Significant Accounting Policies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2020
Accounting Policies [Abstract]
Significant Accounting Policies	(2) Significant Accounting Policies Allowance for Loan Losses: The allowance for loan losses is regularly reviewed by management to determine that the amount is considered adequate to absorb probable losses in the loan portfolio. If not, an additional provision is made to increase the allowance. This evaluation includes specific loss estimates on certain individually reviewed impaired loans, the pooling of commercial credits risk graded as special mention and substandard that are not individually analyzed, and general loss estimates that are based upon the size, quality, and concentration characteristics of the various loan portfolios, adverse situations that may affect a borrower’s ability to repay, and current economic and industry conditions, among other items. Those judgments and assumptions that are most critical to the application of this accounting policy are assessing the initial and on-going credit-worthiness of the borrower, the amount and timing of future cash flows of the borrower that are available for repayment of the loan, the sufficiency of underlying collateral, the enforceability of third-party guarantees, the frequency and subjectivity of loan reviews and risk ratings, emerging or changing trends that might not be fully captured in the historical loss experience, and charges against the allowance for actual losses that are greater than previously estimated. These judgments and assumptions are dependent upon or can be influenced by a variety of factors, including the breadth and depth of experience of lending officers, credit administration and the corporate loan review staff that periodically review the status of the loan, changing economic and industry conditions, changes in the financial condition of the borrower and changes in the value and availability of the underlying collateral and guarantees. Use of Estimates: To prepare financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, management makes estimates and assumptions based on available information. These estimates and assumptions affect the amounts reported in financial statements and the disclosures provided, and future results could differ. The allowance for loan losses, impairment of goodwill, fair values of financial instruments, deferred taxes and pension obligations are particularly subject to change. Reclassifications: Some items in the prior year financial statements were reclassified to conform to the current presentation. Such reclassifications had no effect on net income or shareholders’ equity. Adoption of New Accounting Standards: In August 2018, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2018-13, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Disclosure Framework – Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement. The amendments in this Update remove the requirement to disclose the amount of and reasons for transfers between Level I and Level II of the fair value hierarchy; the policy for timing of transfers between levels; and the valuation processes for Level III fair value measurements. The amendments in this Update require disclosure of changes in unrealized gains and losses for the period included in other comprehensive income (loss) for recurring Level III fair value measurements held at the end of the reporting period and the range and weighted average of significant unobservable inputs used to develop Level III fair value measurements. We adopted ASU 2018-13 effective January 1, 2020, which did not have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-15, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other – Internal-Use Software (Subtopic 350-40). The amendment in this ASU addressed customers’ accounting for implementation costs incurred in a cloud computing arrangement that is a service contract and also added certain disclosure requirements related to implementation costs incurred for internal-use software and cloud computing arrangements. The amendment in this ASU aligned the requirements for capitalizing implementation costs incurred in a hosting arrangement that is a service contract with the requirements for capitalizing implementation costs incurred to develop or obtain internal-use software (and hosting arrangements that include an internal-use software license). We adopted ASU 2018-15 effective January 1, 2020, which did not have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. In October, 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-17, Consolidation (Topic 810), which made improvements in (1) applying the variable interest entity (VIE) guidance to private companies under common control and (2) considering indirect interests held through related parties under common control for determining whether fees paid to decision makers and service providers are variable interests. Under the amendments in this Update, a private company may elect not to apply VIE guidance to legal entities under common control (including common control leasing arrangements) if both the parent and the legal entity being evaluated for consolidation are not public business entities. In addition, indirect interests held through related parties in common control arrangements should be considered on a proportional basis for determining whether fees paid to decision makers and service providers are variable interests. We adopted ASU 2018-17 effective January 1, 2020, which did not have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. In November, 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-18, Collaborative Arrangements (Topic 808), which made the following targeted improvements to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) for collaborative arrangements: (1) clarified that certain transactions between collaborative arrangement participants should be accounted for as revenue under Topic 606 when the collaborative arrangement participant is a customer in the context of a unit of account, (2) added unit-of-account guidance in Topic 808 to align with the guidance in Topic 606 (that is, a distinct good or service) when an entity is assessing whether the collaborative arrangement or a part of the arrangement is within the scope of Topic 606, and (3) required that in a transaction with a collaborative arrangement participant that is not directly related to sales to third parties, presenting the transaction together with revenue recognized under Topic 606 is precluded if the collaborative arrangement participant is not a customer. We adopted ASU 2018-18 effective January 1, 2020, which did not have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. Effect of Newly Issued but Not Yet Effective Accounting Standards: In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments-Credit Losses: Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments (“ASU 2016-13”), which changes the impairment model for most financial assets. This ASU is intended to improve financial reporting by requiring timelier recording of credit losses on loans and other financial instruments held by financial institutions and other organizations. The underlying premise of ASU 2016-13 is that financial assets measured at amortized cost should be presented at the net amount expected to be collected, through an allowance for credit losses that is deducted from the amortized cost basis. The allowance for credit losses should reflect management’s current estimate of credit losses that are expected to occur over the remaining life of a financial asset. The income statement will be effected for the measurement of credit losses for newly recognized financial assets, as well as the expected increases or decreases of expected credit losses that have taken place during the period. With certain exceptions, transition to the new requirements will be through a cumulative effect adjustment to opening retained earnings as of the beginning of the first reporting period in which the guidance is adopted. ASU 2016-13 was to be effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2019, with early adoption permitted for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2018. In November 2019, however, the FASB issued ASU 2019-10, Financial Instruments ‒ Credit Losses (Topic 326), Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815), and Leases (Topic 842). This Update deferred the effective date of ASU 2016-13 for U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) filers that are eligible to be smaller reporting companies, such as the Company, to fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2022, and interim periods within those fiscal years. Management is in the process of evaluating the impact adoption of ASU 2016-13 will have on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. This process has engaged multiple areas of the Company in evaluating loss estimation methods and application of these methods to specific segments of the loan portfolio. Management has been actively monitoring FASB developments and evaluating the use of different methods allowed. Due to continuing development of our methodology, additional time is required to quantify the effect this ASU will have on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. Management plans on running parallel calculations and finalizing a method or methods of adoption in time for the effective date. In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-04, Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment. To simplify the subsequent measurement of goodwill, the FASB eliminated Step 2 from the goodwill impairment test. In computing the implied fair value of goodwill under Step 2, an entity had to perform procedures to determine the fair value at the impairment testing date of its assets and liabilities (including unrecognized assets and liabilities) following the procedure that would be required in determining the fair value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed in a business combination. Instead, under the amendments in this Update, an entity should perform its annual, or interim, goodwill impairment test by comparing the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying amount. An entity should recognize an impairment charge for the amount by which the carrying amount exceeds the reporting unit’s fair value; however, the loss recognized should not exceed the total amount of goodwill allocated to that reporting unit. A public business entity that is an SEC filer, such as the Company, was to adopt the amendments in this Update for its annual or any interim goodwill impairment tests in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019. In November 2019, however, the FASB issued ASU 2019-10, Financial Instruments ‒ Credit Losses (Topic 326), Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815), and Leases (Topic 842), which deferred the effective date for ASC 350, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other, for smaller reporting companies, such as the Company, to fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2022, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company is currently evaluating the impact the adoption of the standard will have on the Company’s financial position or results of operations. In April 2019, the FASB issued ASU 2019-04, Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses, and Topic 825, Financial Instruments, which affects a variety of topics in the Codification and applies to all reporting entities within the scope of the affected accounting guidance. Topic 326, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses amendments are effective for SEC registrants for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company is currently evaluating the potential impact of the Topic 326 amendments on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. The amendments to Topic 825 were to be effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019. In November 2019, however, the FASB issued ASU 2019-10, Financial Instruments ‒ Credit Losses (Topic 326), Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815), and Leases (Topic 842). This Update defers the effective date of ASU 2016-13 for SEC filers that are eligible to be smaller reporting companies, such as the Company, to fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2022, including interim periods within those fiscal years. This Update is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements. In May 2019, the FASB issued ASU 2019-05, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses, Topic 326, which allows entities to irrevocably elect the fair value option for certain financial assets previously measured at amortized cost upon adoption of the new credit losses standard. To be eligible for the transition election, the existing financial asset must otherwise be both within the scope of the new credit losses standard and eligible for applying the fair value option in ASC 825-10.3. The election must be applied on an instrument-by-instrument basis and is not available for either available-for-sale or held-to-maturity debt securities. For entities that elect the fair value option, the difference between the carrying amount and the fair value of the financial asset would be recognized through a cumulative-effect adjustment to opening retained earnings as of the date an entity adopted ASU 2016-13. Changes in fair value of that financial asset would subsequently be reported in current earnings. For entities that have not yet adopted ASU 2016-13, the effective dates and transition requirements are the same as those in ASU 2016-13. For entities that have adopted ASU 2016-13, ASU 2019-05 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted once ASU 2016-13 has been adopted. In November 2019, the FASB issued ASU 2019-10, Financial Instruments ‒ Credit Losses (Topic 326), Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815), and Leases (Topic 842). The Update defers the effective date of ASU 2016-13 for SEC filers that are eligible to be smaller reporting companies, such as the Company, to fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2022, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company is currently evaluating the impact the adoption of the standard will have on the Company’s financial statements. In March 2020, the FASB issued ASU 2020-04, Reference Rate Reform (Topic 848): Facilitation of the Effects of Reference Rate Reform on Financial Reporting. The Update is designed to provide relief from the accounting analysis and impacts that may otherwise be required for modifications to agreements necessitated by reference rate reform. The Update also provides optional expedients to enable companies to continue to apply hedge accounting to certain hedging relationships impacted by reference rate reform. The amendments in this Update are effective for all entities as of March 12, 2020 through December 31, 2022. Management is currently evaluating reference rate options and is reviewing loan agreements, debt securities, derivatives and borrowings impacted by reference rate reform. Other recent ASU’s issued by the FASB did not, or are not believed by management to have a material effect on the Company’s present or future Consolidated Financial Statements.

Significant Accounting Policies

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2020

(2) Significant Accounting Policies

Allowance for Loan Losses: The allowance for loan losses is regularly reviewed by management to determine that the amount is considered adequate to absorb probable losses in the loan portfolio. If not, an additional provision is made to increase the allowance. This evaluation includes specific loss estimates on certain individually reviewed impaired loans, the pooling of commercial credits risk graded as special mention and substandard that are not individually analyzed, and general loss estimates that are based upon the size, quality, and concentration characteristics of the various loan portfolios, adverse situations that may affect a borrower’s ability to repay, and current economic and industry conditions, among other items.

Those judgments and assumptions that are most critical to the application of this accounting policy are assessing the initial and on-going credit-worthiness of the borrower, the amount and timing of future cash flows of the borrower that are available for repayment of the loan, the sufficiency of underlying collateral, the enforceability of third-party guarantees, the frequency and subjectivity of loan reviews and risk ratings, emerging or changing trends that might not be fully captured in the historical loss experience, and charges against the allowance for actual losses that are greater than previously estimated. These judgments and assumptions are dependent upon or can be influenced by a variety of factors, including the breadth and depth of experience of lending officers, credit administration and the corporate loan review staff that periodically review the status of the loan, changing economic and industry conditions, changes in the financial condition of the borrower and changes in the value and availability of the underlying collateral and guarantees.

Use of Estimates: To prepare financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, management makes estimates and assumptions based on available information. These estimates and assumptions affect the amounts reported in financial statements and the disclosures provided, and future results could differ. The allowance for loan losses, impairment of goodwill, fair values of financial instruments, deferred taxes and pension obligations are particularly subject to change.

Reclassifications: Some items in the prior year financial statements were reclassified to conform to the current presentation. Such reclassifications had no effect on net income or shareholders’ equity.

Adoption of New Accounting Standards:

In August 2018, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2018-13, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Disclosure Framework – Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement. The amendments in this Update remove the requirement to disclose the amount of and reasons for transfers between Level I and Level II of the fair value hierarchy; the policy for timing of transfers between levels; and the valuation processes for Level III fair value measurements. The amendments in this Update require disclosure of changes in unrealized gains and losses for the period included in other comprehensive income (loss) for recurring Level III fair value measurements held at the end of the reporting period and the range and weighted average of significant unobservable inputs used to develop Level III fair value measurements. We adopted ASU 2018-13 effective January 1, 2020, which did not have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-15, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other – Internal-Use Software (Subtopic 350-40). The amendment in this ASU addressed customers’ accounting for implementation costs incurred in a cloud computing arrangement that is a service contract and also added certain disclosure requirements related to implementation costs incurred for internal-use software and cloud computing arrangements. The amendment in this ASU aligned the requirements for capitalizing implementation costs incurred in a hosting arrangement that is a service contract with the requirements for capitalizing implementation costs incurred to develop or obtain internal-use software (and hosting arrangements that include an internal-use software license). We adopted ASU 2018-15 effective January 1, 2020, which did not have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

In October, 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-17, Consolidation (Topic 810), which made improvements in (1) applying the variable interest entity (VIE) guidance to private companies under common control and (2) considering indirect interests held through related parties under common control for determining whether fees paid to decision makers and service providers are variable interests. Under the amendments in this Update, a private company may elect not to apply VIE guidance to legal entities under common control (including common control leasing arrangements) if both the parent and the legal entity being evaluated for consolidation are not public business entities. In addition, indirect interests held through related parties in common control arrangements should be considered on a proportional basis for determining whether fees paid to decision makers and service providers are variable interests. We adopted ASU 2018-17 effective January 1, 2020, which did not have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

In November, 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-18, Collaborative Arrangements (Topic 808), which made the following targeted improvements to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) for collaborative arrangements: (1) clarified that certain transactions between collaborative arrangement participants should be accounted for as revenue under Topic 606 when the collaborative arrangement participant is a customer in the context of a unit of account, (2) added unit-of-account guidance in Topic 808 to align with the guidance in Topic 606 (that is, a distinct good or service) when an entity is assessing whether the collaborative arrangement or a part of the arrangement is within the scope of Topic 606, and (3) required that in a transaction with a collaborative arrangement participant that is not directly related to sales to third parties, presenting the transaction together with revenue recognized under Topic 606 is precluded if the collaborative arrangement participant is not a customer. We adopted ASU 2018-18 effective January 1, 2020, which did not have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

Effect of Newly Issued but Not Yet Effective Accounting Standards:

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments-Credit Losses: Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments (“ASU 2016-13”), which changes the impairment model for most financial assets. This ASU is intended to improve financial reporting by requiring timelier recording of credit losses on loans and other financial instruments held by financial institutions and other organizations. The underlying premise of ASU 2016-13 is that financial assets measured at amortized cost should be presented at the net amount expected to be collected, through an allowance for credit losses that is deducted from the amortized cost basis. The allowance for credit losses should reflect management’s current estimate of credit losses that are expected to occur over the remaining life of a financial asset. The income statement will be effected for the measurement of credit losses for newly recognized financial assets, as well as the expected increases or decreases of expected credit losses that have taken place during the period. With certain exceptions, transition to the new requirements will be through a cumulative effect adjustment to opening retained earnings as of the beginning of the first reporting period in which the guidance is adopted. ASU 2016-13 was to be effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2019, with early adoption permitted for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2018. In November 2019, however, the FASB issued ASU 2019-10, Financial Instruments ‒ Credit Losses (Topic 326), Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815), and Leases (Topic 842). This Update deferred the effective date of ASU 2016-13 for U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) filers that are eligible to be smaller reporting companies, such as the Company, to fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2022, and interim periods within those fiscal years. Management is in the process of evaluating the impact adoption of ASU 2016-13 will have on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. This process has engaged multiple areas of the Company in evaluating loss estimation methods and application of these methods to specific segments of the loan portfolio. Management has been actively monitoring FASB developments and evaluating the use of different methods allowed. Due to continuing development of our methodology, additional time is required to quantify the effect this ASU will have on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. Management plans on running parallel calculations and finalizing a method or methods of adoption in time for the effective date.

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-04, Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment. To simplify the subsequent measurement of goodwill, the FASB eliminated Step 2 from the goodwill impairment test. In computing the implied fair value of goodwill under Step 2, an entity had to perform procedures to determine the fair value at the impairment testing date of its assets and liabilities (including unrecognized assets and liabilities) following the procedure that would be required in determining the fair value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed in a business combination. Instead, under the amendments in this Update, an entity should perform its annual, or interim, goodwill impairment test by comparing the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying amount. An entity should recognize an impairment charge for the amount by which the carrying amount exceeds the reporting unit’s fair value; however, the loss recognized should not exceed the total amount of goodwill allocated to that reporting unit. A public business entity that is an SEC filer, such as the Company, was to adopt the amendments in this Update for its annual or any interim goodwill impairment tests in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019. In November 2019, however, the FASB issued ASU 2019-10, Financial Instruments ‒ Credit Losses (Topic 326), Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815), and Leases (Topic 842), which deferred the effective date for ASC 350, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other, for smaller reporting companies, such as the Company, to fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2022, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company is currently evaluating the impact the adoption of the standard will have on the Company’s financial position or results of operations.

In April 2019, the FASB issued ASU 2019-04, Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses, and Topic 825, Financial Instruments, which affects a variety of topics in the Codification and applies to all reporting entities within the scope of the affected accounting guidance. Topic 326, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses amendments are effective for SEC registrants for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company is currently evaluating the potential impact of the Topic 326 amendments on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. The amendments to Topic 825 were to be effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019. In November 2019, however, the FASB issued ASU 2019-10, Financial Instruments ‒ Credit Losses (Topic 326), Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815), and Leases (Topic 842). This Update defers the effective date of ASU 2016-13 for SEC filers that are eligible to be smaller reporting companies, such as the Company, to fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2022, including interim periods within those fiscal years. This Update is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements.

In May 2019, the FASB issued ASU 2019-05, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses, Topic 326, which allows entities to irrevocably elect the fair value option for certain financial assets previously measured at amortized cost upon adoption of the new credit losses standard. To be eligible for the transition election, the existing financial asset must otherwise be both within the scope of the new credit losses standard and eligible for applying the fair value option in ASC 825-10.3. The election must be applied on an instrument-by-instrument basis and is not available for either available-for-sale or held-to-maturity debt securities. For entities that elect the fair value option, the difference between the carrying amount and the fair value of the financial asset would be recognized through a cumulative-effect adjustment to opening retained earnings as of the date an entity adopted ASU 2016-13. Changes in fair value of that financial asset would subsequently be reported in current earnings. For entities that have not yet adopted ASU 2016-13, the effective dates and transition requirements are the same as those in ASU 2016-13. For entities that have adopted ASU 2016-13, ASU 2019-05 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted once ASU 2016-13 has been adopted. In November 2019, the FASB issued ASU 2019-10, Financial Instruments ‒ Credit Losses (Topic 326), Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815), and Leases (Topic 842). The Update defers the effective date of ASU 2016-13 for SEC filers that are eligible to be smaller reporting companies, such as the Company, to fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2022, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company is currently evaluating the impact the adoption of the standard will have on the Company’s financial statements.

In March 2020, the FASB issued ASU 2020-04, Reference Rate Reform (Topic 848): Facilitation of the Effects of Reference Rate Reform on Financial Reporting. The Update is designed to provide relief from the accounting analysis and impacts that may otherwise be required for modifications to agreements necessitated by reference rate reform. The Update also provides optional expedients to enable companies to continue to apply hedge accounting to certain hedging relationships impacted by reference rate reform. The amendments in this Update are effective for all entities as of March 12, 2020 through December 31, 2022. Management is currently evaluating reference rate options and is reviewing loan agreements, debt securities, derivatives and borrowings impacted by reference rate reform.

Other recent ASU’s issued by the FASB did not, or are not believed by management to have a material effect on the Company’s present or future Consolidated Financial Statements.