Accounting Pronouncements

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2020

New Accounting Pronouncements and Changes in Accounting Principles [Abstract]

New Accounting Pronouncements, Policy [Text Block]

Accounting Pronouncements

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments. This ASU and its related amendments (collectively, the Credit Loss Standard) modifies the impairment model to utilize an expected loss methodology in place of the incurred loss methodology for financial instruments, including trade receivables, contract assets, long term receivables and off-balance sheet credit exposures. The Credit Loss Standard requires consideration of a broader range of information to estimate expected credit losses, including historical information, current economic conditions and a reasonable forecast period. This ASU requires that the statement of operations reflect estimates of expected credit losses for newly recognized financial assets as well as changes in the estimate of expected credit losses that have taken place during the period, which may result in earlier recognition of certain losses.

We adopted this standard effective January 1, 2020 utilizing a modified retrospective approach. A cumulative-effect non-cash adjustment to retained earnings as of January 1, 2020 was recorded in the amount of $59 million. The adoption of this standard did not have a material impact on the Company's Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

We are exposed to credit losses primarily through our sales of products and services to commercial customers which are recorded as trade receivables, contract assets, long-term receivables, and notes and lease receivables on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet. We do not have exposure for credit losses related to sales of products and services to our government customers. Our method for developing our allowance for credit losses involves making informed judgments regarding whether an adjustment is necessary to our historical loss experiences to reflect our expectations around current economic conditions and reasonable and supportable forecast periods, where applicable. We utilize current economic market data as well as other internal and external information available to us to inform our decision making. In certain circumstances we may be able to develop reasonable and supportable forecasts over the contractual term of the financial asset or off-balance sheet exposure. For periods beyond which we are able to make or obtain reasonable and supportable forecasts, we revert to historical loss experience and information.

We determine credit ratings for each customer in our portfolio based upon public information and information obtained directly from our customers. We conduct a review of customer credit ratings, published historical credit default rates for different rating categories, and multiple third-party aircraft value publications as a basis to validate the reasonableness of the allowance for credit losses on these balances quarterly or when events and circumstances warrant. In addition to credit quality indicators, factors considered in our evaluation of assessing collectability and risk include: underlying value of any collateral or security interests, significant past due balances, historical losses, and existing economic conditions, including geographic and political risk. A credit limit is established for each customer based on the outcome of this review. Customer credit ratings range from customers with an extremely strong capacity to meet financial obligations, to customers whose uncollateralized receivable is in default. We may require collateral or prepayment to mitigate credit risk.

To estimate expected credit losses of financial assets with similar risk characteristics, we determine an asset is impaired when, based on historical experience, current information and a reasonable forecast period, there’s risk that we will be unable to collect amounts due according to the contractual terms of the agreement. We monitor our ongoing credit exposure through reviews of customer balances against contract terms and due dates, current economic conditions, and dispute resolution. Estimated credit losses are written off in the period in which the financial asset is no longer collectible.

We can also be exposed to credit losses from off-balance sheet exposures, such as certain financial guarantees and financing commitments. We have assessed these potential exposures and concluded that there are no associated credit losses as of March 31, 2020.

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-14, Compensation—Retirement Benefits—Defined Benefit Plans—General (Subtopic 715-20): Disclosure Framework—Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Defined Benefit Plans. The new standard includes updates to the annual disclosure requirements for defined benefit plans including several additions, deletions and modifications to the disclosure requirements. The provisions of this ASU are effective for years beginning after December 15, 2020. This standard is required to be applied retrospectively. We do not expect this ASU to have a material effect on our annual disclosures.

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-15, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other—Internal-Use Software (Subtopic 350-40): Customer’s Accounting for Implementation Costs Incurred in a Cloud Computing Arrangement That Is a Service Contract. The new standard provides updated guidance surrounding implementation costs associated with cloud computing arrangements that are service contracts. The provisions of this ASU are effective for years beginning after December 15, 2019, with early adoption permitted. We adopted the new standard prospectively effective January 1, 2020. This ASU did not have a material impact on the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

In October 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-17, Consolidation (Topic 810): Targeted Improvements to Related Party Guidance for Variable Interest Entities. The amendments in this update for determining whether a decision-making fee is a variable interest require reporting entities to consider indirect interests held through related parties under common control on a proportional basis rather than as the equivalent of a direct interest in its entirety (as currently required in generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP)). These amendments also will create alignment between determining whether a decision making fee is a variable interest and determining whether a reporting entity within a related party group is the primary beneficiary of a VIE. This will significantly reduce the risk that decision makers with insignificant direct and indirect interests could be deemed the primary beneficiary of a VIE. The provisions of this ASU are effective for years beginning after December 15, 2019, with early adoption permitted. We adopted the new standard effective January 1, 2020. This ASU did not have an impact on the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

In November 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-18, Collaborative Arrangements (Topic 808): Clarifying the Interaction between Topic 808 and Topic 606. The amendments in this update make targeted improvements to GAAP for collaborative arrangements as follows: clarify 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. In those situations, all the guidance in Topic 606 should be applied, including recognition, measurement, presentation, and disclosure requirements; add 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 require 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. The provisions of this ASU are effective for years beginning after December 15, 2019, with early adoption permitted. We adopted the new standard effective January 1, 2020. This ASU did not have a material impact on the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

In December 2019, the FASB issued ASU 2019-12, Income Taxes (Topic 740): Simplifying the Accounting for Income Taxes. The amendments in this update remove certain exceptions of Topic 740 including: exception to the incremental approach for intraperiod tax allocation when there is a loss from continuing operations and income or gain from other items; exception to the requirement to recognize a deferred tax liability for equity method investments when a foreign subsidiary becomes an equity method investment; exception to the ability not to recognize a deferred tax liability for a foreign subsidiary when a foreign equity method investment becomes a subsidiary; exception to the general methodology for calculating income taxes in an interim period when a year-to-date loss exceeds the anticipated loss for the year. There are also additional areas of guidance in regards to: franchise and other taxes partially based on income and the interim recognition of enactment of tax laws and rate changes. The provisions of this ASU are effective for years beginning after December 15, 2020, with early adoption permitted. We are currently evaluating the impact of this ASU on our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.