Summary of Significant Accounting Policies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2018
Accounting Policies [Abstract]
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies	Summary of Significant Accounting Policies Basis of Presentation Bank of Hawaii Corporation (the “Parent”) is a Delaware corporation and a bank holding company headquartered in Honolulu, Hawaii. Bank of Hawaii Corporation and its subsidiaries (collectively, the “Company”) provide a broad range of financial products and services to customers in Hawaii, Guam, and other Pacific Islands. The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Parent and its subsidiaries. The Parent’s principal operating subsidiary is Bank of Hawaii (the “Bank”). The consolidated financial statements in this report have not been audited by an independent registered public accounting firm, but in the opinion of management, reflect all adjustments necessary for a fair presentation of the results for the interim periods. All such adjustments are of a normal recurring nature. Intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. Certain prior period information has been reclassified to conform to the current period presentation. Operating results for the interim periods disclosed herein are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the full fiscal year or for any future period. The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Rule 10-01 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and accompanying notes required by GAAP for complete financial statements and should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and related notes included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017. Use of Estimates in the Preparation of Financial Statements The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results may differ from those estimates and such differences could be material to the financial statements. Variable Interest Entities Variable interests are defined as contractual ownership or other interests in an entity that change with fluctuations in an entity’s net asset value. The primary beneficiary consolidates the variable interest entity (“VIE”). The primary beneficiary is defined as the enterprise that has both the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance and the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits that could be significant to the VIE. The Company has limited partnership interests in several low-income housing partnerships. These partnerships provide funds for the construction and operation of apartment complexes that provide affordable housing to lower-income households. If these developments successfully attract a specified percentage of residents falling in that lower-income range, state and/or federal income tax credits are made available to the partners. The tax credits are generally recognized over 10 years. In order to continue receiving the tax credits each year over the life of the partnership, the low-income residency targets must be maintained. Prior to January 1, 2015, the Company utilized the effective yield method whereby the Company recognized tax credits generally over 10 years and amortized the initial cost of the investment to provide a constant effective yield over the period that tax credits are allocated to the Company. On January 1, 2015, the Company adopted ASU No. 2014-01, “Accounting for Investments in Qualified Affordable Housing Projects” prospectively for new investments. ASU No. 2014-01 permits reporting entities to make an accounting policy election to account for their investments in qualified affordable housing projects using the proportional amortization method if certain conditions are met. As permitted by ASU No. 2014-01, the Company elected to continue to utilize the effective yield method for investments made prior to January 1, 2015. Unfunded commitments to fund these low-income housing partnerships were $15.0 million and $17.5 million as of March 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017, respectively. These unfunded commitments are unconditional and legally binding and are recorded in other liabilities in the consolidated statements of condition. See Note 6 Affordable Housing Projects Tax Credit Partnerships for more information. The Company also has limited partnership interests in solar energy tax credit partnership investments. These partnerships develop, build, own and operate solar renewable energy projects. Over the course of these investments, the Company expects to receive federal and state tax credits, tax-related benefits, and excess cash available for distribution, if any. The Company may be called to sell its interest in the limited partnerships through a call option once all investment tax credits have been recognized. Tax benefits associated with these investments are generally recognized over six years. These entities meet the definition of a VIE; however, the Company is not the primary beneficiary of the entities as the general partner has both the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact the economic performance of the entities and the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits that could be significant to the entities. While the partnership agreements allow the limited partners, through a majority vote, to remove the general partner, this right is not deemed to be substantive as the general partner can only be removed for cause. The investments in these entities are initially recorded at cost, which approximates the maximum exposure to loss as a result of the Company’s involvement with these unconsolidated entities. The balance of the Company’s investments in these entities was $86.3 million and $87.6 million as of March 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017, respectively, and is included in other assets in the consolidated statements of condition. Tax Cuts and Jobs Act Public law No. 115-97, known as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the "Tax Act"), enacted on December 22, 2017, reduced the U.S. federal corporate tax rate from 35% to 21% effective January 1, 2018. Also on December 22, 2017, the Securities and Exchange Commission issued Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 118 (“SAB 118”), which provides guidance on accounting for tax effects of the Tax Act. SAB 118 provides a measurement period of up to one year from the enactment date to complete the accounting. Any adjustments during this measurement period will be included in net earnings from continuing operations as an adjustment to income tax expense in the reporting period when such adjustments are determined. Based on the information available and current interpretation of the rules, the Company estimated the impact of the reduction in the corporate tax rate and remeasurement of certain deferred tax assets and liabilities. The provisional amount recorded in the fourth quarter of 2017 related to the remeasurement of the Company's deferred tax balance resulted in additional income tax expense of $3.6 million. An additional $0.1 million was expensed in the first quarter of 2018 due to the remeasurement of the Company’s deferred tax balance. In addition, during the first quarter of 2018, the Company recorded a $2.0 million basis adjustment on its low income housing partnership investments, which consequently reduced income tax expense by the same amount. The final impact of the Tax Act may differ from these estimates as a result of changes in management’s interpretations and assumptions, as well as new guidance that may be issued by the Internal Revenue Service. Accounting Standards Adopted in 2018 In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers.” The standard’s core principle is that a company will recognize revenue when it transfers promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the company expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. In doing so, companies generally will be required to use more judgment and make more estimates than under current guidance. These may include identifying performance obligations in the contract, estimating the amount of variable consideration to include in the transaction price and allocating the transaction price to each separate performance obligation. Subsequent to the issuance of ASU 2014-09, the FASB issued targeted updates to clarify specific implementation issues including ASU No. 2016-08, “Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net),” ASU No. 2016-10, “Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing,” ASU No. 2016-12, “Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients,” and ASU No. 2016-20 “Technical Corrections and Improvements to Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers.” For financial reporting purposes, the standard allows for either full retrospective adoption, meaning the standard is applied to all of the periods presented, or modified retrospective adoption, meaning the standard is applied only to the most current period presented in the financial statements with the cumulative effect of initially applying the standard recognized at the date of initial application. Since the guidance does not apply to revenue associated with financial instruments, including loans and securities that are accounted for under other GAAP, the new guidance did not have a material impact on revenue most closely associated with financial instruments, including interest income and expense. The Company completed its overall assessment of revenue streams and review of related contracts potentially affected by the ASU, including trust and asset management fees, deposit related fees, interchange fees, merchant income, and annuity and insurance commissions. Based on this assessment, the Company concluded that ASU 2014-09 did not materially change the method in which the Company currently recognizes revenue for these revenue streams. The Company also completed its evaluation of certain costs related to these revenue streams to determine whether such costs should be presented as expenses or contra-revenue (i.e., gross vs. net). Based on its evaluation, the Company determined that the classification of certain debit and credit card related costs should change (i.e., costs previously recorded as expense is now recorded as contra-revenue, and vice versa). These classification changes resulted in immaterial changes to both revenue and expense. The Company also determined that certain costs related to ATMs should be recorded as an expense rather than a reduction of revenue. This change did not have a material effect to noninterest income or expense. The Company adopted ASU 2014-09 and its related amendments on its required effective date of January 1, 2018 utilizing the modified retrospective approach. Since there was no net income impact upon adoption of the new guidance, a cumulative effect adjustment to opening retained earnings was not deemed necessary. Consistent with the modified retrospective approach, the Company did not adjust prior period amounts for the debit and credit card costs and the ATM costs reclassifications noted above. See Note 15 Revenue Recognition for more information. In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01, “Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities.” This ASU addresses certain aspects of recognition, measurement, presentation, and disclosure of financial instruments by making targeted improvements to GAAP as follows: (1) require equity investments (except those accounted for under the equity method of accounting or those that result in consolidation of the investee) to be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income. However, an entity may choose to measure equity investments that do not have readily determinable fair values at cost minus impairment, if any, plus or minus changes resulting from observable price changes in orderly transactions for the identical or a similar investment of the same issuer; (2) simplify the impairment assessment of equity investments without readily determinable fair values by requiring a qualitative assessment to identify impairment. When a qualitative assessment indicates that impairment exists, an entity is required to measure the investment at fair value; (3) eliminate the requirement to disclose the fair value of financial instruments measured at amortized cost for entities that are not public business entities; (4) eliminate the requirement for public business entities to disclose the method(s) and significant assumptions used to estimate the fair value that is required to be disclosed for financial instruments measured at amortized cost on the balance sheet; (5) require public business entities to use the exit price notion when measuring the fair value of financial instruments for disclosure purposes; (6) require an entity to present separately in other comprehensive income the portion of the total change in the fair value of a liability resulting from a change in the instrument-specific credit risk when the entity has elected to measure the liability at fair value in accordance with the fair value option for financial instruments; (7) require separate presentation of financial assets and financial liabilities by measurement category and form of financial asset (that is, securities or loans and receivables) on the balance sheet or the accompanying notes to the financial statements; and (8) clarify that an entity should evaluate the need for a valuation allowance on a deferred tax asset related to available-for-sale securities in combination with the entity’s other deferred tax assets. The adoption of ASU No. 2016-01 on January 1, 2018 did not have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. In accordance with (5) above, the Company measured the fair value of its loan portfolio as of March 31, 2018 using an exit price notion (see Note 14 Fair Value of Assets and Liabilities). In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-15, “Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments.” Current GAAP is unclear or does not include specific guidance on how to classify certain transactions in the statement of cash flows. This ASU is intended to reduce diversity in practice in how eight particular transactions are classified in the statement of cash flows. ASU No. 2016-15 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. Entities are required to apply the guidance retrospectively. If it is impracticable to apply the guidance retrospectively for an issue, the amendments related to that issue would be applied prospectively. The Company adopted ASU No. 2016-15 on January 1, 2018. ASU No. 2016-15 did not have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. In March 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-07, “Improving the Presentation of Net Periodic Pension Cost and Net Periodic Postretirement Benefit Cost.” Under the new guidance, employers are required to present the service cost component of the net periodic benefit cost in the same income statement line item (e.g., Salaries and Benefits) as other employee compensation costs arising from services rendered during the period. In addition, only the service cost component will be eligible for capitalization in assets. Employers will present the other components of net periodic benefit cost separately (e.g., Other Noninterest Expense) from the line item that includes the service cost. ASU No. 2017-07 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. Employers will apply the guidance on the presentation of the components of net periodic benefit cost in the income statement retrospectively. The guidance limiting the capitalization of net periodic benefit cost in assets to the service cost component will be applied prospectively. The Company adopted ASU No. 2017-07 on January 1, 2018 and utilized the ASU’s practical expedient allowing entities to estimate amounts for comparative periods using the information previously disclosed in their pension and other postretirement benefit plan footnote. ASU No. 2017-07 did not have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. In February 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-02, “Reclassification of Certain Tax Effects from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income.” This ASU allows a reclassification from accumulated other comprehensive income (“AOCI”) to retained earnings for certain income tax effects stranded in AOCI as a result of the Tax Act. Consequently, the reclassification eliminates the stranded tax effects resulting from the Tax Act and is intended to improve the usefulness of information reported to financial statement users. However, because the ASU only relates to the reclassification of the income tax effects of the Tax Act, the underlying guidance that requires the effect of a change in tax laws or rates to be included in income from continuing operations is not affected. ASU No. 2018-02 is effective for the Company's reporting period beginning on January 1, 2019; early adoption is permitted. The Company elected to early adopt ASU No. 2018-02 during the first quarter of 2018, and elected to reclassify the income tax effects of the Tax Act from AOCI to retained earnings. The reclassification decreased AOCI and increased retained earnings by $7.5 million, with zero net effect on total shareholders’ equity. The Company utilizes the individual securities approach when releasing income tax effects from AOCI for its investment securities. Accounting Standards Pending Adoption In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, “Leases.” Under the new guidance, lessees will be required to recognize the following for all leases (with the exception of short-term leases): 1) a lease liability, which is the present value of a lessee’s obligation to make lease payments, and 2) a right-of-use asset, which is an asset that represents the lessee’s right to use, or control the use of, a specified asset for the lease term. Lessor accounting under the new guidance remains largely unchanged as it is substantially equivalent to existing guidance for sales-type leases, direct financing leases, and operating leases. Leveraged leases have been eliminated, although lessors can continue to account for existing leveraged leases using the current accounting guidance. Other limited changes were made to align lessor accounting with the lessee accounting model and the new revenue recognition standard. All entities will classify leases to determine how to recognize lease-related revenue and expense. Quantitative and qualitative disclosures will be required by lessees and lessors to meet the objective of enabling users of financial statements to assess the amount, timing, and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases. The intention is to require enough information to supplement the amounts recorded in the financial statements so that users can understand more about the nature of an entity’s leasing activities. ASU No. 2016-02 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018; early adoption is permitted. All entities are required to use a modified retrospective approach for leases that exist or are entered into after the beginning of the earliest comparative period in the financial statements. They have the option to use certain relief; full retrospective application is prohibited. The Company has several lease agreements, such as branch locations, which are currently considered operating leases, and therefore, not recognized on the Company’s consolidated statements of condition. The Company expects the new guidance will require these lease agreements to be recognized on the consolidated statements of condition as a right-of-use asset and a corresponding lease liability. Therefore, the Company’s preliminary evaluation indicates the provisions of ASU No. 2016-02 are expected to impact the Company’s consolidated statements of condition, along with our regulatory capital ratios. However, the Company continues to evaluate the extent of potential impact the new guidance will have on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. The Company is nearing completion of identifying a complete inventory of arrangements containing a lease and accumulating the lease data necessary to apply the amended guidance. In addition, the Company has obtained new software to aid in the transition to the new leasing guidance. In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13, “Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments.” This ASU significantly changes how entities will measure credit losses for most financial assets and certain other instruments that aren’t measured at fair value through net income. In issuing the standard, the FASB is responding to criticism that today’s guidance delays recognition of credit losses. The standard will replace today’s “incurred loss” approach with an “expected loss” model. The new model, referred to as the current expected credit loss (“CECL”) model, will apply to: (1) financial assets subject to credit losses and measured at amortized cost, and (2) certain off-balance sheet credit exposures. This includes, but is not limited to, loans, leases, held-to-maturity securities, loan commitments, and financial guarantees. The CECL model does not apply to available-for-sale (“AFS”) debt securities. For AFS debt securities with unrealized losses, entities will measure credit losses in a manner similar to what they do today, except that the credit losses will be recognized as allowances rather than reductions in the amortized cost of the securities. As a result, entities will recognize improvements to estimated credit losses immediately in earnings rather than as interest income over time, as they do today. The ASU also simplifies the accounting model for purchased credit-impaired debt securities and loans. ASU 2016-13 also expands the disclosure requirements regarding an entity’s assumptions, models, and methods for estimating the allowance for loan and lease losses. In addition, entities will need to disclose the amortized cost balance for each class of financial asset by credit quality indicator, disaggregated by the year of origination. ASU No. 2016-13 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019; early adoption is permitted for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018. Entities will apply the standard’s provisions as a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the first reporting period in which the guidance is effective (i.e., modified retrospective approach). The Company is continuing its implementation efforts through its Company-wide implementation team. This team has assigned roles and responsibilities, key tasks to complete, and a general timeline to be followed. The implementation team meets periodically to discuss the latest developments and ensure progress is being made. The team also keeps current on evolving interpretations and industry practices related to ASU 2016-13 via webcasts, publications, conferences, and peer bank meetings. The team continues to evaluate and validate data resources and different loss methodologies. The Company has also engaged an outside consultant to assist with the methodology review and validation, as well as other key aspects of implementing the standard. The Company’s preliminary evaluation indicates the provisions of ASU No. 2016-13 are expected to impact the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements, in particular the level of the reserve for credit losses. However, the Company continues to evaluate the extent of the potential impact. In August 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-12, “Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities.” This ASU’s objectives are to (1) improve the transparency and understandability of information conveyed to financial statement users about an entity’s risk management activities by better aligning the entity’s financial reporting for hedging relationships with those risk management activities; and (2) reduce the complexity of and simplify the application of hedge accounting by preparers. ASU No. 2017-12 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018; early adoption is permitted. The Company currently does not designate any derivative financial instruments as formal hedging relationships, and therefore, does not utilize hedge accounting. However, the Company is currently evaluating this ASU to determine whether its provisions will enhance the Company’s ability to employ risk management strategies, while improving the transparency and understanding of those strategies for financial statement users.

Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Basis of Presentation

Bank of Hawaii Corporation (the “Parent”) is a Delaware corporation and a bank holding company headquartered in Honolulu, Hawaii. Bank of Hawaii Corporation and its subsidiaries (collectively, the “Company”) provide a broad range of financial products and services to customers in Hawaii, Guam, and other Pacific Islands. The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Parent and its subsidiaries. The Parent’s principal operating subsidiary is Bank of Hawaii (the “Bank”).

The consolidated financial statements in this report have not been audited by an independent registered public accounting firm, but in the opinion of management, reflect all adjustments necessary for a fair presentation of the results for the interim periods. All such adjustments are of a normal recurring nature. Intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. Certain prior period information has been reclassified to conform to the current period presentation. Operating results for the interim periods disclosed herein are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the full fiscal year or for any future period.

The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Rule 10-01 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and accompanying notes required by GAAP for complete financial statements and should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and related notes included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017.

Use of Estimates in the Preparation of Financial Statements

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results may differ from those estimates and such differences could be material to the financial statements.

Variable Interest Entities

Variable interests are defined as contractual ownership or other interests in an entity that change with fluctuations in an entity’s net asset value. The primary beneficiary consolidates the variable interest entity (“VIE”). The primary beneficiary is defined as the enterprise that has both the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance and the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits that could be significant to the VIE.

The Company has limited partnership interests in several low-income housing partnerships. These partnerships provide funds for the construction and operation of apartment complexes that provide affordable housing to lower-income households. If these developments successfully attract a specified percentage of residents falling in that lower-income range, state and/or federal income tax credits are made available to the partners. The tax credits are generally recognized over 10 years. In order to continue receiving the tax credits each year over the life of the partnership, the low-income residency targets must be maintained.

Prior to January 1, 2015, the Company utilized the effective yield method whereby the Company recognized tax credits generally over 10 years and amortized the initial cost of the investment to provide a constant effective yield over the period that tax credits are allocated to the Company. On January 1, 2015, the Company adopted ASU No. 2014-01, “Accounting for Investments in Qualified Affordable Housing Projects” prospectively for new investments. ASU No. 2014-01 permits reporting entities to make an accounting policy election to account for their investments in qualified affordable housing projects using the proportional amortization method if certain conditions are met. As permitted by ASU No. 2014-01, the Company elected to continue to utilize the effective yield method for investments made prior to January 1, 2015.

Unfunded commitments to fund these low-income housing partnerships were $15.0 million and $17.5 million as of March 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017, respectively. These unfunded commitments are unconditional and legally binding and are recorded in other liabilities in the consolidated statements of condition. See Note 6 Affordable Housing Projects Tax Credit Partnerships for more information.

The Company also has limited partnership interests in solar energy tax credit partnership investments. These partnerships develop, build, own and operate solar renewable energy projects. Over the course of these investments, the Company expects to receive federal and state tax credits, tax-related benefits, and excess cash available for distribution, if any. The Company may be called to sell its interest in the limited partnerships through a call option once all investment tax credits have been recognized. Tax benefits associated with these investments are generally recognized over six years.

These entities meet the definition of a VIE; however, the Company is not the primary beneficiary of the entities as the general partner has both the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact the economic performance of the entities and the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits that could be significant to the entities. While the partnership agreements allow the limited partners, through a majority vote, to remove the general partner, this right is not deemed to be substantive as the general partner can only be removed for cause.

The investments in these entities are initially recorded at cost, which approximates the maximum exposure to loss as a result of the Company’s involvement with these unconsolidated entities. The balance of the Company’s investments in these entities was $86.3 million and $87.6 million as of March 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017, respectively, and is included in other assets in the consolidated statements of condition.

Tax Cuts and Jobs Act

Public law No. 115-97, known as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the "Tax Act"), enacted on December 22, 2017, reduced the U.S. federal corporate tax rate from 35% to 21% effective January 1, 2018. Also on December 22, 2017, the Securities and Exchange Commission issued Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 118 (“SAB 118”), which provides guidance on accounting for tax effects of the Tax Act. SAB 118 provides a measurement period of up to one year from the enactment date to complete the accounting. Any adjustments during this measurement period will be included in net earnings from continuing operations as an adjustment to income tax expense in the reporting period when such adjustments are determined. Based on the information available and current interpretation of the rules, the Company estimated the impact of the reduction in the corporate tax rate and remeasurement of certain deferred tax assets and liabilities. The provisional amount recorded in the fourth quarter of 2017 related to the remeasurement of the Company's deferred tax balance resulted in additional income tax expense of $3.6 million. An additional $0.1 million was expensed in the first quarter of 2018 due to the remeasurement of the Company’s deferred tax balance. In addition, during the first quarter of 2018, the Company recorded a $2.0 million basis adjustment on its low income housing partnership investments, which consequently reduced income tax expense by the same amount. The final impact of the Tax Act may differ from these estimates as a result of changes in management’s interpretations and assumptions, as well as new guidance that may be issued by the Internal Revenue Service.

Accounting Standards Adopted in 2018

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers.” The standard’s core principle is that a company will recognize revenue when it transfers promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the company expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. In doing so, companies generally will be required to use more judgment and make more estimates than under current guidance. These may include identifying performance obligations in the contract, estimating the amount of variable consideration to include in the transaction price and allocating the transaction price to each separate performance obligation. Subsequent to the issuance of ASU 2014-09, the FASB issued targeted updates to clarify specific implementation issues including ASU No. 2016-08, “Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net),” ASU No. 2016-10, “Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing,” ASU No. 2016-12, “Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients,” and ASU No. 2016-20 “Technical Corrections and Improvements to Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers.” For financial reporting purposes, the standard allows for either full retrospective adoption, meaning the standard is applied to all of the periods presented, or modified retrospective adoption, meaning the standard is applied only to the most current period presented in the financial statements with the cumulative effect of initially applying the standard recognized at the date of initial application. Since the guidance does not apply to revenue associated with financial instruments, including loans and securities that are accounted for under other GAAP, the new guidance did not have a material impact on revenue most closely associated with financial instruments, including interest income and expense. The Company completed its overall assessment of revenue streams and review of related contracts potentially affected by the ASU, including trust and asset management fees, deposit related fees, interchange fees, merchant income, and annuity and insurance commissions. Based on this assessment, the Company concluded that ASU 2014-09 did not materially change the method in which the Company currently recognizes revenue for these revenue streams. The Company also completed its evaluation of certain costs related to these revenue streams to determine whether such costs should be presented as expenses or contra-revenue (i.e., gross vs. net). Based on its evaluation, the Company determined that the classification of certain debit and credit card related costs should change (i.e., costs previously recorded as expense is now recorded as contra-revenue, and vice versa). These classification changes resulted in immaterial changes to both revenue and expense. The Company also determined that certain costs related to ATMs should be recorded as an expense rather than a reduction of revenue. This change did not have a material effect to noninterest income or expense. The Company adopted ASU 2014-09 and its related amendments on its required effective date of January 1, 2018 utilizing the modified retrospective approach. Since there was no net income impact upon adoption of the new guidance, a cumulative effect adjustment to opening retained earnings was not deemed necessary. Consistent with the modified retrospective approach, the Company did not adjust prior period amounts for the debit and credit card costs and the ATM costs reclassifications noted above. See Note 15 Revenue Recognition for more information.

In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01, “Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities.” This ASU addresses certain aspects of recognition, measurement, presentation, and disclosure of financial instruments by making targeted improvements to GAAP as follows: (1) require equity investments (except those accounted for under the equity method of accounting or those that result in consolidation of the investee) to be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income. However, an entity may choose to measure equity investments that do not have readily determinable fair values at cost minus impairment, if any, plus or minus changes resulting from observable price changes in orderly transactions for the identical or a similar investment of the same issuer; (2) simplify the impairment assessment of equity investments without readily determinable fair values by requiring a qualitative assessment to identify impairment. When a qualitative assessment indicates that impairment exists, an entity is required to measure the investment at fair value; (3) eliminate the requirement to disclose the fair value of financial instruments measured at amortized cost for entities that are not public business entities; (4) eliminate the requirement for public business entities to disclose the method(s) and significant assumptions used to estimate the fair value that is required to be disclosed for financial instruments measured at amortized cost on the balance sheet; (5) require public business entities to use the exit price notion when measuring the fair value of financial instruments for disclosure purposes; (6) require an entity to present separately in other comprehensive income the portion of the total change in the fair value of a liability resulting from a change in the instrument-specific credit risk when the entity has elected to measure the liability at fair value in accordance with the fair value option for financial instruments; (7) require separate presentation of financial assets and financial liabilities by measurement category and form of financial asset (that is, securities or loans and receivables) on the balance sheet or the accompanying notes to the financial statements; and (8) clarify that an entity should evaluate the need for a valuation allowance on a deferred tax asset related to available-for-sale securities in combination with the entity’s other deferred tax assets. The adoption of ASU No. 2016-01 on January 1, 2018 did not have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. In accordance with (5) above, the Company measured the fair value of its loan portfolio as of March 31, 2018 using an exit price notion (see Note 14 Fair Value of Assets and Liabilities).

In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-15, “Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments.” Current GAAP is unclear or does not include specific guidance on how to classify certain transactions in the statement of cash flows. This ASU is intended to reduce diversity in practice in how eight particular transactions are classified in the statement of cash flows. ASU No. 2016-15 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. Entities are required to apply the guidance retrospectively. If it is impracticable to apply the guidance retrospectively for an issue, the amendments related to that issue would be applied prospectively. The Company adopted ASU No. 2016-15 on January 1, 2018. ASU No. 2016-15 did not have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

In March 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-07, “Improving the Presentation of Net Periodic Pension Cost and Net Periodic Postretirement Benefit Cost.” Under the new guidance, employers are required to present the service cost component of the net periodic benefit cost in the same income statement line item (e.g., Salaries and Benefits) as other employee compensation costs arising from services rendered during the period. In addition, only the service cost component will be eligible for capitalization in assets. Employers will present the other components of net periodic benefit cost separately (e.g., Other Noninterest Expense) from the line item that includes the service cost. ASU No. 2017-07 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. Employers will apply the guidance on the presentation of the components of net periodic benefit cost in the income statement retrospectively. The guidance limiting the capitalization of net periodic benefit cost in assets to the service cost component will be applied prospectively. The Company adopted ASU No. 2017-07 on January 1, 2018 and utilized the ASU’s practical expedient allowing entities to estimate amounts for comparative periods using the information previously disclosed in their pension and other postretirement benefit plan footnote. ASU No. 2017-07 did not have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

In February 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-02, “Reclassification of Certain Tax Effects from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income.” This ASU allows a reclassification from accumulated other comprehensive income (“AOCI”) to retained earnings for certain income tax effects stranded in AOCI as a result of the Tax Act. Consequently, the reclassification eliminates the stranded tax effects resulting from the Tax Act and is intended to improve the usefulness of information reported to financial statement users. However, because the ASU only relates to the reclassification of the income tax effects of the Tax Act, the underlying guidance that requires the effect of a change in tax laws or rates to be included in income from continuing operations is not affected. ASU No. 2018-02 is effective for the Company's reporting period beginning on January 1, 2019; early adoption is permitted. The Company elected to early adopt ASU No. 2018-02 during the first quarter of 2018, and elected to reclassify the income tax effects of the Tax Act from AOCI to retained earnings. The reclassification decreased AOCI and increased retained earnings by $7.5 million, with zero net effect on total shareholders’ equity. The Company utilizes the individual securities approach when releasing income tax effects from AOCI for its investment securities.

Accounting Standards Pending Adoption

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, “Leases.” Under the new guidance, lessees will be required to recognize the following for all leases (with the exception of short-term leases): 1) a lease liability, which is the present value of a lessee’s obligation to make lease payments, and 2) a right-of-use asset, which is an asset that represents the lessee’s right to use, or control the use of, a specified asset for the lease term. Lessor accounting under the new guidance remains largely unchanged as it is substantially equivalent to existing guidance for sales-type leases, direct financing leases, and operating leases. Leveraged leases have been eliminated, although lessors can continue to account for existing leveraged leases using the current accounting guidance. Other limited changes were made to align lessor accounting with the lessee accounting model and the new revenue recognition standard. All entities will classify leases to determine how to recognize lease-related revenue and expense. Quantitative and qualitative disclosures will be required by lessees and lessors to meet the objective of enabling users of financial statements to assess the amount, timing, and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases. The intention is to require enough information to supplement the amounts recorded in the financial statements so that users can understand more about the nature of an entity’s leasing activities. ASU No. 2016-02 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018; early adoption is permitted. All entities are required to use a modified retrospective approach for leases that exist or are entered into after the beginning of the earliest comparative period in the financial statements. They have the option to use certain relief; full retrospective application is prohibited. The Company has several lease agreements, such as branch locations, which are currently considered operating leases, and therefore, not recognized on the Company’s consolidated statements of condition. The Company expects the new guidance will require these lease agreements to be recognized on the consolidated statements of condition as a right-of-use asset and a corresponding lease liability. Therefore, the Company’s preliminary evaluation indicates the provisions of ASU No. 2016-02 are expected to impact the Company’s consolidated statements of condition, along with our regulatory capital ratios. However, the Company continues to evaluate the extent of potential impact the new guidance will have on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. The Company is nearing completion of identifying a complete inventory of arrangements containing a lease and accumulating the lease data necessary to apply the amended guidance. In addition, the Company has obtained new software to aid in the transition to the new leasing guidance.

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13, “Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments.” This ASU significantly changes how entities will measure credit losses for most financial assets and certain other instruments that aren’t measured at fair value through net income. In issuing the standard, the FASB is responding to criticism that today’s guidance delays recognition of credit losses. The standard will replace today’s “incurred loss” approach with an “expected loss” model. The new model, referred to as the current expected credit loss (“CECL”) model, will apply to: (1) financial assets subject to credit losses and measured at amortized cost, and (2) certain off-balance sheet credit exposures. This includes, but is not limited to, loans, leases, held-to-maturity securities, loan commitments, and financial guarantees. The CECL model does not apply to available-for-sale (“AFS”) debt securities. For AFS debt securities with unrealized losses, entities will measure credit losses in a manner similar to what they do today, except that the credit losses will be recognized as allowances rather than reductions in the amortized cost of the securities. As a result, entities will recognize improvements to estimated credit losses immediately in earnings rather than as interest income over time, as they do today. The ASU also simplifies the accounting model for purchased credit-impaired debt securities and loans. ASU 2016-13 also expands the disclosure requirements regarding an entity’s assumptions, models, and methods for estimating the allowance for loan and lease losses. In addition, entities will need to disclose the amortized cost balance for each class of financial asset by credit quality indicator, disaggregated by the year of origination. ASU No. 2016-13 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019; early adoption is permitted for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018. Entities will apply the standard’s provisions as a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the first reporting period in which the guidance is effective (i.e., modified retrospective approach). The Company is continuing its implementation efforts through its Company-wide implementation team. This team has assigned roles and responsibilities, key tasks to complete, and a general timeline to be followed. The implementation team meets periodically to discuss the latest developments and ensure progress is being made. The team also keeps current on evolving interpretations and industry practices related to ASU 2016-13 via webcasts, publications, conferences, and peer bank meetings. The team continues to evaluate and validate data resources and different loss methodologies. The Company has also engaged an outside consultant to assist with the methodology review and validation, as well as other key aspects of implementing the standard. The Company’s preliminary evaluation indicates the provisions of ASU No. 2016-13 are expected to impact the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements, in particular the level of the reserve for credit losses. However, the Company continues to evaluate the extent of the potential impact.

In August 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-12, “Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities.” This ASU’s objectives are to (1) improve the transparency and understandability of information conveyed to financial statement users about an entity’s risk management activities by better aligning the entity’s financial reporting for hedging relationships with those risk management activities; and (2) reduce the complexity of and simplify the application of hedge accounting by preparers. ASU No. 2017-12 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018; early adoption is permitted. The Company currently does not designate any derivative financial instruments as formal hedging relationships, and therefore, does not utilize hedge accounting. However, the Company is currently evaluating this ASU to determine whether its provisions will enhance the Company’s ability to employ risk management strategies, while improving the transparency and understanding of those strategies for financial statement users.