Basis of Presentation and Significant Accounting Policies (Policies)

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2016

Our consolidated financial statements include the accounts of our wholly owned subsidiaries. Our interests in oil and gas properties are proportionately consolidated. All intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. The information furnished reflects all normal recurring adjustments, which are, in the opinion of management, necessary to provide a fair statement of the results for the interim periods. Operating results for the period ended September 30, 2016 are not necessarily indicative of results that may be expected for the twelve months ended December 31, 2016.

We consolidate the financial statements of CSI Compressco LP and its subsidiaries ("CCLP") as part of our Compression Division, as we determined that CCLP is a variable interest entity and we are the primary beneficiary. We control the financial interests of CCLP and have the ability to direct the activities of CCLP that most significantly impact its economic performance through our ownership of its general partner. The share of CCLP net assets and earnings that is not owned by us is presented as noncontrolling interest in our consolidated financial statements. Our cash flows from our investment in CCLP are limited to the quarterly distributions we receive on our CCLP common units and general partner interest (including incentive distribution rights) and the amounts collected for services we perform on behalf of CCLP, as TETRA's capital structure and CCLP's capital structure are separate, and do not include cross default provisions, cross collateralization provisions, or cross guarantees.

The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with Rule 10-01 of Regulation S-X for interim financial statements required to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") and do not include all information and footnotes required by generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements. These financial statements should be read in connection with the financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2015, and notes thereto included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K, which we filed with the SEC on March 4, 2016.

Reclassifications policy

Certain previously reported financial information has been reclassified to conform to the current year period’s presentation. The impact of such reclassifications was not significant to the prior year period’s overall presentation. These reclassifications include the presentation of deferred financing costs in accordance with the adoption of Accounting Standards Update ("ASU") No. 2015-03 and ASU No. 2015-15 as further discussed below and the allocation of deferred financing costs from Other Expense, net to Interest Expense, net. See Note B - Long-Term Debt and Other Borrowings for further discussion and presentation.

Use of estimates policy

Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP") requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclose contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues, expenses, and impairments during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates, and such differences could be material.

Cash and cash equivalents policy

Cash Equivalents

We consider all highly liquid cash investments with a maturity of three months or less when purchased to be cash equivalents.

Restricted cash policy

Restricted Cash

Restricted cash is classified as a current asset when it is expected to be repaid or settled in the next twelve month period. Restricted cash reported on our balance sheet as of September 30, 2016 consists primarily of escrowed cash associated with our July 2011 purchase of a heavy lift derrick barge. The escrowed cash is expected to be released to the sellers in early 2017.

Inventories policy

Inventories

Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market value. Except for work in progress inventory discussed below, cost is determined using the weighted average method. Components of inventories as of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015 are as follows:



	September 30, 2016		December 31, 2015
	(In Thousands)
Finished goods	$	68,856	$	54,587
Raw materials	3,431		1,731
Parts and supplies	37,577		37,379
Work in progress	18,541		23,312
Total inventories	$	128,405	$	117,009

Finished goods inventories include newly manufactured clear brine fluids as well as used brines that are repurchased from certain customers for recycling. Recycled brines are recorded at cost, using the weighted average method. Work in progress inventory consists primarily of new compressor packages located in the CCLP fabrication facility in Midland, Texas. The cost of work in process is determined using the specific identification method. During the nine month period ended September 30, 2016, $12.0 million of CCLP work in progress inventory was transferred to Property, Plant and Equipment. We write down the value of inventory by an amount equal to the difference between its cost and its market value.

Goodwill policy

Goodwill

Goodwill represents the excess of cost over the fair value of the net assets of businesses acquired in purchase transactions. We perform a goodwill impairment test on an annual basis or whenever indicators of impairment are present. We perform the annual test of goodwill impairment following the fourth quarter of each year. The assessment for goodwill impairment begins with a qualitative assessment of whether it is “more likely than not” that the fair value of each reporting unit is less than its carrying value. This qualitative assessment requires the evaluation, based on the weight of evidence, of the significance of all identified events and circumstances for each reporting unit. During 2015, and continuing into 2016, global oil and natural gas commodity prices, particularly crude oil, were significantly reduced. These low commodity prices have had, and are expected to continue to have, a negative impact on industry drilling and capital expenditure activity, which affects the demand for a portion of our products and services. Due to the decrease in the price of our common stock and the price per common unit of CCLP during the first three months of 2016, our and CCLP's market capitalizations as of March 31, 2016, were below their respective recorded net book values, including goodwill. In addition, the continuing low oil and natural gas commodity price environment resulted in a further negative impact on demand for the products and services for each of our reporting units. As a result of these factors, we determined that it was “more likely than not” that the fair values of certain of our reporting units were less than their respective carrying values as of March 31, 2016.

When the qualitative analysis indicates that it is “more likely than not” that a reporting unit’s fair value is less than its carrying value, the resulting goodwill impairment test consists of a two-step accounting test performed on a reporting unit basis. The first step of the impairment test is to compare the estimated fair value with the recorded net book value (including goodwill) of our business. If the estimated fair value of the reporting unit is higher than the recorded net book value, no impairment is deemed to exist and no further testing is required. If, however, the estimated fair value of the reporting unit is below the recorded net book value, then a second step must be performed to determine the goodwill impairment required, if any. In this second step, the estimated fair value from the first step is used as the purchase price in a hypothetical acquisition of the reporting unit. Business combination accounting rules are followed to determine a hypothetical purchase price allocation to the reporting unit’s assets and liabilities. The residual amount of goodwill that results from this hypothetical purchase price allocation is compared to the recorded amount of goodwill for the reporting unit, and the recorded amount is written down to the hypothetical amount, if lower.

Because quoted market prices for our reporting units other than Compression are not available, our management must apply judgment in determining the estimated fair value of these reporting units for purposes of performing the goodwill impairment test. Management uses all available information to make these fair value determinations, including the present value of expected future cash flows using discount rates commensurate with the risks involved in the assets. The resultant fair values calculated for the reporting units are then compared to observable metrics for other companies in our industry or to mergers and acquisitions in our industry to determine whether those valuations, in our judgment, appear reasonable.

The accounting principles regarding goodwill acknowledge that the observed market prices of individual trades of a company’s stock (and thus its computed market capitalization) may not be representative of the fair value of the company as a whole. Substantial value may arise from the ability to take advantage of synergies and other benefits that flow from control over another entity. Consequently, measuring the fair value of a collection of assets and liabilities that operate together in a controlled entity is different from measuring the fair value of a single share of that entity’s common stock. Therefore, once the fair value of the reporting units was determined, we also added a control premium to the calculations. This control premium is judgmental and is based on observed mergers and acquisitions in our industry.

Goodwill Impairment as of March 31, 2016. As part of our internal annual business outlook for each of our reporting units that we performed during the fourth quarter of 2015, we considered changes in the global economic environment that affected our stock price and market capitalization. As part of the first step of goodwill impairment testing as of March 31, 2016, we updated our annual assessment of the future cash flows for each of our reporting units, applying expected long-term growth rates, discount rates, and terminal values that we consider reasonable for each reporting unit. We calculated a present value of the respective cash flows for each of the reporting units to arrive at an estimate of fair value under the income approach, and then used the market approach to corroborate these values.

During the first three months of 2016, low oil and natural gas commodity prices resulted in decreased demand for many of the products and services of each of our reporting units. However, based on updated assumptions as of March 31, 2016, we determined that the fair value of our Fluids Division was significantly in excess of its carrying value, which includes $6.6 million of goodwill. Our Offshore Services and Maritech Divisions had no remaining goodwill as of March 31, 2016. With regard to our Compression Division, demand for low-horsepower wellhead compression services and for sales of compressor equipment decreased significantly and is expected to continue to be decreased for the foreseeable future. In addition, the price per common unit of CCLP as of March 31, 2016 decreased compared to December 31, 2015. Accordingly, the fair value, including the market capitalization for CCLP, for the Compression reporting unit was less than its carrying value as of March 31, 2016, despite impairments recorded as of December 31, 2015. For our Production Testing Division, demand for production testing services decreased in each of the market areas in which we operate, resulting in decreased estimated future cash flows. As a result, the fair value of the Production Testing reporting unit was also less than its carrying value as of March 31, 2016, despite impairments recorded as of December 31, 2015. After making the hypothetical purchase price adjustments as part of the second step of the goodwill impairment test, there was $0.0 million residual purchase price to be allocated to the goodwill of both the Compression and Production Testing reporting units. Based on this analysis, we concluded that full impairments of the $92.4 million of recorded goodwill for Compression and $13.9 million of recorded goodwill for Production Testing were required. Accordingly, during the three month period ended March 31, 2016, $106.2 million was charged to Goodwill Impairment expense in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations.

As of September 30, 2016, we determined that there was no additional impairment of goodwill, as the fair value of our Fluids Division remains in excess of its carrying value. The carrying amounts of goodwill for the Fluids, Production Testing, Compression, and Offshore Services reporting units are net of $23.8 million, $111.8 million, $231.8 million, and $27.2 million, respectively, of accumulated impairment losses. The changes in the carrying amount of goodwill are as follows:



	Fluids		Production Testing			Compression			Offshore Services		Maritech		Total
	(In Thousands)
Balance as of December 31, 2014	$	6,636	$	53,682		$	233,548		$	—	$	—	$	293,866
Goodwill adjustments	—		(39,775		)	(141,146		)	—		—		(180,921		)
Balance as of December 31, 2015	6,636		13,907			92,402			—		—		112,945
Goodwill adjustments	—		(13,907		)	(92,402		)	—		—		(106,309		)
Balance as of September 30, 2016	$	6,636	$	—		$	—		$	—	$	—	$	6,636

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets policy

Impairments of Long-Lived Assets

Impairments of long-lived assets, including identified intangible assets, are determined periodically when indicators of impairment are present. If such indicators are present, the determination of the amount of impairment is based on our judgments as to the future undiscounted operating cash flows to be generated from these assets throughout their remaining estimated useful lives. If these undiscounted cash flows are less than the carrying amount of the related asset, an impairment is recognized for the excess of the carrying value over its fair value. Fair value of intangible assets is generally determined using the discounted present value of future cash flows using discount rates commensurate with the risks inherent with the specific assets. Assets held for sale are recorded at the lower of carrying value or estimated fair value less estimated selling costs.

During the first nine months of 2016, primarily as a result of continuing decreased demand due to current market conditions, our Compression, Production Testing, and Fluids segments recorded $7.9 million, $2.8 million, and $0.3 million, respectively, of impairments associated with certain identified intangible assets. These amounts were charged to Impairments of Long-Lived Assets expense in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations.

Net income per share policy

Net Income (Loss) per Share

The following is a reconciliation of the weighted average number of common shares outstanding with the number of shares used in the computations of net income (loss) per common and common equivalent share:



	Three Months Ended September 30,		Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2016	2015	2016	2015
	(In Thousands)
Number of weighted average common shares outstanding	91,746	79,219	85,093	79,098
Assumed exercise of stock awards	—	573	—	357
Average diluted shares outstanding	91,746	79,792	85,093	79,455

For the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2016, the average diluted shares outstanding excludes the impact of all outstanding stock awards, as the inclusion of these shares would have been antidilutive due to the net losses recorded during the periods.

Services and rentals revenues policy

Services and Rentals Revenues and Costs

A portion of our services and rentals revenues consist of income pursuant to operating lease arrangements for compressor packages and other equipment assets. For the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, the following operating lease revenues and associated costs were included in services and rentals revenues and cost of services and rentals, respectively, in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations.



	Three Months Ended September 30,				Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2016		2015		2016		2015
	(In Thousands)
Rental revenue	$	15,585	$	30,478	$	41,552	$	122,476
Cost of rental revenue	$	8,558	$	11,245	$	31,424	$	53,680

Foreign currency translation policy

Foreign Currency Translation

We have designated the euro, the British pound, the Norwegian krone, the Canadian dollar, the Brazilian real, the Argentine peso, and the Mexican peso, respectively, as the functional currency for our operations in Finland and Sweden, the United Kingdom, Norway, Canada, Brazil, Argentina, and certain of our operations in Mexico. The U.S. dollar is the designated functional currency for all of our other foreign operations. The cumulative translation effects of translating the applicable accounts from the functional currencies into the U.S. dollar at current exchange rates are included as a separate component of equity. Foreign currency exchange gains and (losses) are included in Other Expense and totaled $(0.2) million and $(0.5) million during the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2016 and $0.5 million and $(1.8) million during the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2015, respectively.

Income taxes policy

Income Taxes

Our consolidated provision for income taxes during the first nine months of 2015 and 2016 is primarily attributable to taxes in certain foreign jurisdictions and Texas gross margin taxes. Our consolidated effective tax rates for the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2016 of negative 6.4% and negative 0.9%, respectively, were primarily the result of losses generated in entities for which no related tax benefit has been recorded. The losses generated by these entities do not result in tax benefits due to offsetting valuation allowances being recorded against the related net deferred tax assets. We establish a valuation allowance to reduce the deferred tax assets when it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. Included in our deferred tax assets are net operating loss carryforwards and tax credits that are available to offset future income tax liabilities in the U.S. as well as in certain foreign jurisdictions. Further, the effective tax rate is negatively impacted by the nondeductible portion of our goodwill impairments recorded during the three month period ended March 31, 2016.

Fair value measurements policy

Fair Value Measurements

Fair value is defined as “the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date” within an entity’s principal market, if any. The principal market is the market in which the reporting entity would sell the asset or transfer the liability with the greatest volume and level of activity, regardless of whether it is the market in which the entity will ultimately transact for a particular asset or liability or if a different market is potentially more advantageous. Accordingly, this exit price concept may result in a fair value that may differ from the transaction price or market price of the asset or liability.

Under U.S. generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP"), the fair value hierarchy prioritizes inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value. Fair value measurements should maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs, where possible. Observable inputs are developed based on market data obtained from sources independent of the reporting entity. Unobservable inputs may be needed to measure fair value in situations where there is little or no market activity for the asset or liability at the measurement date and are developed based on the best information available in the circumstances, which could include the reporting entity’s own judgments about the assumptions market participants would utilize in pricing the asset or liability.

We utilize fair value measurements to account for certain items and account balances within our consolidated financial statements. Fair value measurements are utilized in the determination of the carrying value of the CCLP Preferred Units (a Level 3 fair value measurement), which were issued in August and September 2016. We also utilize fair value measurements on a recurring basis in the accounting for our foreign currency forward sale derivative contracts. For these fair value measurements, we utilize the quoted value as determined by our counterparty financial institution (a level 2 fair value measurement). Fair value measurements are also utilized on a nonrecurring basis, such as in the allocation of purchase consideration for acquisition transactions to the assets and liabilities acquired, including intangible assets and goodwill (a level 3 fair value measurement), the initial recording of our decommissioning and other asset retirement obligations, and for the impairment of long-lived assets, including goodwill (a level 3 fair value measurement). The fair value of certain of our financial instruments, which include cash, restricted cash, accounts receivable, short-term borrowings, and long-term debt pursuant to our bank credit agreements, approximate their carrying amounts. The aggregate fair values of our long-term 11% Senior Notes and Tender Offer Senior Notes at September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, were approximately $121.9 million and $229.8 million, respectively, based on current interest rates on those dates, which were different from the stated interest rate on the on these notes. Those fair values compared to carrying amounts of such notes of $125.0 million and $275.0 million, respectively. The fair values of the publicly traded CCLP 7.25% Senior Notes (as herein defined) at September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, were approximately $312.7 million and $259.9 million, respectively, (a level 2 fair value measurement) based on current interest rates on those dates, which were different from the stated interest rate on the CCLP 7.25% Senior Notes. Those fair values compared to a face amounts of $330.0 million and $350.0 million, respectively. See Note C - Long-Term Debt and Other Borrowings, for further discussion. We calculated the fair values of our 11% Senior Notes and Tender Offer Senior Notes as of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, internally, using current market conditions and average cost of debt (a level 2 fair value measurement).

The CCLP Preferred Units are valued using a lattice modeling technique that, among a number of lattice structures, includes significant unobservable items. These unobservable items include (i) the volatility of the trading price of CCLP's common units compared to a volatility analysis of equity prices of CCLP's comparable peer companies, (ii) a yield analysis that utilizes market information related to the debt yields of comparable peer companies, and (iii) a future conversion price analysis. The fair valuation of the CCLP Preferred Units liability is increased by, among other factors, projected increases in CCLP's common unit price, and by increases in the volatility and decreases in the debt yields of CCLP's comparable peer companies. Increases (or decreases) in the fair value of CCLP Preferred Units will increase (decrease) the associated liability and result in future adjustments to earnings for the associated valuation losses (gains).

A summary of these fair value measurements as of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, is as follows:



				Fair Value Measurements Using
	Total as of			Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets or Liabilities		Significant Other Observable Inputs			Significant Unobservable Inputs
Description	September 30, 2016			(Level 1)		(Level 2)			(Level 3)
	(In Thousands)
CCLP Series A Preferred Units	$	77,018		$	—	$	—		$	77,018
Asset for foreign currency derivative contracts	6			—		6			—
Liability for foreign currency derivative contracts	(105		)	—		(105		)	—
Net liability	$	76,919



				Fair Value Measurements Using
	Total as of			Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets or Liabilities		Significant Other Observable Inputs			Significant Unobservable Inputs
Description	December 31, 2015			(Level 1)		(Level 2)			(Level 3)
	(In Thousands)
Asset for foreign currency derivative contracts	$	23		$	—	$	23		$	—
Liability for foreign currency derivative contracts	(385		)	—		(385		)	—
Acquisition contingent consideration liability	—			—		—			—
Net liability	$	(362	)

During the first quarter of 2016, in connection with the review of goodwill impairment of our Compression and Production Testing Divisions, these segments recorded total impairment charges of $117.1 million, reflecting the decreased fair value for certain assets. For further discussion, see "Goodwill" and "Impairment of Long-Lived Assets" section above. The fair values used in these impairment calculations were estimated based on a variety of measurements, including current replacement cost and discounted estimated future cash flows, all of which are based on significant unobservable inputs (a level 3 fair value measurement) in accordance with the fair value hierarchy. A summary of these nonrecurring fair value measurements as of March 31, 2016, using the fair value hierarchy is as follows:



			Fair Value Measurements Using
	Total as of		Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets or Liabilities	Significant Other Observable Inputs	Significant Unobservable Inputs	Year-to-Date Impairment
Description	March 31, 2016		(Level 1)	(Level 2)	(Level 3)	Losses
	(In Thousands)
Compression intangible assets	$	—	—	—	—	$	7,866
Compression goodwill	—		—	—	—	92,334
Production Testing intangible assets	—		—	—	—	2,805
Production Testing goodwill	—		—	—	—	13,871
Other	—		—	—	—	256
Total	$	—				$	117,132

New Accounting Pronouncements policy

New Accounting Pronouncements

In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued Accounting Standards Update ("ASU") 2014-09, "Revenue from Contracts with Customers." ASU 2014-09 supersedes the revenue recognition requirements in Accounting Standards Codification ("ASC") 605, Revenue Recognition, and most industry-specific guidance. The core principle of the guidance is that an entity should recognize revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. This ASU is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within those years, under either full or modified retrospective adoption. We are currently assessing the potential effects of these changes to our consolidated financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-08, "Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net)" to clarify the guidance on principal versus agent considerations. This ASU does not change the effective date or adoption method under ASU 2014-09 which is noted above.

In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-10, "Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing" to clarify the guidance on identifying performance obligations and the licensing implementation guidance. This ASU does not change the effective date or adoption method under ASU 2014-09, which is noted above.

Additionally in May 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-12, "Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients". This ASU addresses and amends several aspects of ASU 2014-09, but does not change the core principle of the guidance. This ASU does not change the effective date or adoption method under ASU 2014-09 which is noted above.

In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-15, “Presentation of Financial Statements - Going Concern.” The ASU provides guidance on management's responsibility to evaluate whether there is substantial doubt about an entity's ability to continue as a going concern and in certain circumstances to provide related footnote disclosures. The ASU is effective for annual periods ending after December 15, 2016, and for annual and interim periods thereafter. Early adoption is permitted. We do not expect the adoption of this standard to have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-03, “Interest - Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs.” The ASU requires entities that have historically presented debt financing costs as an asset to present those costs as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of the related debt liability. This presentation will result in the debt issuance costs being presented the same way debt discounts have historically been handled. The ASU does not change the recognition, measurement, or subsequent measurement guidance for debt issuance costs. The ASU is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015, and interim periods within those annual periods and is to be applied retrospectively. As a result of the retrospective adoption of this guidance during the quarter, deferred financing costs of $10.9 million and $13.5 million at September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively, are netted against the carrying values of the Senior Notes of TETRA and CCLP.

Additionally, in accordance with ASU No. 2015-15, "Interest-Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Presentation and Subsequent Measurement of Debt Issuance Costs Associated with Line-of-Credit Arrangements", issued in August 2015, we elected to present the deferred financing costs associated with the bank credit facilities of $6.3 million and $6.7 million at September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively, as netted against the outstanding amount of the bank credit facilities of TETRA and CCLP.

In July 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-11, “Simplifying the Measurement of Inventory” (Topic 330), which simplifies the subsequent measurement of inventory by requiring entities to measure inventory at the lower of cost or net realizable value, except for inventory measured using the last-in, first-out (LIFO) or the retail inventory methods. The ASU requires entities to compare the cost of inventory to one measure - net realizable value. Net realizable value is the estimated selling price in the ordinary course of business, less reasonably predictable costs of completion, disposal and transportation. The ASU is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016, and interim periods within those annual periods, and is to be applied prospectively with early adoption permitted. We do not expect the adoption of this standard to have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, "Leases" (Topic 842) to increase comparability and transparency among different organizations. Organizations are required to recognize lease assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet and disclose key information about the leasing arrangements and cash flows. The ASU is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim periods within those annual periods, under a modified retrospective adoption with early adoption permitted. We are currently assessing the potential effects of these changes to our consolidated financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, "Compensation-Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting" as part of a simplification initiative. The update addresses and simplifies several aspects of accounting for share-based payment transactions. The ASU is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016, and interim periods within those annual periods, with early adoption permitted, and is to be applied using either modified retrospective, retrospective, or prospective transition method based on which amendment is being applied. We are currently assessing the potential effects of these changes to our consolidated financial statements.

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13, "Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments." ASU 2016-13 amends the impairment model to utilize an expected loss methodology in place of the currently used incurred loss methodology, which will result in the more timely recognition of losses. ASU 2016-13, which has an effective date of the first quarter of fiscal 2022, also applies to employee benefit plan accounting. We are currently assessing the potential effects of these changes to our consolidated financial statements and employee benefit plan accounting.

In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15, "Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments" to reduce diversity in practice in classification of certain transactions in the statement of cash flows. The ASU is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within those annual periods, with early adoption permitted, under a retrospective transition adoption. We are currently assessing the potential effects of these changes to our consolidated financial statements.