling costs are included in both cost of goods sold and selling expenses, depending on the nature of such costs. Shipping and handling costs included in cost of goods sold reflect inbound freight of raw materials and finished goods, and product loading and handling costs at the Company’s production facilities to the distribution centers and branches. Shipping and handling costs included in selling expenses consist primarily of those costs associated with moving finished goods to customers. Shipping and handling costs that were recorded as a component of the Company's selling expenses were $3.1 million and $1.9 million, respectively, in the three months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017. Effective June 30, 2018, the Company implemented a change in accounting principle for freight costs incurred to transfer goods from a distribution center to a branch warehouse and warehousing overhead costs incurred to store and ready goods prior to their sale, and made certain corrections relating to the classification of allied freight, overhead variances and purchase price variances (“PPVs”) from expensing such costs as incurred within selling expenses to capitalizing such costs as inventory and expensing through cost of goods sold. See Note 3. Pension Plans The Company’s defined benefit pension plans are not admitting new participants, therefore, changes to pension liabilities are primarily due to market fluctuations of investments for existing participants and changes in interest rates. The Company’s defined benefit pension plans are accounted for using the guidance of ASC 710, “Compensation--General“ and ASC 715, “Compensation--Retirement Benefits“ and are measured as of the end of the fiscal year. The Company recognizes the overfunded or underfunded status of a defined benefit pension plan as an asset or liability on its consolidated balance sheets. Changes in the funded status are recognized through AOCI, in the year in which the changes occur. See Note 12. The Company’s significant accounting policy for pension plans was updated as a result of the adoption of ASU 2017-07, which impacted the presentation of the components of net periodic benefit cost in the condensed consolidated statements of income. Net periodic benefit cost, other than the service cost component, is retrospectively included in “Interest expense,” and “Other, net” in the condensed consolidated statements of income. Recently Adopted Accounting Standards In March 2017, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued ASU 2017-07. ASU 2017-07 amends the requirements in GAAP related to the income statement presentation of the components of net periodic benefit cost for an entity’s sponsored defined benefit pension and other postretirement plans. Under ASU 2017-07, an entity must disaggregate and present the service cost component of net periodic benefit cost in the same income statement line items as other employee compensation costs arising from services rendered during the period, and only the service cost component will be eligible for capitalization. Other components of net periodic benefit cost must be presented separately from the line items that include the service cost. The guidance in ASU 2017-07 is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Entities are required to use a retrospective transition method to adopt the requirement for separate income statement presentation of the service cost and other components, and a prospective transition method to adopt the requirement to limit the capitalization of benefit cost to the service component. The Company adopted ASU 2017-07 beginning July 1, 2018 using a retrospective transition method to reclassify net periodic benefit cost, other than the service component, from “Cost of goods sold,” “Selling expenses” and “General and administrative expenses” to “Interest expense” and “Other, net” in the condensed consolidated statements of income. Accordingly, “Interest expense” increased by $1.6 million in each of the three months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017 and “Other, net” increased by $1.8 million and $1.7 million in the three months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017, respectively. See Note 3 and Note 6. In the fiscal years ended June 30, 2018 and 2017, “Interest expense” increased by $6.6 million and $6.4 million, respectively, and “Other, net” increased by $6.7 million and $6.8 million, respectively, due to reclassifications of net periodic benefit cost, other than the service component, as a result of adopting ASU 2017-07. In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-01. The amendments in ASU 2017-01 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 and provide a screen to determine when an integrated set of assets and activities (collectively referred to as a “set”) is not a business. If the screen is not met, the amendments (1) require that to be considered a business, a set must include, at a minimum, an input and a substantive process that together significantly contribute to the ability to create output and (2) remove the evaluation of whether a market participant could replace the missing elements. The guidance in ASU 2017-01 is effective for public business entities for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years, and should be applied prospectively. The Company adopted ASU 2017-01 beginning July 1, 2018. The Company will apply the new guidance to all applicable transactions after the adoption date. In November 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-18. The amendments require that a statement of cash flows explain the change during the period in the total of cash, cash equivalents, and amounts generally described as restricted cash or restricted cash equivalents. As a result, amounts generally described as restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents should be included with cash and cash equivalents when reconciling the beginning-of-period and end-of-period total amounts shown on the statement of cash flows. The amendments do not provide a definition of restricted cash or restricted cash equivalents. An entity with a material balance of restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents must disclose information about the nature of the restrictions. The guidance in ASU 2016-18 is effective for public business entities for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company adopted ASU 2016-18 beginning July 1, 2018. The new guidance changed the presentation of restricted cash in the condensed consolidated statements of cash flows and was implemented on a retrospective basis. In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15. ASU 2016-15 addresses certain issues where diversity in practice was identified in classifying certain cash receipts and cash payments based on the guidance in ASC 230, “Statement of Cash Flows” (“ASC 230”). ASC 230 is principles based and often requires judgment to determine the appropriate classification of cash flows as operating, investing or financing activities. The application of judgment has resulted in diversity in how certain cash receipts and cash payments are classified. Certain cash receipts and cash payments may have aspects of more than one class of cash flows. ASU 2016-15 clarifies that an entity will first apply any relevant guidance in ASC 230 and in other applicable topics. If there is no guidance that addresses those cash receipts and cash payments, an entity will determine each separately identifiable source or use and classify the receipt or payment based on the nature of the cash flow. If a receipt or payment has aspects of more than one class of cash flows and cannot be separated, classification will depend on the predominant source or use. The guidance in ASU 2016-15 is effective for public business entities for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company adopted ASU 2016-15 beginning July 1, 2018. Adoption of ASU 2016-15 did not have a material effect on the results of operations, financial position or cash flows of the Company. In May 2014, the FASB issued accounting guidance which requires an entity to recognize the amount of revenue to which it expects to be entitled for the transfer of promised goods or services to customers under ASU 2014-09. ASU 2014-09 replaces most existing revenue recognition guidance in GAAP. The standard's core principle is that a company will recognize revenue when it transfers promised goods or services to a customer in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the company expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. In 2015 and 2016, the FASB issued additional ASUs related to ASU 2014-09 that delayed the effective date of the guidance and clarified various aspects of the new revenue guidance, including principal versus agent considerations, identification of performance obligations, and accounting for licenses, and included other improvements and practical expedients. ASU 2014-09 is effective for public business entities for annual reporting periods beginning after December 31, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company adopted ASU 2014-09 beginning July 1, 2018 using the modified retrospective method for all contracts not completed as of the date of adoption. Adoption of ASU 2014-09 did not have a material effect on the results of operations, financial position or cash flows of the Company. The Company has included expanded disclosures in this report related to revenue recognition in order to comply with ASU 2014-09. See Note 19. New Accounting Pronouncements In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 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”). ASU 2018-15 aligns the requirements for capitalizing implementation costs incurred in a hosting arrangement that is a service contract with the requirements for capitalizing implementation costs incurred to develop or obtain internal-use software. The guidance in ASU 2018-15 is effective for public business entities for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2019, and interim periods within those fiscal years, and is effective for the Company beginning July 1, 2020. Early adoption is permitted, including adoption in any interim period. The Company is currently evaluating the impact ASU 2018-15 will have on its consolidated financial statements. In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 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”). ASU 2018-14 modifies disclosure of other accounting and reporting requirements related to single-employer defined benefit pension or other postretirement benefit plans. The guidance in ASU 2018-14 is effective for public business entities for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2020, and is effective for the Company beginning July 1, 2021. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact ASU 2018-14 will have on its consolidated financial statements. In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-13, “Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Disclosure Framework—Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement” (“ASU 2018-13”). ASU 2018-13 improves the effectiveness of fair value measurement disclosures and modifies the disclosure requirements on fair value measurements, including the consideration of costs and benefits. The guidance in ASU 2018-13 is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2019, and interim periods within those fiscal years, and is effective for the Company beginning July 1, 2020. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact ASU 2018-13 will have on its consolidated financial statements. In March 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-05, “Income Taxes (Topic 740): Amendments to SEC Paragraphs Pursuant to SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 118” (“ASU 2018-05”). ASU 2018-05 amends ASC 740, “Income Taxes,” to provide guidance on accounting for the tax effects of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “Tax Act”) pursuant to Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 118, “Income Tax Accounting Implications of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” (“SAB 118”), which provides guidance on accounting for the tax effects of the Tax Act. Under SAB 118, companies are able to record a reasonable estimate of the impact of the Tax Act if one is able to be determined and report it as a provisional amount during the measurement period. The measurement period is not to extend beyond one year from the enactment date. If the Company is not able to make a reasonable estimate for the impact of the Tax Act, it should not be recorded until a reasonable estimate can be made during the measurement period. The Company recorded provisional adjustments as of September 30, 2018 and expects to finalize the provisional amounts within one year from the enactment date. See Note 16. In February 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-02, “Income Statement—Reporting Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Reclassification of Certain Tax Effects from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income” (“ASU 2018-02”). ASU 2018-02 allows a reclassification from accumulated other comprehensive income to retained earnings for stranded tax effects resulting from the Tax Act and requires certain disclosures about stranded tax effects. The guidance in ASU 2018-02 is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim periods within those fiscal years, and is effective for the Company beginning July 1, 2019 and should be applied either in the period of adoption or retrospectively. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact ASU 2018-02 will have on its consolidated financial statements. In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-04, “Intangibles—Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment” (“ASU 2017-04”). The amendments in ASU 2017-04 address concerns regarding the cost and complexity of the two-step goodwill impairment test, and remove the second step of the test. An entity will apply a one-step quantitative test and record the amount of goodwill impairment as the excess of a reporting unit’s carrying amount over its fair value, not to exceed the total amount of goodwill allocated to the reporting unit. ASU 2017-04 does not amend the optional qualitative assessment of goodwill impairment. The guidance in ASU 2017-04 is effective for annual and interim goodwill impairment tests in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, and is effective for the Company beginning July 1, 2020. Adoption of ASU 2017-04 is not expected to have a material effect on the results of operations, financial position or cash flows of the Company. In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, “Leases (Topic 842)” (“ASU 2016-02”), which introduces a new lessee model that brings substantially all leases onto the balance sheet. Under the new guidance, lessees are required to recognize a lease liability, which represents the discounted obligation to make future minimum lease payments and a related right-of-use asset. In July 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-10, “Codification Improvements to Topic 842, Leases,” and ASU No. 2018-11, “Leases (Topic 842): Targeted Improvements,” which provide additional guidance to consider when implementing ASU 2016-02. For public business entities, ASU 2016-02 is effective for financial statements issued for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim periods within those annual periods. Early application is permitted. ASU 2016-02 is effective for the Company beginning July 1, 2019. The Company is in the process of evaluating the provisions of ASU 2016-02 and assessing its impact on the Company’s financial statements, information systems, business processes, and financial statement disclosures. The Company is implementing a project plan related to ASU 2016-02 and is identifying the lease population. The Company expects the adoption will have a material effect on the Company’s financial position resulting from the increase in assets and liabilities as well as additional disclosures. The Company will continue to evaluate the impact of the adoption of ASU 2016-02.

Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

For a detailed discussion about the Company’s significant accounting policies, see Note 2, “Summary of Significant Accounting Policies,” in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in the 2018 Form 10-K.

During the three months ended September 30, 2018, other than as set forth below and the adoption of Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2017-07, “Compensation—Retirement Benefits (Topic 715): Improving the Presentation of Net Periodic Pension Cost and Net Periodic Postretirement Benefit Cost” (“ASU 2017-07”), ASU No. 2017-01, “Business Combinations (Topic 805): Clarifying the Definition of a Business” (“ASU 2017-01”), ASU No. 2016-18, “Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Restricted Cash” (“ASU 2016-18”), ASU No. 2016-15, “Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments” (“ASU 2016-15”), and ASU No. 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)” (“ASU 2014-09”), there were no significant updates made to the Company’s significant accounting policies.

Concentration of Credit Risk

At September 30, 2018 and June 30, 2018, the financial instruments which potentially expose the Company to concentration of credit risk consist of cash in financial institutions (in excess of federally insured limits), derivative instruments and trade receivables.

The Company does not have any credit-risk related contingent features that would require it to post additional collateral in support of its net derivative liability positions.

At September 30, 2018, $2.6 million in cash in the Company’s coffee-related derivative margin accounts was restricted due to the net loss position exceeding the credit limit in such accounts at September 30, 2018. At June 30, 2018, none of the cash in the Company’s coffee-related derivative margin accounts was restricted due to the net loss position not exceeding the credit limit in such accounts at June 30, 2018. Further changes in commodity prices and the number of coffee-related derivative instruments held could have a significant impact on cash deposit requirements under the Company's broker and counterparty agreements.

Concentration of credit risk with respect to trade receivables for the Company is limited due to the large number of customers comprising the Company’s customer base and their dispersion across many different geographic areas. The trade receivables are generally short-term and all probable bad debt losses have been appropriately considered in establishing the allowance for doubtful accounts.

Coffee Brewing Equipment and Service

The Company capitalizes coffee brewing equipment and depreciates it over five years and reports the depreciation expense in cost of goods sold. See Note 10. Further, the Company classifies certain expenses related to coffee brewing equipment provided to customers as cost of goods sold. These costs include equipment depreciation as well as the cost of servicing that equipment (including service employees’ salaries, cost of transportation and the cost of supplies and parts) and are considered directly attributable to the generation of revenues from its customers. Accordingly, such costs included in cost of goods sold in the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements in the three months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017 were $8.5 million and $6.6 million, respectively.

Revenue Recognition

The Company’s significant accounting policy for revenue was updated as a result of the adoption of ASU 2014-09. The Company recognizes revenue in accordance with the five-step model as prescribed by ASU 2014-09 in which the Company evaluates the transfer of promised goods or services and recognizes revenue when its customer obtains control of promised goods or services in an amount that reflects the consideration which the Company expects to be entitled to receive in exchange for those goods or services. To determine revenue recognition for the arrangements that the Company determines are within the scope of ASU 2014-09, the Company performs the following five steps: (1) identify the contract(s) with a customer, (2) identify the performance obligations in the contract, (3) determine the transaction price, (4) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract and (5) recognize revenue when (or as) the entity satisfies a performance obligation. See Note 19.

Shipping and Handling Costs

The Company’s shipping and handling costs are included in both cost of goods sold and selling expenses, depending on the nature of such costs. Shipping and handling costs included in cost of goods sold reflect inbound freight of raw materials and finished goods, and product loading and handling costs at the Company’s production facilities to the distribution centers and branches. Shipping and handling costs included in selling expenses consist primarily of those costs associated with moving finished goods to customers. Shipping and handling costs that were recorded as a component of the Company's selling expenses were $3.1 million and $1.9 million, respectively, in the three months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017.

Effective June 30, 2018, the Company implemented a change in accounting principle for freight costs incurred to transfer goods from a distribution center to a branch warehouse and warehousing overhead costs incurred to store and ready goods prior to their sale, and made certain corrections relating to the classification of allied freight, overhead variances and purchase price variances (“PPVs”) from expensing such costs as incurred within selling expenses to capitalizing such costs as inventory and expensing through cost of goods sold. See Note 3.

Pension Plans

The Company’s defined benefit pension plans are not admitting new participants, therefore, changes to pension liabilities are primarily due to market fluctuations of investments for existing participants and changes in interest rates. The Company’s defined benefit pension plans are accounted for using the guidance of ASC 710, “Compensation--General“ and ASC 715, “Compensation--Retirement Benefits“ and are measured as of the end of the fiscal year.

The Company recognizes the overfunded or underfunded status of a defined benefit pension plan as an asset or liability on its consolidated balance sheets. Changes in the funded status are recognized through AOCI, in the year in which the changes occur. See Note 12. The Company’s significant accounting policy for pension plans was updated as a result of the adoption of ASU 2017-07, which impacted the presentation of the components of net periodic benefit cost in the condensed consolidated statements of income. Net periodic benefit cost, other than the service cost component, is retrospectively included in “Interest expense,” and “Other, net” in the condensed consolidated statements of income.

Recently Adopted Accounting Standards

In March 2017, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued ASU 2017-07. ASU 2017-07 amends the requirements in GAAP related to the income statement presentation of the components of net periodic benefit cost for an entity’s sponsored defined benefit pension and other postretirement plans. Under ASU 2017-07, an entity must disaggregate and present the service cost component of net periodic benefit cost in the same income statement line items as other employee compensation costs arising from services rendered during the period, and only the service cost component will be eligible for capitalization. Other components of net periodic benefit cost must be presented separately from the line items that include the service cost. The guidance in ASU 2017-07 is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Entities are required to use a retrospective transition method to adopt the requirement for separate income statement presentation of the service cost and other components, and a prospective transition method to adopt the requirement to limit the capitalization of benefit cost to the service component. The Company adopted ASU 2017-07 beginning July 1, 2018 using a retrospective transition method to reclassify net periodic benefit cost, other than the service component, from “Cost of goods sold,” “Selling expenses” and “General and administrative expenses” to “Interest expense” and “Other, net” in the condensed consolidated statements of income. Accordingly, “Interest expense” increased by $1.6 million in each of the three months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017 and “Other, net” increased by $1.8 million and $1.7 million in the three months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017, respectively. See Note 3 and Note 6. In the fiscal years ended June 30, 2018 and 2017, “Interest expense” increased by $6.6 million and $6.4 million, respectively, and “Other, net” increased by $6.7 million and $6.8 million, respectively, due to reclassifications of net periodic benefit cost, other than the service component, as a result of adopting ASU 2017-07.

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-01. The amendments in ASU 2017-01 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 and provide a screen to determine when an integrated set of assets and activities (collectively referred to as a “set”) is not a business. If the screen is not met, the amendments (1) require that to be considered a business, a set must include, at a minimum, an input and a substantive process that together significantly contribute to the ability to create output and (2) remove the evaluation of whether a market participant could replace the missing elements. The guidance in ASU 2017-01 is effective for public business entities for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years, and should be applied prospectively. The Company adopted ASU 2017-01 beginning July 1, 2018. The Company will apply the new guidance to all applicable transactions after the adoption date.

In November 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-18. The amendments require that a statement of cash flows explain the change during the period in the total of cash, cash equivalents, and amounts generally described as restricted cash or restricted cash equivalents. As a result, amounts generally described as restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents should be included with cash and cash equivalents when reconciling the beginning-of-period and end-of-period total amounts shown on the statement of cash flows. The amendments do not provide a definition of restricted cash or restricted cash equivalents. An entity with a material balance of restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents must disclose information about the nature of the restrictions. The guidance in ASU 2016-18 is effective for public business entities for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company adopted ASU 2016-18 beginning July 1, 2018. The new guidance changed the presentation of restricted cash in the condensed consolidated statements of cash flows and was implemented on a retrospective basis.

In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15. ASU 2016-15 addresses certain issues where diversity in practice was identified in classifying certain cash receipts and cash payments based on the guidance in ASC 230, “Statement of Cash Flows” (“ASC 230”). ASC 230 is principles based and often requires judgment to determine the appropriate classification of cash flows as operating, investing or financing activities. The application of judgment has resulted in diversity in how certain cash receipts and cash payments are classified. Certain cash receipts and cash payments may have aspects of more than one class of cash flows. ASU 2016-15 clarifies that an entity will first apply any relevant guidance in ASC 230 and in other applicable topics. If there is no guidance that addresses those cash receipts and cash payments, an entity will determine each separately identifiable source or use and classify the receipt or payment based on the nature of the cash flow. If a receipt or payment has aspects of more than one class of cash flows and cannot be separated, classification will depend on the predominant source or use. The guidance in ASU 2016-15 is effective for public business entities for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company adopted ASU 2016-15 beginning July 1, 2018. Adoption of ASU 2016-15 did not have a material effect on the results of operations, financial position or cash flows of the Company.

In May 2014, the FASB issued accounting guidance which requires an entity to recognize the amount of revenue to which it expects to be entitled for the transfer of promised goods or services to customers under ASU 2014-09. ASU 2014-09 replaces most existing revenue recognition guidance in GAAP. The standard's core principle is that a company will recognize revenue when it transfers promised goods or services to a customer in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the company expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. In 2015 and 2016, the FASB issued additional ASUs related to ASU 2014-09 that delayed the effective date of the guidance and clarified various aspects of the new revenue guidance, including principal versus agent considerations, identification of performance obligations, and accounting for licenses, and included other improvements and practical expedients. ASU 2014-09 is effective for public business entities for annual reporting periods beginning after December 31, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company adopted ASU 2014-09 beginning July 1, 2018 using the modified retrospective method for all contracts not completed as of the date of adoption. Adoption of ASU 2014-09 did not have a material effect on the results of operations, financial position or cash flows of the Company. The Company has included expanded disclosures in this report related to revenue recognition in order to comply with ASU 2014-09. See Note 19.

New Accounting Pronouncements

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 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”). ASU 2018-15 aligns the requirements for capitalizing implementation costs incurred in a hosting arrangement that is a service contract with the requirements for capitalizing implementation costs incurred to develop or obtain internal-use software. The guidance in ASU 2018-15 is effective for public business entities for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2019, and interim periods within those fiscal years, and is effective for the Company beginning July 1, 2020. Early adoption is permitted, including adoption in any interim period. The Company is currently evaluating the impact ASU 2018-15 will have on its consolidated financial statements.

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 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”). ASU 2018-14 modifies disclosure of other accounting and reporting requirements related to single-employer defined benefit pension or other postretirement benefit plans. The guidance in ASU 2018-14 is effective for public business entities for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2020, and is effective for the Company beginning July 1, 2021. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact ASU 2018-14 will have on its consolidated financial statements.

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-13, “Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Disclosure Framework—Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement” (“ASU 2018-13”). ASU 2018-13 improves the effectiveness of fair value measurement disclosures and modifies the disclosure requirements on fair value measurements, including the consideration of costs and benefits. The guidance in ASU 2018-13 is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2019, and interim periods within those fiscal years, and is effective for the Company beginning July 1, 2020. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact ASU 2018-13 will have on its consolidated financial statements.

In March 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-05, “Income Taxes (Topic 740): Amendments to SEC Paragraphs Pursuant to SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 118” (“ASU 2018-05”). ASU 2018-05 amends ASC 740, “Income Taxes,” to provide guidance on accounting for the tax effects of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “Tax Act”) pursuant to Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 118, “Income Tax Accounting Implications of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” (“SAB 118”), which provides guidance on accounting for the tax effects of the Tax Act. Under SAB 118, companies are able to record a reasonable estimate of the impact of the Tax Act if one is able to be determined and report it as a provisional amount during the measurement period. The measurement period is not to extend beyond one year from the enactment date. If the Company is not able to make a reasonable estimate for the impact of the Tax Act, it should not be recorded until a reasonable estimate can be made during the measurement period. The Company recorded provisional adjustments as of September 30, 2018 and expects to finalize the provisional amounts within one year from the enactment date. See Note 16.

In February 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-02, “Income Statement—Reporting Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Reclassification of Certain Tax Effects from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income” (“ASU 2018-02”). ASU 2018-02 allows a reclassification from accumulated other comprehensive income to retained earnings for stranded tax effects resulting from the Tax Act and requires certain disclosures about stranded tax effects. The guidance in ASU 2018-02 is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim periods within those fiscal years, and is effective for the Company beginning July 1, 2019 and should be applied either in the period of adoption or retrospectively. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact ASU 2018-02 will have on its consolidated financial statements.

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-04, “Intangibles—Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment” (“ASU 2017-04”). The amendments in ASU 2017-04 address concerns regarding the cost and complexity of the two-step goodwill impairment test, and remove the second step of the test. An entity will apply a one-step quantitative test and record the amount of goodwill impairment as the excess of a reporting unit’s carrying amount over its fair value, not to exceed the total amount of goodwill allocated to the reporting unit. ASU 2017-04 does not amend the optional qualitative assessment of goodwill impairment. The guidance in ASU 2017-04 is effective for annual and interim goodwill impairment tests in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, and is effective for the Company beginning July 1, 2020. Adoption of ASU 2017-04 is not expected to have a material effect on the results of operations, financial position or cash flows of the Company.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, “Leases (Topic 842)” (“ASU 2016-02”), which introduces a new lessee model that brings substantially all leases onto the balance sheet. Under the new guidance, lessees are required to recognize a lease liability, which represents the discounted obligation to make future minimum lease payments and a related right-of-use asset. In July 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-10, “Codification Improvements to Topic 842, Leases,” and ASU No. 2018-11, “Leases (Topic 842): Targeted Improvements,” which provide additional guidance to consider when implementing ASU 2016-02. For public business entities, ASU 2016-02 is effective for financial statements issued for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim periods within those annual periods. Early application is permitted. ASU 2016-02 is effective for the Company beginning July 1, 2019. The Company is in the process of evaluating the provisions of ASU 2016-02 and assessing its impact on the Company’s financial statements, information systems, business processes, and financial statement disclosures. The Company is implementing a project plan related to ASU 2016-02 and is identifying the lease population. The Company expects the adoption will have a material effect on the Company’s financial position resulting from the increase in assets and liabilities as well as additional disclosures. The Company will continue to evaluate the impact of the adoption of ASU 2016-02.