Bill and Hold Transactions. We hold certain products manufactured by us on a “bill-and-hold” basis for our customers’ convenience. Revenue is recognized for these “bill-and-hold” arrangements in accordance with SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin (“SAB”) 104, which requires consideration of, among other things, whether the customer has made a fixed commitment to purchase the product; the existence of a substantial business purpose for the arrangement; the “bill-and-hold” arrangement is at the request of the customer; the scheduled delivery date must be reasonable and consistent with the buyer’s business purpose; title and risk of ownership must pass to the customer, including any decline in the market value of the product; the product is complete and ready for shipment; the product has been segregated from our inventory; payment terms for such arrangements have not been modified from our normal billing and credit terms; our custodial risks must be insurable and insured; and no further performance obligations by us exist. Extended procedures are not necessary to assure that there are no exceptions to the customer’s commitment to accept and pay for the product.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Inventory Valuation. In July 2015, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2015-11, Simplifying the Measurement of Inventory, which became effective in the first quarter of 2017. ASU 2015-11 requires that inventory be valued at the lower of cost or net realizable value, which is defined as the estimated selling price in the ordinary course of business, less reasonably predictable costs of completion, disposal, and transportation. We previously valued inventory at the lower of cost or net realizable value less a reasonable profit margin as allowed by previous inventory valuation guidance. The adoption of ASU 2015-11 increased our inventory valuation by $1.7 million as of September 30, 2017.

Revenue Recognition. ASU 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, issued in May 2014, ASU 2016-10, Revenue from Contracts with Customers: Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing, and subsequent amendments, enhance the comparability of revenue recognition practices across entities, industries, jurisdictions, and capital markets. The principles-based guidance provides a framework for addressing revenue recognition issues comprehensively. The standards require that revenue be recognized that reflects the consideration the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for goods or services, which are referred to as performance obligations.

ASU 2014-09 will be effective in the first quarter of 2018. Two adoption methods are allowed under ASU 2014-09: the full retrospective method and modified retrospective method. We have elected to use the modified retrospective method by applying the revised guidance to contracts that have not been completed as of January 1, 2018. Retained earnings will be adjusted for the cumulative effect of the change on January 1, 2018. The new standard requires comprehensive annual and interim disclosures regarding the nature, amount, timing, and uncertainty of recognized revenue, which will be provided in the year of adoption along with the impact on recognized revenue compared with revenue that would have been recognized under prior guidance. Qualitative and quantitative disclosures will be required regarding:

•

disaggregation of our current disclosures of revenue by segment and geographic area into categories that depict how revenue and cash flows are impacted by economic factors,

•

timing of recognition, contract duration, and sales channel,

•

billed and unbilled contracts with customers, including revenue and impairments recognized, disaggregation, and information about contract balances and performance obligations,

•

significant judgments and changes in judgments required to determine the transaction price, amounts allocated to performance obligations, and the timing for recognizing revenue resulting from the satisfaction of performance obligations,

•

assets recognized from the costs to obtain or fulfill a contract (e.g., commissions), and

•

bad debt provisions related to billed and unbilled receivables.

Upon evaluation, we believe the key changes in the guidance that impact our revenue recognition relate to the timing of revenue recognition and allocation of contract revenue between services and software licenses. The requirement to defer incremental contract acquisition costs (e.g., commissions) and recognize them over the contract period or expected customer life will result in the recognition of a deferred charge on our balance sheet. We are assessing the impact on our consolidated financial statements, systems, and controls upon adoption.

Principal vs Agent. ASU 2016-08, Principal vs. Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross vs Net), issued in March 2016, streamlines and clarifies the criteria for identifying whether an entity is satisfying a performance obligation as the principal or agent in the transaction. The entity that is responsible for fulfilling the contractual obligations related to the good or service is acting as the principal and recognizes the gross amount of consideration. The entity that is responsible only for arranging delivery to the customer is acting as the agent and recognizes revenue in the amount of the fee or commission related to arranging for the delivery of the good or service.

Several indicators of the nature of the relationship that are considered under current guidance have been streamlined and clarified in the new guidance by focusing more specifically on the performance obligations that must be fulfilled in the transaction, which entity carries the inventory risk in the transaction, and which entity controls the pricing of the good or service. Credit risk will no longer be a criterion. This guidance will be effective in the first quarter of 2018. We are evaluating its impact on our revenue and results of operations related to third party ink revenue and certain printer components.

Financial Instruments. ASU 2016-13, Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments, issued in June 2016, amends current guidance regarding other-than-temporary impairment of available-for-sale debt securities. The new guidance requires an estimate of expected credit loss when fair value is below the amortized cost of the asset without regard for the length of time that the fair value has been below the amortized cost or the historical or implied volatility of the asset. Credit losses on available-for-sale debt securities will be limited to the difference between the security’s amortized cost basis and its fair value. The use of an allowance to record estimated credit losses (and subsequent recoveries) will also be required under the new guidance.

ASU 2016-13 will be effective in the first quarter of 2020. We are evaluating its impact on the carrying value of our available-for-sale securities and results of operations.

Settlement of Convertible Debt. ASU 2016-15, Statement of Cash Flows: Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments, issued in August 2016, requires that cash settlements of principal amounts of debt instruments with coupon interest rates that are insignificant in relation to the effective interest rate of the debt must classify the portion of the principal payment attributable to the accreted interest related to the debt discount as cash outflows from operating activities. This is consistent with the classification of the coupon interest payments.

ASU 2016-15 will be effective in the first quarter of 2018. Accordingly, $63.6 million debt discount attributable to the difference between the 0.75% coupon interest rate on our 0.75% Convertible Senior Notes Due 2019 (“Notes”) and the 4.98% (5.46% inclusive of debt issuance costs) effective interest rate will be classified as an operating cash outflow in the Condensed Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows upon cash settlement. If we settle the conversion of the Notes in cash on or prior to the maturity date of September 1, 2019, the cash outflow of $63.6 million will be recorded in operating activities in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows.

Restricted Cash. In November 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-18, Statement of Cash Flows: Restricted Cash, requiring that the statement of cash flows explain the change in cash, cash equivalents, and amounts generally described as restricted cash or restricted cash equivalents. Therefore, amounts generally described as restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents will 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. Under current guidance, changes in restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents are included in operating or investing activities in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.

ASU 2016-18 will be effective in the first quarter of 2018. Changes in restricted cash related to the off-balance sheet financing arrangement described in Note 8 – Commitments and Contingencies of the Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements will no longer be presented as an investing cash outflow, but will instead be presented as a component of the beginning and ending balance of cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.

Lease Arrangements. Under current guidance, the classification of a lease by a lessee as either an operating or capital lease determines whether an asset and liability is recognized on the balance sheet. ASU 2016-02, Leases, issued in February 2016 and effective in the first quarter of 2019, requires that a lessee recognize an asset and liability on its balance sheet related to all leases with terms in excess of one year. For all leases, a lessee will be required to recognize a right-of-use asset and a lease liability, initially measured at the present value of the lease payments, in the statement of financial position. The right-to-use asset represents the right to use the underlying asset during the lease term.

The recognition, measurement, and presentation of expenses and cash flows by a lessee have not significantly changed from previous guidance. There continues to be a differentiation between finance leases and operating leases. The criteria for determining whether a lease is a financing or operating lease are substantially the same as existing guidance except that the “bright line” percentages have been removed.

•

For finance leases, interest is recognized on the lease liability separately from depreciation of the right-of-use asset in the statement of operations. Principal repayments are classified within financing activities and interest payments are classified as operating activities in the statement of cash flows.

•

For operating leases, a lessee is required to recognize lease expense generally on a straight-line basis. All operating lease payments are classified as operating activities in the statement of cash flows.

The current build-to-suit lease accounting guidance will be rescinded by the new guidance, although simplified guidance will remain regarding lessee control during the construction period. Consequently, the accounting for build-to-suit leases will be the same as finance leases unless the lessee control provisions are applicable.

We have not quantified the impact, but the requirement to recognize a right-of-use asset and a lease liability related to operating leases will have a material impact on our consolidated financial position as reflected in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. As stated above, the recognition, measurement, and presentation of expenses and cash flows by a lessee have not significantly changed from previous guidance; accordingly, the impact on our results of operations as reflected in our Consolidated Statements of Operations is not expected to be material.

Definition of a Business. ASU 2017-01, Business Combinations: Clarifying the Definition of a Business, was issued in January 2017, and significantly narrows how businesses are defined. Under current guidance, a business is defined as an integrated set of assets and activities that usually consists of business processes and their related inputs and outputs. However, business process outputs are not required to be present and only some business process inputs and business processes must be present if the acquiring entity can produce outputs by integrating the acquired set of assets and activities with its own inputs and processes. Essentially, existing guidance only requires that business processes and inputs be present in order to constitute a business.

Under ASU 2017-01, when substantially all of the fair value of the gross assets acquired is concentrated in a single asset or group of similar identifiable assets, then the assets acquired do not constitute a business. If substantially all of the fair value of the gross assets acquired is not concentrated in a single asset or group of similar assets, then the assets acquired may constitute a business if certain criteria are met. We must determine whether the acquired gross assets and activities include an input and a “substantive” process that together “significantly” contribute to the ability to create an output. A framework and specific criteria are provided to assist with the evaluation of whether a process is “substantive” and “significantly contributes” to the ability to create an output. “Output” is narrowly defined to be consistent with the description of a performance obligation in the new revenue guidance. Missing inputs and processes may not be replaced by integration with our own inputs and processes under the new guidance.

Our condensed consolidated financial statements may be impacted if an acquisition does not qualify as a business combination after ASU 2017-01 is effective in the first quarter of 2018. Such acquisitions would be accounted for as asset purchases.

Nonfinancial Asset Derecognition. In February 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-05, Other Income – Gains and Losses from the Derecognition of Nonfinancial Assets: Clarifying the Scope of Asset Derecognition and Accounting for Partial Sales of Nonfinancial Assets, which clarifies the scope of recent guidance as it relates to nonfinancial asset derecognition and the accounting for partial sales of nonfinancial assets. The ASU conforms the derecognition guidance as it relates to nonfinancial assets with the derecognition guidance in the new revenue standard (ASU 2014-09) and is expected to have a material impact on the accounting for real estate dispositions.

ASU 2017-05 will be effective in the first quarter of 2018. We have elected to adopt the modified retrospective method of implementation.

Derivatives and Hedging

We are exposed to market risk and foreign currency exchange risk from changes in foreign currency exchange rates, which could affect operating results, financial position, and cash flows. We manage our exposure to these risks through our regular operating and financing activities and, when appropriate, through use of derivative financial instruments. These derivative financial instruments are used to hedge monetary assets and liabilities, intercompany balances, trade receivables, anticipated cash flows, and to reduce earnings and cash flow volatility resulting from shifts in market rates. Our objective is to offset gains and losses resulting from these exposures with losses and gains on the derivative contracts used to hedge them, thereby reducing volatility of earnings or protecting fair values of assets and liabilities. We do not have any leveraged derivatives, nor do we use derivative contracts for speculative purposes. ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging, requires the fair value of all derivative instruments, including those embedded in other contracts, to be recorded as assets or liabilities in our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet. The related cash flow impacts of our derivative contracts are reflected as cash flows from operating activities.

Our exposures are primarily related to non-U.S. dollar-denominated revenue in Europe, the U.K., Latin America, China, Israel, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, and to non-U.S. dollar-denominated operating expenses in Europe, India, Japan, the U.K., China, Israel, Brazil, and Australia. We hedge our operating expense cash flow exposure in Indian rupees. We hedge balance sheet remeasurement exposure associated with British pound sterling, Brazilian real, Israeli shekel, Japanese yen, Chinese renminbi, and Euro-denominated intercompany balances; Brazilian real, British pound sterling, Australian dollar, Canadian dollar, Israeli shekel, and Euro-denominated trade receivables; and British pound sterling, Indian rupee, Israeli shekel, Canadian dollar, and Euro-denominated net monetary assets.

By their nature, derivative instruments involve, to varying degrees, elements of market and credit risk. The market risk associated with these instruments resulting from currency exchange movement is expected to offset the market risk of the underlying transactions, assets, and liabilities being hedged (i.e., operating expense exposure in Indian rupees; the collection of trade receivables denominated in currencies other than their respective reporting entity’s functional currency, and the settlement of intercompany balances denominated in currencies other than their functional currency). Under our master netting agreements with our foreign currency derivative counterparties, we are allowed to net transactions of the same currency with a single net amount payable by one party to the other. The derivatives held by us are not subject to any credit contingent features negotiated with these counterparties. We are not required to pledge cash collateral related to these foreign currency derivative contracts. We do not believe there is significant risk of loss from non-performance by the counterparty associated with these instruments because, by policy, we deal with counterparties having a minimum investment grade or better credit rating. Credit risk is managed through the continuous monitoring of exposures to such counterparties.

Cash Flow Hedges

Foreign currency derivative contracts with notional amounts of $3.8 million and $3.2 million have been designated as cash flow hedges of our Indian rupee operating expense exposure at September 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively. The fair value of the net assets (liabilities) related to these cash flow hedges are not material. The changes in fair value of these contracts are reported as a component of OCI and reclassified to operating expense in the periods of payment of the hedged operating expenses. The amount of ineffectiveness that was recorded in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for these designated cash flow hedges was immaterial. All components of each derivative’s gain or loss were included in the assessment of hedge effectiveness.

Balance Sheet Hedges

Forward contracts not designated for hedge accounting treatment with notional amounts of $188.0 and $158.7 million are used to hedge foreign currency balance sheet exposures at September 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively. They are not designated for hedge accounting treatment since there is a natural offset for the remeasurement of the underlying foreign currency denominated asset or liability. We recognize changes in the fair value of non-designated derivative instruments in earnings in the period of change. Gains and losses on foreign currency forward contracts used to hedge balance sheet exposures are recognized in interest income and other income, net, in the same period as the remeasurement gain or loss of the related foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities. Forward contracts not designated for hedge accounting treatment consist of hedges of British pound sterling, Brazilian real, Israeli shekel, Japanese yen, Chinese renminbi, and Euro-denominated intercompany balances with notional amounts of $99.6 and $90.7 million; hedges of Brazilian real, British pound sterling, Australian dollar, Canadian dollar, Israeli shekel, and Euro-denominated trade receivables with notional amounts of $46.5 and $39.8 million; and hedges of British pounds sterling, Indian rupee, Israeli shekel, Canadian dollar, and Euro-denominated other net monetary assets with notional amounts of $41.9 and $28.2 million at September 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively.

Computation of Net Income Per Common Share

ASC 260-10-45-48. Accordingly, performance-based RSUs, which vested on various dates during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, based on achievement of specified performance criteria related to revenue, cash flows from operating activities, and non-GAAP operating income targets, and performance-based stock options, which vested during the nine months ended September 30, 2016 based on achievement of specified targets related to non-GAAP return on equity, are included in the determination of net income per diluted common share as of the beginning of each period.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Inventory Valuation. In July 2015, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2015-11, Simplifying the Measurement of Inventory, which became effective in the first quarter of 2017. ASU 2015-11 requires that inventory be valued at the lower of cost or net realizable value, which is defined as the estimated selling price in the ordinary course of business, less reasonably predictable costs of completion, disposal, and transportation. We previously valued inventory at the lower of cost or net realizable value less a reasonable profit margin as allowed by previous inventory valuation guidance. The adoption of ASU 2015-11 increased our inventory valuation by $1.7 million as of September 30, 2017.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Principal vs Agent. ASU 2016-08, Principal vs. Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross vs Net), issued in March 2016, streamlines and clarifies the criteria for identifying whether an entity is satisfying a performance obligation as the principal or agent in the transaction. The entity that is responsible for fulfilling the contractual obligations related to the good or service is acting as the principal and recognizes the gross amount of consideration. The entity that is responsible only for arranging delivery to the customer is acting as the agent and recognizes revenue in the amount of the fee or commission related to arranging for the delivery of the good or service.

Several indicators of the nature of the relationship that are considered under current guidance have been streamlined and clarified in the new guidance by focusing more specifically on the performance obligations that must be fulfilled in the transaction, which entity carries the inventory risk in the transaction, and which entity controls the pricing of the good or service. Credit risk will no longer be a criterion. This guidance will be effective in the first quarter of 2018. We are evaluating its impact on our revenue and results of operations related to third party ink revenue and certain printer components.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Financial Instruments. ASU 2016-13, Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments, issued in June 2016, amends current guidance regarding other-than-temporary impairment of available-for-sale debt securities. The new guidance requires an estimate of expected credit loss when fair value is below the amortized cost of the asset without regard for the length of time that the fair value has been below the amortized cost or the historical or implied volatility of the asset. Credit losses on available-for-sale debt securities will be limited to the difference between the security’s amortized cost basis and its fair value. The use of an allowance to record estimated credit losses (and subsequent recoveries) will also be required under the new guidance.

ASU 2016-13 will be effective in the first quarter of 2020. We are evaluating its impact on the carrying value of our available-for-sale securities and results of operations.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Settlement of Convertible Debt. ASU 2016-15, Statement of Cash Flows: Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments, issued in August 2016, requires that cash settlements of principal amounts of debt instruments with coupon interest rates that are insignificant in relation to the effective interest rate of the debt must classify the portion of the principal payment attributable to the accreted interest related to the debt discount as cash outflows from operating activities. This is consistent with the classification of the coupon interest payments.

ASU 2016-15 will be effective in the first quarter of 2018. Accordingly, $63.6 million debt discount attributable to the difference between the 0.75% coupon interest rate on our 0.75% Convertible Senior Notes Due 2019 (“Notes”) and the 4.98% (5.46% inclusive of debt issuance costs) effective interest rate will be classified as an operating cash outflow in the Condensed Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows upon cash settlement. If we settle the conversion of the Notes in cash on or prior to the maturity date of September 1, 2019, the cash outflow of $63.6 million will be recorded in operating activities in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Restricted Cash. In November 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-18, Statement of Cash Flows: Restricted Cash, requiring that the statement of cash flows explain the change in cash, cash equivalents, and amounts generally described as restricted cash or restricted cash equivalents. Therefore, amounts generally described as restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents will 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. Under current guidance, changes in restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents are included in operating or investing activities in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.

ASU 2016-18 will be effective in the first quarter of 2018. Changes in restricted cash related to the off-balance sheet financing arrangement described in Note 8 – Commitments and Contingencies of the Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements will no longer be presented as an investing cash outflow, but will instead be presented as a component of the beginning and ending balance of cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Lease Arrangements. Under current guidance, the classification of a lease by a lessee as either an operating or capital lease determines whether an asset and liability is recognized on the balance sheet. ASU 2016-02, Leases, issued in February 2016 and effective in the first quarter of 2019, requires that a lessee recognize an asset and liability on its balance sheet related to all leases with terms in excess of one year. For all leases, a lessee will be required to recognize a right-of-use asset and a lease liability, initially measured at the present value of the lease payments, in the statement of financial position. The right-to-use asset represents the right to use the underlying asset during the lease term.

The recognition, measurement, and presentation of expenses and cash flows by a lessee have not significantly changed from previous guidance. There continues to be a differentiation between finance leases and operating leases. The criteria for determining whether a lease is a financing or operating lease are substantially the same as existing guidance except that the “bright line” percentages have been removed.

•

For finance leases, interest is recognized on the lease liability separately from depreciation of the right-of-use asset in the statement of operations. Principal repayments are classified within financing activities and interest payments are classified as operating activities in the statement of cash flows.

•

For operating leases, a lessee is required to recognize lease expense generally on a straight-line basis. All operating lease payments are classified as operating activities in the statement of cash flows.

The current build-to-suit lease accounting guidance will be rescinded by the new guidance, although simplified guidance will remain regarding lessee control during the construction period. Consequently, the accounting for build-to-suit leases will be the same as finance leases unless the lessee control provisions are applicable.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Nonfinancial Asset Derecognition. In February 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-05, Other Income – Gains and Losses from the Derecognition of Nonfinancial Assets: Clarifying the Scope of Asset Derecognition and Accounting for Partial Sales of Nonfinancial Assets, which clarifies the scope of recent guidance as it relates to nonfinancial asset derecognition and the accounting for partial sales of nonfinancial assets. The ASU conforms the derecognition guidance as it relates to nonfinancial assets with the derecognition guidance in the new revenue standard (ASU 2014-09) and is expected to have a material impact on the accounting for real estate dispositions.

ASU 2017-05 will be effective in the first quarter of 2018. We have elected to adopt the modified retrospective method of implementation.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Stock Compensation Modification. In May 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-09, Stock Compensation – Scope of Modification Accounting, which clarifies the scope of modification accounting for share-based payment arrangements. Specifically, an entity would not apply modification accounting if the fair value, vesting conditions, and classification of the awards are the same immediately before and after the modification.

ASU 2017-09 will be effective in the first quarter of 2018. We will adopt this guidance prospectively to awards modified on or after the adoption date. We do not believe this guidance will materially impact our results of operations.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Hedge Accounting. In August 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-12, Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities, which amends the hedge accounting recognition and presentation requirements in Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 815, Derivatives and Hedging.

Our foreign currency derivative contracts include notional amounts of $3.8 million that have been designated as cash flow hedges of our Indian rupee operating expense exposure at September 30, 2017. Under current guidance, changes in the fair value of the effective portion of these contracts are reported as a component of other comprehensive income (“OCI”) and reclassified to operating expense in the periods of payment of the hedged cash flows. The ineffective portion is recognized as a component of interest income and other income, net. Under the new guidance, the entire change in the fair value of hedging instruments designated as cash flow hedges that are included in the assessment of hedge effectiveness will be recorded in OCI. Those amounts are reclassified to earnings in the periods of payment in the same income statement line item as the hedged operating expenses. Upon adoption, a cumulative-effect adjustment will be required to charge the ineffective portion of derivative contracts designated as cash flow hedges existing at the date of adoption to accumulated OCI with a corresponding adjustment to the retained earnings as of the beginning of the fiscal year of the adoption.

The new guidance continues to require an initial prospective quantitative hedge effectiveness assessment unless the hedging relationship qualifies for the critical-terms-match method or facts and circumstances method, which permit an assumption of perfect hedge effectiveness. After the initial quantitative assessment, the new guidance permits a qualitative ongoing effectiveness assessment for certain hedges if we can reasonably support an expectation of high effectiveness throughout the term of the hedge. The new guidance also requires additional disclosure related to the effect on the income statement of cash flow hedges.

ASU 2017-12 will be effective in the first quarter of 2019. We do not believe this guidance will materially impact our results of operations.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Revenue Recognition. ASU 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, issued in May 2014, ASU 2016-10, Revenue from Contracts with Customers: Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing, and subsequent amendments, enhance the comparability of revenue recognition practices across entities, industries, jurisdictions, and capital markets. The principles-based guidance provides a framework for addressing revenue recognition issues comprehensively. The standards require that revenue be recognized that reflects the consideration the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for goods or services, which are referred to as performance obligations.

ASU 2014-09 will be effective in the first quarter of 2018. Two adoption methods are allowed under ASU 2014-09: the full retrospective method and modified retrospective method. We have elected to use the modified retrospective method by applying the revised guidance to contracts that have not been completed as of January 1, 2018. Retained earnings will be adjusted for the cumulative effect of the change on January 1, 2018. The new standard requires comprehensive annual and interim disclosures regarding the nature, amount, timing, and uncertainty of recognized revenue, which will be provided in the year of adoption along with the impact on recognized revenue compared with revenue that would have been recognized under prior guidance. Qualitative and quantitative disclosures will be required regarding:

•

disaggregation of our current disclosures of revenue by segment and geographic area into categories that depict how revenue and cash flows are impacted by economic factors,

•

timing of recognition, contract duration, and sales channel,

•

billed and unbilled contracts with customers, including revenue and impairments recognized, disaggregation, and information about contract balances and performance obligations,

•

significant judgments and changes in judgments required to determine the transaction price, amounts allocated to performance obligations, and the timing for recognizing revenue resulting from the satisfaction of performance obligations,

•

assets recognized from the costs to obtain or fulfill a contract (e.g., commissions), and

•

bad debt provisions related to billed and unbilled receivables.

Upon evaluation, we believe the key changes in the guidance that impact our revenue recognition relate to the timing of revenue recognition and allocation of contract revenue between services and software licenses. The requirement to defer incremental contract acquisition costs (e.g., commissions) and recognize them over the contract period or expected customer life will result in the recognition of a deferred charge on our balance sheet. We are assessing the impact on our consolidated financial statements, systems, and controls upon adoption.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Definition of a Business. ASU 2017-01, Business Combinations: Clarifying the Definition of a Business, was issued in January 2017, and significantly narrows how businesses are defined. Under current guidance, a business is defined as an integrated set of assets and activities that usually consists of business processes and their related inputs and outputs. However, business process outputs are not required to be present and only some business process inputs and business processes must be present if the acquiring entity can produce outputs by integrating the acquired set of assets and activities with its own inputs and processes. Essentially, existing guidance only requires that business processes and inputs be present in order to constitute a business.

Under ASU 2017-01, when substantially all of the fair value of the gross assets acquired is concentrated in a single asset or group of similar identifiable assets, then the assets acquired do not constitute a business. If substantially all of the fair value of the gross assets acquired is not concentrated in a single asset or group of similar assets, then the assets acquired may constitute a business if certain criteria are met. We must determine whether the acquired gross assets and activities include an input and a “substantive” process that together “significantly” contribute to the ability to create an output. A framework and specific criteria are provided to assist with the evaluation of whether a process is “substantive” and “significantly contributes” to the ability to create an output. “Output” is narrowly defined to be consistent with the description of a performance obligation in the new revenue guidance. Missing inputs and processes may not be replaced by integration with our own inputs and processes under the new guidance.

Our condensed consolidated financial statements may be impacted if an acquisition does not qualify as a business combination after ASU 2017-01 is effective in the first quarter of 2018. Such acquisitions would be accounted for as asset purchases.