Recent Accounting Pronouncements	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2019
Recent Accounting Pronouncements [Abstract]
Recent Accounting Pronouncements	20. Recent Accounting Pronouncements Recently Adopted Accounting Guidance The following paragraphs provide descriptions of recently adopted accounting standards that may have had a material effect on the Company’s financial position or results of operations. The FASB issued guidance in February 2016, with amendments in 2018 and 2019, which changed the accounting for leases. The guidance requires lessees to recognize right-of-use (ROU) assets and lease liabilities for most leases where we are the lessee in the Consolidated Statement of Financial Position. The guidance also made some changes to lessor accounting, including the elimination of the use of third-party residual value guarantee insurance in the lease classification test, and overall aligns with the new revenue recognition guidance. The guidance also requires qualitative and quantitative disclosures to assess the amount, timing and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases. ASU 2016-02 provides for a modified retrospective transition approach requiring lessees to recognize and measure leases on the consolidated balance sheet at the beginning of either the earliest period presented or as of the beginning of the period of adoption with the option to elect certain practical expedients. The Company elected the package of practical expedients not to reassess prior conclusions related to contracts containing leases, lease classification and initial direct costs (IDC’s). From a lessor perspective, the changes in lease termination guidance, IDC and removal of third-party residual value guarantee insurance in the lease classification test did not have a material impact on the consolidated financial results. We adopted ASU No. 2016-02 Leases (Topic 842), as of January 1, 2019, using the cumulative effect transition approach. The cumulative effect transition approach provides a method for recording existing leases at adoption and not restated comparative periods; rather the effect of the change is recorded at the beginning of the year of adoption. The Company elected the ASU’s package of three practical expedients, which allowed the Company to forego a reassessment of (i) whether any expired or existing contracts contain leases, (ii) the lease classification for any expired or existing leases and (iii) the initial direct costs for any existing leases. The Company elected the option not to separate lease and non-lease components and instead to account for them as a single lease component and the hindsight practical expedient, which allows entities to use hindsight when determining lease term and impairment of right-of-use assets. The Company has several lease agreements, such as branch locations, which are considered operating leases, and therefore, were not previously recognized on the Company’s consolidated statements of condition. The new guidance requires these lease agreements to be recognized as a right-of-use asset and corresponding lease liability. Our operating leases relate primarily to office space and bank branches. As a result of implementing ASU 2016-02, we recognized an operating lease right-of-use (“ROU”) asset of $4.73 million and an operating lease liability of $4.73 million on January 1, 2019, with no impact on our consolidated statement of income or consolidated statement of cash flows compared to the prior lease accounting model. The ROU asset and operating lease liability are recorded in other assets and other liabilities, respectively, in the consolidated balance sheets. See Note 19 – “Leases” for additional information. In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-01, Financial Instruments – Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities. The ASU addresses certain aspects of recognition, measurement, presentation, and disclosure of financial instruments. Most notably, the ASU changes the income statement impact of equity investments held by the Company and the requirement for the Company to use the exit price notion when measuring the fair value of financial instruments for disclosure purposes. The Company adopted the ASU provisions on January 1, 2018. The adoption of the ASU resulted in the use of an exit price rather than an entrance price to determine the fair value of loans not measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis in the consolidated balance sheets. See Note 17 – Fair Value of Financial Instruments for further information regarding the valuation of these loans. In February 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-02, Income Statement – Reporting Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Reclassification of Certain Tax Effects from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income. The amendments in ASU 2018-02 allow a reclassification from accumulated other comprehensive income (“AOCI”) to retained earnings for stranded tax effects resulting from the newly enacted Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (“Tax Act”). The amount of the reclassification consists of the difference between the historical corporate income tax rates and the newly enacted 21 percent corporate federal income tax rate. The amendments are effective for all entities for the interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018, and early adoption is permitted, including interim periods in those years. The Company adopted the amendments as of December 31, 2017, which resulted in a net reclassification of $144,000 between AOCI and retained earnings. Accounting Guidance Pending Adoption at December 31, 2019 The following paragraphs provide descriptions of newly issued but not yet effective accounting standards that could have a material effect on the Company’s financial position or results of operations. In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments. The ASU will require the earlier recognition of credit losses on loans and other financial instruments based on an expected loss model, replacing the incurred loss model that is currently in use. Under the new guidance, an entity will measure all expected credit losses for financial instruments held at the reporting date based on historical experience, current conditions and reasonable and supportable forecasts. The expected loss model will apply to loans and leases, unfunded lending commitments, held-to-maturity debt securities and other debt instruments measured at amortized cost. The impairment model for available-for-sale debt securities will require the recognition of credit losses through a valuation allowance when fair value is less than amortized cost, regardless of whether the impairment is considered to be other-than-temporary. The new guidance is effective on January 1, 2020. During 2109 Company completed an assessment of its CECL data and system needs, and engaged a third-party vendor to assist in developing a CECL model. The Company, in conjunction with this vendor, researched and analyzed modeling standards, loan segmentation, as well as potential external inputs to supplement our historical loss history. Model validation began in the third quarter, enabling us to complete a parallel run using second, third and fourth quarter 2019 data. The ultimate impact of adopting the standard on January 1, 2020 will depend on the characteristics of the Company’s portfolios, macroeconomic conditions and forecasts, the ultimate validation of models and methodologies, and other management judgments.

20. Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Recently Adopted Accounting Guidance

The following paragraphs provide descriptions of recently adopted accounting standards that may have had a material effect on the Company’s financial position or results of operations.

The FASB issued guidance in February 2016, with amendments in 2018 and 2019, which changed the accounting for leases. The guidance requires lessees to recognize right-of-use (ROU) assets and lease liabilities for most leases where we are the lessee in the Consolidated Statement of Financial Position. The guidance also made some changes to lessor accounting, including the elimination of the use of third-party residual value guarantee insurance in the lease classification test, and overall aligns with the new revenue recognition guidance. The guidance also requires qualitative and quantitative disclosures to assess the amount, timing and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases. ASU 2016-02 provides for a modified retrospective transition approach requiring lessees to recognize and measure leases on the consolidated balance sheet at the beginning of either the earliest period presented or as of the beginning of the period of adoption with the option to elect certain practical expedients. The Company elected the package of practical expedients not to reassess prior conclusions related to contracts containing leases, lease classification and initial direct costs (IDC’s). From a lessor perspective, the changes in lease termination guidance, IDC and removal of third-party residual value guarantee insurance in the lease classification test did not have a material impact on the consolidated financial results. We adopted ASU No. 2016-02 Leases (Topic 842), as of January 1, 2019, using the cumulative effect transition approach. The cumulative effect transition approach provides a method for recording existing leases at adoption and not restated comparative periods; rather the effect of the change is recorded at the beginning of the year of adoption. The Company elected the ASU’s package of three practical expedients, which allowed the Company to forego a reassessment of (i) whether any expired or existing contracts contain leases, (ii) the lease classification for any expired or existing leases and (iii) the initial direct costs for any existing leases. The Company elected the option not to separate lease and non-lease components and instead to account for them as a single lease component and the hindsight practical expedient, which allows entities to use hindsight when determining lease term and impairment of right-of-use assets.

The Company has several lease agreements, such as branch locations, which are considered operating leases, and therefore, were not previously recognized on the Company’s consolidated statements of condition. The new guidance requires these lease agreements to be recognized as a right-of-use asset and corresponding lease liability.

Our operating leases relate primarily to office space and bank branches. As a result of implementing ASU 2016-02, we recognized an operating lease right-of-use (“ROU”) asset of $4.73 million and an operating lease liability of $4.73 million on January 1, 2019, with no impact on our consolidated statement of income or consolidated statement of cash flows compared to the prior lease accounting model. The ROU asset and operating lease liability are recorded in other assets and other liabilities, respectively, in the consolidated balance sheets. See Note 19 – “Leases” for additional information.

In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-01, Financial Instruments – Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities. The ASU addresses certain aspects of recognition, measurement, presentation, and disclosure of financial instruments. Most notably, the ASU changes the income statement impact of equity investments held by the Company and the requirement for the Company to use the exit price notion when measuring the fair value of financial instruments for disclosure purposes. The Company adopted the ASU provisions on January 1, 2018. The adoption of the ASU resulted in the use of an exit price rather than an entrance price to determine the fair value of loans not measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis in the consolidated balance sheets. See Note 17 – Fair Value of Financial Instruments for further information regarding the valuation of these loans.

In February 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-02, Income Statement – Reporting Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Reclassification of Certain Tax Effects from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income. The amendments in ASU 2018-02 allow a reclassification from accumulated other comprehensive income (“AOCI”) to retained earnings for stranded tax effects resulting from the newly enacted Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (“Tax Act”). The amount of the reclassification consists of the difference between the historical corporate income tax rates and the newly enacted 21 percent corporate federal income tax rate. The amendments are effective for all entities for the interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018, and early adoption is permitted, including interim periods in those years. The Company adopted the amendments as of December 31, 2017, which resulted in a net reclassification of $144,000 between AOCI and retained earnings.

Accounting Guidance Pending Adoption at December 31, 2019

The following paragraphs provide descriptions of newly issued but not yet effective accounting standards that could have a material effect on the Company’s financial position or results of operations.

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments. The ASU will require the earlier recognition of credit losses on loans and other financial instruments based on an expected loss model, replacing the incurred loss model that is currently in use. Under the new guidance, an entity will measure all expected credit losses for financial instruments held at the reporting date based on historical experience, current conditions and reasonable and supportable forecasts. The expected loss model will apply to loans and leases, unfunded lending commitments, held-to-maturity debt securities and other debt instruments measured at amortized cost. The impairment model for available-for-sale debt securities will require the recognition of credit losses through a valuation allowance when fair value is less than amortized cost, regardless of whether the impairment is considered to be other-than-temporary. The new guidance is effective on January 1, 2020. During 2109 Company completed an assessment of its CECL data and system needs, and engaged a third-party vendor to assist in developing a CECL model. The Company, in conjunction with this vendor, researched and analyzed modeling standards, loan segmentation, as well as potential external inputs to supplement our historical loss history. Model validation began in the third quarter, enabling us to complete a parallel run using second, third and fourth quarter 2019 data. The ultimate impact of adopting the standard on January 1, 2020 will depend on the characteristics of the Company’s portfolios, macroeconomic conditions and forecasts, the ultimate validation of models and methodologies, and other management judgments.