SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2012

SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

NOTE 2 — SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Derivative Financial Instruments—As part of its asset and liability management strategy, the Company uses derivative financial instruments to mitigate exposure to interest rate and foreign currency risks. All derivative instruments, including certain derivative instruments embedded in other contracts, are recognized on the condensed consolidated balance sheet at fair value with the change in fair value reported in earnings. When master netting agreements exist, the Company nets counterparty positions with any cash collateral received or delivered.

The Company’s interest rate swaps on certain certificates of deposit qualify for hedge accounting treatment under ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging. The Company documents its hedge relationships, including identification of the hedging instruments and the hedged items, as well as its risk management objectives and strategies for undertaking the hedge transaction at the time the derivative contract is executed. This includes designating the derivative contract as a “fair value hedge” which is a hedge of a recognized asset or liability. All derivatives designated as fair value hedges are linked to specific hedged items or to groups of specific assets and liabilities on the balance sheet. Both at inception and quarterly thereafter, the Company assesses whether the derivatives used in hedging transactions are highly effective (as defined in the guidance) in offsetting changes in the fair value of the hedged item. Retroactive effectiveness is also assessed as well as the continued expectation that the hedge will remain effective prospectively. Any ineffective portion of the changes of fair value hedges is recognized immediately in interest expense in the condensed consolidated statements of income.

The Company discontinues hedge accounting prospectively when (i) a derivative is no longer highly effective in offsetting changes in the fair value, (ii) a derivative expires or is sold, terminated, or exercised, or (iii) the Company determines that designation of a derivative as a hedge is no longer appropriate. If a fair value hedge derivative instrument is terminated or the hedge designation removed, the previous adjustments to the carrying amount of the hedged liability would be subsequently accounted for in the same manner as other components of the carrying amount of that liability. For interest-bearing liabilities, such adjustments would be amortized into earnings over the remaining life of the respective liability.

The Company adopted ASU 2011-04, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs and has made the accounting policy election to use the exception in ASC 820 with respect to measuring counterparty credit risk for derivative instruments. That exception permits the Company to measure the fair value of a group of financial assets and liabilities on the basis of the price that would be received to sell an asset position or to transfer a liability position for a particular risk exposure, based on specified criteria, which have been met by the Company.

Comprehensive Income—The term “comprehensive income” describes the total of all components of comprehensive income, including net income and other comprehensive income. “Other comprehensive income” refers to revenues, expenses, and gains and losses that are included in comprehensive income but are excluded from net income because they have been recorded directly in equity under the provisions of other Financial Accounting Standards Board statements. In accordance with the adoption of ASU 2011-05, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Presentation of Comprehensive Income, the Company presents comprehensive income in the condensed consolidated statements of comprehensive income, which was formerly presented in the condensed consolidated statements of changes in stockholders’ equity.

Recent Accounting Standards

In April 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-02, Receivables (Topic 310) A Creditor’s Determination of Whether a Restructuring Is a Troubled Debt Restructuring. ASU 2011-02 clarifies the guidance on the two conditions that must exist in evaluating whether a restructuring constitutes a troubled debt restructuring:  that the restructuring constitutes a concession and that the debtor is experiencing financial difficulties. In addition, ASU 2011-02 clarifies that a creditor is precluded from using the effective interest rate test in the debtor’s guidance on restructuring of payables (paragraph 470-60-55-10) when evaluating whether a restructuring constitutes a troubled debt restructuring. The amendments in ASU 2011-02 are effective for the first interim or annual period beginning on or after June 15, 2011, and should be applied retrospectively to the beginning of the annual period of adoption. Additionally, ASU 2011-02 finalizes the effective date for the disclosures required by paragraphs 310-10-50-33 through 50-34, which were deferred by ASU 2011-01, for interim and annual periods beginning on or after June 15, 2011. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material effect on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements.

In April 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-03, Transfers and Servicing (Topic 860):  Reconsideration of Effective Control for Repurchase Agreements. ASU 2011-03 removes the transferor’s ability criterion from the consideration of effective control for repos and other agreements that both entitle and obligate the transferor to repurchase or redeem financial assets before their maturity. The amendments in ASU 2011-03 remove from the assessment of effective control (1) the criterion requiring the transferor to have the ability to repurchase or redeem the financial assets on substantially the agreed terms, even in the event of default by the transferee, and (2) the collateral maintenance implementation guidance related to that criterion. The FASB indicates that eliminating the transferor’s ability criterion and related implementation guidance from an entity’s assessment of effective control should improve the accounting for repos and other similar transactions. The amendments in ASU 2011-03 are effective for the first interim or annual period beginning on or after December 15, 2011 and are to be applied prospectively to transactions or modifications of existing transactions that occur on or after the effective date. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material effect on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements.

In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-04, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs. ASU 2011-04 addresses convergence between GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) requirements for measurement of and disclosures about fair value. The amendments are not expected to have a significant impact on companies applying GAAP. Key provisions of the amendment include: a prohibition on grouping financial instruments for purposes of determining fair value, except when an entity manages market and credit risks on the basis of the entity’s net exposure to the group; an extension of the prohibition against the use of a blockage factor to all fair value measurements (that prohibition currently applies only to financial instruments with quoted prices in active markets); and a requirement that for recurring Level 3 fair value measurements, entities disclose quantitative information about unobservable inputs, a description of the valuation process used and qualitative details about the sensitivity of the measurements. In addition, for items not carried at fair value but for which fair value is disclosed, entities will be required to disclose the level within the fair value hierarchy that applies to the fair value measurement disclosed. The amendments in ASU 2011-04 are effective during interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material effect on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements.

In June 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-05, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Presentation of Comprehensive Income. ASU 2011-05 will require companies to present the components of net income and other comprehensive income either as one continuous statement or as two consecutive statements. It eliminates the option to present components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in stockholders’ equity. The standard does not change the items which must be reported in other comprehensive income, how such items are measured, or when they must be reclassified to net income. The FASB amended ASU 2011-05 in December 2011, with the issuance of ASU 2011-12, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Deferral of the Effective Date for Amendments to the Presentation of Reclassifications of Items Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income in Accounting Standards Update No. 2011-05. ASU 2011-12 defers only changes in ASU 2011-05 that relate to the presentation of reclassification adjustments. Both standards are effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011. The adoption of these standards only affected the presentation of the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements and did not have an impact on the financial amounts presented in the statements.

In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-08, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Testing Goodwill for Impairment. ASU 2011-08 gives both public and nonpublic companies the option to qualitatively determine whether they can bypass the two-step goodwill impairment test under ASC 350-20, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other: Goodwill. Under ASU 2011-08, if a company chooses to perform a qualitative assessment and determines that it is more likely than not (a more than 50 percent likelihood) that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, it would then perform Step 1 of the annual goodwill impairment test in ASC 350-20 and, if necessary, proceed to Step 2. Otherwise, no further evaluation would be necessary. The amended guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011. The Company has elected to continue to assess the two-step goodwill impairment, quantitatively. As such, this guidance did not have an impact on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements.

In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-11, Balance Sheet (Topic 210): Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities. ASU 2011-11 addresses the differences in offsetting requirements between GAAP and IFRS by enhancing disclosures about financial instruments and derivative instruments that are either offset in accordance with GAAP or are subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement or similar agreement. Entities are required to disclose both gross information and net information about both instruments and transactions eligible for offset in the statement of financial position and instruments and transactions subject to an agreement similar to a master netting arrangement. The guidance is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013, and must be applied retrospectively to all comparative periods presented. Early adoption is permitted. The Company does not expect the adoption of this guidance to have a material effect on its condensed consolidated financial statements.