IMPACT OF RECENTLY ISSUED ACCOUNTING STANDARDS

12 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2011

IMPACT OF RECENTLY ISSUED ACCOUNTING STANDARDS

IMPACT OF RECENTLY ISSUED ACCOUNTING STANDARDS

22. IMPACT OF RECENTLY ISSUED ACCOUNTING STANDARDS

In February 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2010-09, Amendments to Certain Recognition and Disclosure Requirements, as an amendment to ASC Topic 855.  As a result of ASU 2010-09, SEC registrants will not disclose the date through which management evaluated subsequent events in financial statements.  ASU 2010-09 was effective immediately for all financial statements that had not yet been issued or had not yet become available to be issued, or March 31, 2010 for the Company.  The adoption of ASU 2010-09 is for disclosure purposes only and did not have any effect on the Company’s financial position or results of operations.

In June 2009, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Standards (“SFAS”) No. 166, Accounting for Transfers of Financial Assets, an Amendment of SFAS No. 140 — Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities, which was subsequently incorporated into ASC Topic 860, Transfers and Servicing. SFAS No. 166 amends ASC Topic 860 and requires more information about transfers of financial assets, including securitization transactions and whether companies have continuing exposure to the risks related to transferred financial assets. It eliminates the concept of a “qualifying special-purpose entity,” changes the requirements for derecognizing financial assets and requires additional disclosures. SFAS No. 166 was effective for the annual period beginning after November 15, 2009 and for interim periods within the first annual reporting period, and was required be applied to transfers occurring on or after the effective date. The adoption of the provisions of this Topic did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial condition or results of operations.

In June 2009, the FASB issued SFAS No. 167, Amendments to FASB Interpretation No. 46(R). SFAS No. 167 amends FIN 46(R), Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities, which was subsequently incorporated into ASC Topic 810, Consolidation, to change how a company determines when an entity that is insufficiently capitalized or is not controlled through voting (or similar rights) should be consolidated, and requires additional disclosures about involvement with variable interest entities, any significant changes in risk exposure due to that involvement and how that involvement affects the company’s financial statements. The determination of whether a company is required to consolidate an entity is based on, among other things, an entity’s purpose and design and a company’s ability to direct the activities of the entity that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance. The provisions of this Topic were effective for the annual period beginning after November 15, 2009 and for interim periods within the first annual reporting period. The adoption of the provisions of this Topic did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial condition or results of operations.

In June 2009, the FASB issued SFAS No. 168, The FASB Accounting Standards Codification TM and the Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, a Replacement of SFAS No. 162 — The Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, which was subsequently incorporated into ASC Topic 105, Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. This ASC establishes the source of authoritative Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (“GAAP”) recognized by the FASB to be applied by non-governmental entities. Rules and interpretive releases of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) under authority of federal securities laws, are also sources of authoritative GAAP for SEC registrants. This ASC superseded all then-existing non-SEC accounting and reporting standards. All other non-grandfathered, non-SEC accounting literature not included in the ASC became non-authoritative. ASC Topic 105 was effective for financial statements issued for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. The implementation of the ASC did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial condition or results of operations.

In January 2010, the FASB issued ASU No. 2010-06 which amends ASC Topic 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures. This update provides more robust disclosures about (a) the different classes of assets and liabilities measured at fair value, (b) the valuation techniques and inputs used, (c) the activity in Level 3 fair value measurements, and (d) the transfers between Levels 1, 2, and 3. The ASU was effective for financial statements issued for interim and annual periods ending after December 15, 2009.  The interim disclosures required by this update are reported in the notes to the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In July 2010, the FASB issued ASU No. 2010-20, Receivables (ASC Topic 310): Disclosures about the Credit Quality of Financing Receivables and the Allowance for Credit Losses. This ASU requires expanded credit risk disclosures intended to provide investors with greater transparency regarding the allowance for credit losses and the credit quality of financing receivables. Under this ASU, companies are required to provide more information about the credit quality of their financing receivables in the disclosures to financial statements, such as aging information, credit quality indicators, changes in the allowance for credit losses, and the nature and extent of troubled debt restructurings and their effect on the allowance for credit losses. Both new and existing disclosures must be disaggregated by portfolio segment or class based on the level of disaggregation that management uses when assessing its allowance for credit losses and managing its credit exposure. The disclosures as of the end of a reporting period were effective for interim and annual periods ending on or after December 15, 2010. The disclosures about activity that occurs during a reporting period were effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning on or after December 15, 2010. The adoption of the provisions of this Topic did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial condition or results of operations.

In April 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-02, A Creditor’s Determination of Whether a Restructuring is a Troubled Debt Restructuring.  The provisions of ASU No. 2011-02 provide additional guidance related to determining whether a creditor has granted a concession, include factors and examples for creditors to consider in evaluating whether a restructuring results in a delay in payment that is insignificant, prohibits creditors from using the borrower’s effective rate test to evaluate whether a concession has been granted to the borrower, and add factors for creditors to use in determining whether a borrower is experiencing financial difficulties.  A provision in ASU No. 2011-02 also ends the deferral of the additional disclosures about troubled debt restructurings as required by ASU No. 2010-20.  The provisions of ASU No. 2011-02 were effective for the Company’s reporting period ending September 30, 2011 and were required to be applied retrospectively to the beginning of the annual period of adoption.  The adoption of the ASU did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial condition or results of operations.

In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-08, Intangibles — Goodwill and Other (ASC Topic 350) — Testing of Goodwill for Impairment. This ASU simplifies how entities test goodwill for impairment. The amendments under this ASU permit an entity to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount as a basis for determining whether it is necessary to perform the two-step goodwill impairment test. The more-likely-than-not threshold is defined as having a likelihood of more than 50 percent. If an entity concludes that it is not more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, it would not be required to perform the two-step impairment test for that reporting unit. This ASU does not change the current guidance for testing other indefinite-lived intangible assets for impairment. The provisions of this ASU are effective for annual and interim goodwill impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011. The adoption of this ASU is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial condition or results of operations.