Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2020

Accounting Policies [Abstract]

Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

NOTE 2 - SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with US GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, equity-based transactions and disclosure of contingent liabilities at the date of the financial statements and revenues and expense during the reporting period. Actual results could materially differ from those estimates.

The Company believes the following critical accounting policies affect its more significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation of the financial statements. Significant estimates include the valuation of goodwill and intangible assets for impairment, deferred tax asset and valuation allowance, and fair value of financial instruments.

Cash

As of June 30, 2020, and December 31, 2019, the Company held all its cash in banks in the United States of America. The Company considers investments in highly liquid instruments with a maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents. The Company did not have any cash equivalents as of June 30, 2020 and December 31, 2019.

Investment in Equity Securities

Prior to the Merger, Oncotelic received Series E Preferred Shares of Adhera Therapeutics, Inc. (“Adhera”) in consideration for the issuance of Oncotelic’s Common Stock under various Securities Purchase Agreements. The Company records its investments in equity securities initially at cost in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 321, Investments –Equity Securities (“ASC 321”). The Company subsequently marks the investments to market at each reporting period and, in accordance with Accounting Standard Update (“ASU”) 2016-01, Financial Instruments – (Overall), records the unrealized gains or losses in the Consolidated Statement of Operations. During the three months ended December 31, 2019, the Company evaluated the fair value of the investment based on filings by Adhera, in which Adhera describes their current financial condition including the potential to file for bankruptcy, the Company believed that the long term investment in Adhera was impaired and therefore, determined to write off the entire investment.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

The carrying value of cash, accounts payable and accrued expense approximate their fair values based on the short-term maturity of these instruments. As defined in ASC 820, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures,” fair value is 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 (exit price). The Company utilizes market data or assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability, including assumptions about risk and the risks inherent in the inputs to the valuation technique. These inputs can be readily observable, market corroborated, or generally unobservable. ASC 820 establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (level 1 measurement) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (level 3 measurement). This fair value measurement framework applies at both initial and subsequent measurement.

The three levels of the fair value hierarchy defined by ASC 820 are as follows:

● Level 1 – Quoted prices are available in active markets for identical assets or liabilities as of the reporting date. Active markets are those in which transactions for the asset or liability occur in sufficient frequency and volume to provide pricing information on an ongoing basis. Level 1 primarily consists of financial instruments such as exchange-traded derivatives, marketable securities and listed equities.

● Level 2 – Pricing inputs are other than quoted prices in active markets included in Level 1, which are either directly or indirectly observable as of the reported date. Level 2 includes those financial instruments that are valued using models or other valuation methodologies. These models are primarily industry-standard models that consider various assumptions, including quoted forward prices for commodities, time value, volatility factors and current market and contractual prices for the underlying instruments, as well as other relevant economic measures. Substantially all of these assumptions are observable in the marketplace throughout the full term of the instrument, can be derived from observable data or are supported by observable levels at which transactions are executed in the marketplace. Instruments in this category generally include non-exchange-traded derivatives such as commodity swaps, interest rate swaps, options and collars.

● Level 3 – Pricing inputs include significant inputs that are generally less observable from objective sources. These inputs may be used with internally developed methodologies that result in management’s best estimate of fair value.

The Company did not have any Level 1 or Level 2 assets and liabilities at June 30, 2020. The derivative liabilities associated with its 2019 convertible note debt financing (see Note 5), consisted of conversion feature derivatives at June 30, 2020 hence are classified as Level 3 fair value measurements. The table below sets forth a summary of the changes in the fair value of the Company’s derivative liabilities classified as Level 3 as of June 30, 2020:

	Conversion Feature
Balance at December 31, 2019	$	540,517
New derivative liability		870,268
Reclassification to additional paid in capital from conversion of debt to common stock		(408,811	)
Change in fair value		(10,512	)
Balance at June 30, 2020	$	991,462

As of June 30, 2020, and December 31, 2019, the Company estimated the fair value of the conversion feature derivatives embedded in the convertible debentures based on assumptions used in the Black-Scholes valuation model. The key valuation assumptions used consists, in part, of the price of the Company’s Common Stock, a risk free interest rate based on the yield of a Treasury note and expected volatility of the Company’s Common Stock all as of the measurement dates. The Company used the following assumptions to estimate fair value of the derivatives as of June 30, 2020:

	June 30, 2020
	Key Assumptions for
	fair value of conversions
Risk free interest		0.16	%
Market price of share	$	0.1875
Life of instrument in years		1.81 - 2.10
Volatility		151.87	%
Dividend yield		0	%

When the Company changes its valuation inputs for measuring financial liabilities at fair value, either due to changes in current market conditions or other factors, it may need to transfer those liabilities to another level in the hierarchy based on the new inputs used. The Company recognizes these transfers at the end of the reporting period that the transfers occur. For the period ended June 30, 2020, there were no transfers of financial assets or financial liabilities between the hierarchy levels.

Net Income (Loss) Per Share

Basic net income (loss) per common share is computed by dividing the net income (loss) by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted net income (loss) per share includes the effect of Common Stock equivalents (notes convertible into Common Stock, stock options and warrants) when, under either the treasury or if-converted method, such inclusion in the computation would be dilutive. The following number of shares have been excluded from diluted loss since such inclusion would be anti-dilutive:

	Six Months Ended June 30,				Three Months Ended June 30,
	2020		2019		2020		2019
Convertible notes		11,584,300		8,000,000		5,000,000		8,000,000
Stock options		6,135,284		6,477,922		6,135,284		6,477,922
Warrants		15,237,500		22,216,211		15,237,500		22,216,211
Potentially dilutive securities		32,957,084		36,694,133		26,372,784		33,457,084

The following table reflects the inclusion of the common stock equivalents included in the calculation of the diluted net income per share for the three months ended June 30, 2020. No similar calculations are required for the three months ended June 30, 2019 or the six months ended June 30, 2020 and 2019, respectively as all these periods had losses.

Reconciliation for Basic to Diluted Weighted Average common stock outstanding
Basic weighted average common stock outstanding	88,152,403
Add: Dilutive Common Stock Instruments
Shares issuable upon conversion of debt	6,584,300
Diluted weighted average common stock outstanding	94,736,703

Stock-Based Compensation

The Company applies the provisions of ASC 718, Compensation—Stock Compensation (“ASC 718”), which requires the measurement and recognition of compensation expense for all stock-based awards made to employees, including employee stock options, in the statements of operations.

For stock options issued to employees and members of the Board of Directors (the “Board”) for their services, the Company estimates the grant date fair value of each option using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. The use of the Black-Scholes option pricing model requires management to make assumptions with respect to the expected term of the option, the expected volatility of the Common Stock consistent with the expected life of the option, risk-free interest rates and expected dividend yields of the Common Stock. For awards subject to service-based vesting conditions, including those with a graded vesting schedule, the Company recognizes stock-based compensation expense equal to the grant date fair value of stock options on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period, which is generally the vesting term. Forfeitures are recorded as they are incurred as opposed to being estimated at the time of grant and revised.

Pursuant to ASU 2018-07 Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Nonemployee Share-Based Payment Accounting, the Company accounts for stock options issued to non-employees for their services in accordance with ASC 718. The Company uses valuation methods and assumptions to value the stock options that are in line with the process for valuing employee stock options noted above.

For warrants issued in connection with fund raising activities, the Company estimates the grant date fair value of each warrant using the Black-Scholes pricing model. The use of the Black-Scholes option pricing model requires management to make assumptions with respect to the expected term of the warrant, the expected volatility of the Common Stock consistent with the expected life of the warrant, risk-free interest rates and expected dividend yields of the Common Stock. If the warrants are issued upon termination or cancellation of prior issued warrants, then the Company estimates the grant date fair value of the new warrants using the Black-Scholes pricing model and evaluates whether the new warrants are deemed as equity instruments or liability instruments. If the warrants are deemed to be equity instruments, the Company records stock compensation expense and an addition to additional paid in capital. If however, the warrants are deemed to be liability instruments, then the fair value is treated as a deemed dividend and credited to additional paid in capital.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

The Company reviews long-lived assets, including definite-lived intangible assets, for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of such assets may not be recoverable. Recoverability of these assets is determined by comparing the forecasted undiscounted net cash flows of the operation to which the assets relate to the carrying amount. If the operation is determined to be unable to recover the carrying amount of its assets, then these assets are written down first, followed by other long-lived assets of the operation to fair value. Fair value is determined based on discounted cash flows or appraised values, depending on the nature of the assets. For the six months ended June 30, 2020 and year ended December 31, 2019, there were no impairment losses recognized for long-lived assets.

Intangible Assets

The Company records its intangible assets at cost in accordance with ASC 350, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other. The Company reviews the intangible assets for impairment on an annual basis or if events or changes in circumstances indicate it is more likely than not that they are impaired. These events could include a significant change in the business climate, legal factors, a decline in operating performance, competition, sale or disposition of a significant portion of the business, or other factors. If the review indicates the impairment, an impairment loss would be recorded for the difference of the value recorded and the new value. For the six months ended June 30, 2020 and 2019, there were no impairment losses recognized for intangible assets.

Goodwill

Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price of acquired business over the estimated fair value of the identifiable net assets acquired. Goodwill is not amortized but is tested for impairment at least once annually, at the reporting unit level or more frequently if events or changes in circumstances indicate that the asset might be impaired. The goodwill impairment test is applied by performing a qualitative assessment before calculating the fair value of the reporting unit. If, on the basis of qualitative factors, it is considered not more likely than not that the fair value of the reporting unit is less than the carrying amount, further testing of goodwill for impairment would not be required. Otherwise, goodwill impairment is tested using a two-step approach.

The first step involves comparing the fair value of the reporting unit to its carrying amount. If the fair value of the reporting unit is determined to be greater than its carrying amount, there is no impairment. If the reporting unit’s carrying amount is determined to be greater than the fair value, the second step must be completed to measure the amount of impairment, if any. The second step involves calculating the implied fair value of goodwill by deducting the fair value of all tangible and intangible assets, excluding goodwill, of the reporting unit from the fair value of the reporting unit as determined in step one. The implied fair value of the goodwill in this step is compared to the carrying value of goodwill. If the implied fair value of the goodwill is less than the carrying value of the goodwill, an impairment loss equivalent to the difference is recorded. For the six months ended June 30, 2020 and 2019, there were no impairment losses recognized for Goodwill.

Convertible Instruments

The Company evaluates and accounts for conversion options embedded in its convertible instruments in accordance with ASC 815 “Derivatives and Hedging”.

ASC 815 generally provides three criteria that, if met, require companies to bifurcate conversion options from their host instruments and account for them as free standing derivative financial instruments. These three criteria include circumstances in which (a) the economic characteristics and risks of the embedded derivative instrument are not clearly and closely related to the economic characteristics and risks of the host contract, (b) the hybrid instrument that embodies both the embedded derivative instrument and the host contract is not re-measured at fair value under otherwise applicable generally accepted accounting principles with changes in fair value reported in earnings as they occur, and (c) a separate instrument with the same terms as the embedded derivative instrument would be considered a derivative instrument. Professional standards also provide an exception to this rule when the host instrument is deemed to be conventional as defined under professional standards as “The Meaning of Conventional Convertible Debt Instrument.”

The Company accounts for convertible instruments (when it has determined that the embedded conversion options should not be bifurcated from their host instruments) in accordance with ASC 470-20 “Debt – Debt with Conversion and Other Options.” Accordingly, the Company records, when necessary, discounts to convertible notes for the intrinsic value of conversion options embedded in debt instruments based upon the differences between the fair value of the underlying Common Stock at the commitment date of the note transaction and the effective conversion price embedded in the note. Original issue discounts (“OID”) under these arrangements are amortized over the term of the related debt to their earliest date of redemption. The Company also records when necessary deemed dividends for the intrinsic value of conversion options embedded in preferred shares based upon the differences between the fair value of the underlying Common Stock at the commitment date of the note transaction and the effective conversion price embedded in the note.

ASC 815-40 “Derivatives and Hedging – Contracts in Entity’s Own Equity” provides that, among other things, generally, if an event occurs that is not within the entity’s control could or would require net cash settlement, then the contract shall be classified as an asset or a liability.

Revenue Recognition

The Company recognizes revenue in accordance with ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606).

Under ASU 2014-9, the Company recognizes revenue when its customers obtain control of the promised good or services, in an amount that reflects the consideration which the Company expects to receive in exchange for those goods or services. The Company applies the following five-step process: (i) identify the contract(s) with a customer; (ii) identify the performance obligation(s) in the contract; (iii) determine the transaction price; (iv) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligation(s) in the contract; and (v) recognize revenue when (or as) the Company satisfies a performance obligation.

At contract inception, once the contract is determined to be within the scope of ASU 2014-09, the Company identifies the performance obligation(s) in the contract by assessing whether the goods or services promised within each contract are distinct. The Company then recognizes revenue for the amount of the transaction price that is allocated to the respective performance obligation when (or as) the performance obligation is satisfied.

The Company anticipates generating revenues from rendering services to other third party customers for the development of certain drug products and/or in connection with certain out-licensing agreements. In the case of services rendered for development of the drugs, revenue is recognized upon the achievement of the performance obligations or over time on a straight-line basis over the extended service period. In the case of out-licensing contracts, the Company records revenues either (i) upon achievement of certain pre-defined milestones when there is no obligation of the Company achieve any performance obligations in connection with the said pre-defined milestones, or (ii) upon achievement of the performance obligations if the milestones require the Company to provide the performance obligations.

The Company occasionally collects advance payments from customers toward commitments to provide services or performance obligations, in which case the advance payment is recorded as a liability until the obligations are fulfilled and revenue is recognized.

Research Service Agreement between GMP and Mateon Therapeutics Inc./Oncotelic Inc. (“Mateon Entities”).

Oncotelic and GMP entered into a research and services agreement (the “Agreement”) on February 3, 2020 memorializing their collaborative efforts to develop and test COVID-19 antisense therapeutics. On March 18, 2020, the Company reported the positive anti-viral activity results of OT-101 (the “Product”) in an in vitro antiviral testing performed by an independent laboratory to GMP. In March 2020, the Mateon Entities and GMP entered into a supplement to the Agreement (the “Supplement”) to confirm the inclusion of the Product within the scope of the Agreement, pending positive confirmatory testing against COVID-19. In consideration for the financial support provided by GMP for the research, pursuant to the terms of the Agreement (as amended by the Supplement) GMP was entitled to obtain certain exclusive rights to the use of the Product in the COVID field on a global basis, and an economic interest in the use of the Product in the COVID field including 50/50 profit sharing. GMP paid the Company fees of $0.3 million during the three months ended March 31, 2020 and an $0.9 million during the three months ended June 30, 2020 for the services rendered under the Agreement and Supplement, respectively. The Company also recorded approximately $40 thousand for reimbursement of actual costs incurred.

Agreement with Autotelic BIO

Oncotelic had entered into a license agreement in February 2018 (the “ATB Agreement”) with ATB. The ATB Agreement licensed the use of OT-101 in combination with Interleukin-2 (the “Combined Product”), and granted to ATB an exclusive license under the Oncotelic technology to develop, make, have made, use, sell, offer for sale, import and export the Combined Product, and the Combination Product only, in the field, throughout the entire world (excluding the United States of America and Canada) as the territory, on the terms and subject to the conditions of the ATB Agreement. The ATB Agreement requires ATB to be responsible for the development of the Combination Product. Oncotelic was responsible to provide to ATB the technical know-how and other pertinent information on the development of the Combination Product. ATB paid Oncotelic a non-refundable milestone payment in consideration for the rights and licenses granted to ATB under the ATB Agreement, and ATB was to pay Oncotelic $500,000 within sixty days from the successful completion of the in vivo efficacy studies. This payment was made in June 2020 after the successful completion of the in-vivo study and, as such, the Company recorded the revenue during the three months ended June 30, 2020. In addition, ATB is to pay Oncotelic: (i) $500,000 upon Oncotelic’s completion of the technology know how and Oncotelic’s technical assistance and regulatory consultation to ATB, as determined by the preparation of a Current Good Regulation Practices audit or certification by the Food and Drug Administration, with a mutual goal to obtain marketing approval of the Combined Product developed by ATB in the aforementioned territory; (ii) $1,000,000 upon receiving marketing approval of the Combined Product in Japan, China, Brazil, Mexico, Russia, or Korea; and (iii) $2,000,000 from receiving marketing approval of the Combined Product in Germany, France, Spain, Italy, or the United Kingdom. For the six months ended June 30, 2020, the Company recorded approximately $500,000 as revenue under the ATB Agreement for the successful completion of the in-vivo study.

Research& Development Costs

In accordance with ASC 730-10-25 “Research and Development”, research and development costs are charged to expense as and when incurred.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In January 2017, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued ASU No. 2017-04, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment. The new guidance requires only a one-step quantitative impairment test, whereby a goodwill impairment loss will be measured as the excess of a reporting period unit’s carrying amount over its fair value (not to exceed the total goodwill allocated to that reporting unit). It eliminates Step 2 of the current two-step goodwill impairment test, under which a goodwill impairment loss is measured by comparing the implied fair value of a reporting unit’s goodwill with the carrying amount of that goodwill. ASU 2017-04 is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2019. Early adoption is permitted for interim or annual goodwill impairment tests performed on testing dates after January 1, 2017. The adoption of ASU 2017-04 had no material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements and related disclosures.

In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-14, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Deferral of the Effective Date, which defers the effective date of ASU 2014-09 for all entities by one year. ASU 2014-09 became effective on January 1, 2018. The ASU also requires expanded disclosures relating to the nature, amount, timing, and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from contracts with customers. Additionally, qualitative and quantitative disclosures are required about customer contracts, significant judgments and changes in judgments, and assets recognized from the costs to obtain or fulfill a contract. The Company adopted ASU 2015-14 during the six months ended June 30, 2020 as till then, no revenue was earned by the Company.

All other newly issued but not yet effective accounting pronouncements have been deemed to be not applicable or immaterial to the Company.