1.	Organization and Basis of Presentation

BGC Partners, Inc. is a leading global brokerage and financial technology company servicing the global financial markets. Through the Company’s financial service brands, including BGC, GFI, Sunrise Brokers, Besso, Ed Broking, Poten & Partners and RP Martin, among others, the Company specializes in the brokerage of a broad range of products, including fixed income (rates and credit), foreign exchange, equities, energy and commodities, insurance, and futures. It also provides a wide variety of services, including trade execution, brokerage, clearing, trade compression, post-trade, information, and other back-office services to a broad assortment of financial and non-financial institutions. BGC Partners’ integrated platform is designed to provide flexibility to customers with regards to price discovery, execution and processing of transactions, and enables them to use Voice, Hybrid, or in many markets, Fully Electronic brokerage services in connection with transactions executed either OTC or through an exchange. Through the Company’s electronic brands, including Fenics, BGC Trader, CreditMatch, Fenics Market Data, BGC Market Data, kACE2, EMBonds, Capitalab, Swaptioniser, CBID and Lucera, BGC Partners offers Fully Electronic brokerage, financial technology solutions, market data, post-trade services and analytics related to financial instruments and markets.

The Company’s customers include many of the world’s largest banks, broker-dealers, investment banks, trading firms, hedge funds, governments, corporations, and investment firms. BGC Partners has dozens of offices globally in major markets including New York and London, as well as in Bahrain, Beijing, Bermuda, Bogotá, Brisbane, Buenos Aires, Chicago, Copenhagen, Dubai, Dublin, Frankfurt, Geneva, Hong Kong, Houston, Istanbul, Johannesburg, Madrid, Melbourne, Mexico City, Moscow, Nyon, Paris, Rio de Janeiro, Santiago, São Paulo, Seoul, Shanghai, Singapore, Sydney, Tel Aviv, Tokyo, and Toronto.

The Company previously offered real estate services through its publicly traded subsidiary, Newmark Group, Inc. (NASDAQ: NMRK). On November 30, 2018, BGC completed the Spin-Off, with shares of Newmark Class A common stock distributed to the holders of shares of BGC Class A common stock (including directors and executive officers of BGC Partners) of record as of the close of business on the Record Date and shares of Newmark Class B common stock distributed to the holders of shares of BGC Partners Class B common stock (consisting of Cantor and CFGM) of record as of the close of business on the Record Date. The Spin-Off was effective as of 12:01 a.m., New York City time, on the Distribution Date.

On November 30, 2018, the Company completed the Spin-Off. Based on the number of shares of BGC common stock outstanding on the Record Date, BGC’s stockholders as of the Record Date received 0.463895 of a share of Newmark Class A common stock for each share of BGC Class A common stock held as of the Record Date, and 0.463895 of a share of Newmark Class B common stock for each share of BGC Class B common stock held as of the Record Date. No fractional shares of Newmark common stock were distributed in the Spin-Off. Instead, BGC stockholders received cash in lieu of any fraction of a share of Newmark common stock that they otherwise would have received in the Spin-Off.

In the aggregate, BGC Partners distributed 131,886,409 shares of Newmark Class A common stock and 21,285,537 shares of Newmark Class B common stock to BGC’s stockholders in the Spin-Off. These shares of Newmark common stock collectively represented approximately 94% of the total voting power of the outstanding Newmark common stock and approximately 87% of the total economics of the outstanding Newmark common stock in each case as of the Distribution Date.

On November 30, 2018, BGC Partners also caused its subsidiary, BGC Holdings, to distribute pro-rata all of the 1,458,931 exchangeable LPUs of Newmark Holdings held by BGC Holdings immediately prior to the Distribution Date to its limited partners entitled to receive distributions on their BGC Holdings units who were holders as of the Record Date (including Cantor and executive officers of BGC). The Newmark Holdings units distributed to BGC Holdings partners in the BGC Holdings Distribution are exchangeable for shares of Newmark Class A common stock, and in the case of the 449,917 Newmark Holdings units received by Cantor also into shares of Newmark Class B common stock, at the current Exchange Ratio. As of June 30, 2020, the Exchange Ratio equaled 0.9366 shares of Newmark common stock per Newmark Holdings unit (subject to adjustment).

See Note 1—“Organization and Basis of Presentation” to the Company’s consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K as of December 31, 2019, for further information regarding the transactions related to the IPO and Spin-Off of Newmark.

Following the Spin-Off and the BGC Holdings Distribution, BGC ceased to be a controlling stockholder of Newmark, and BGC and its subsidiaries no longer held any shares of Newmark common stock or other equity interests in Newmark or its subsidiaries. Therefore, the Company no longer consolidates Newmark with its financial results subsequent to the Spin-Off. Cantor continues to control Newmark and its subsidiaries following the Spin-Off and the BGC Holdings Distribution.

The Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared pursuant to the rules and regulations of the SEC and in conformity with U.S. GAAP. The Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements include the Company’s accounts and all subsidiaries in which the Company has a controlling interest. Intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. Certain reclassifications have been made to previously reported amounts to conform to the current presentation.

Effective with the three and six months ended June 30, 2020, the Company changed the line item formerly known as “Interest income” to “Interest and dividend income” in the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operation. The change did not result in any reclassification of revenue, had no impact on the Company’s “Total revenues” and is viewed only as a name change to better reflect the underlying activity.

Effective with the three months ended March 31, 2019, the Company changed the line item formerly known as “Allocations of net income and grant of exchangeability to limited partnership units and FPUs and issuance of common stock” to “Equity-based compensation and allocations of net income to limited partnership units and FPUs” in the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations and unaudited condensed consolidated statements of cash flows. The change resulted in the reclassification of amortization charges related to equity-based awards such as REUs and RSUs from “Compensation and employee benefits” to “Equity-based compensation and allocations of net income to limited partnership units and FPUs.” This change in presentation had no impact on the Company’s “Total compensation and employee benefits” nor “Total expenses.”

“Equity-based compensation and allocations of net income to limited partnership units and FPUs” reflects the following items related to cash and equity-based compensation:

•

Charges with respect to the issuance of shares of common stock or LPUs with capital accounts, such as HDUs, including in connection with the redemption of non-exchangeable LPUs, including PSUs, as well as the cash paid in the settlement of the related Preferred Units to pay withholding taxes owed by the unit holder upon such grant.

•

Charges with respect to the grant of exchangeability, such as the right of holders of LPUs with no capital accounts, such as PSUs, to exchange the units into shares of Class A common stock or HDUs, as well as the cash paid in the settlement of the related Preferred Units to pay the withholding taxes owed by the unit holder upon such issuance or exchange.

•

Charges related to the amortization of RSUs and LPUs, including REUs.

•

Allocations of net income to LPUs and FPUs, including the Preferred Distribution.

The unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements contain all normal and recurring adjustments that, in the opinion of management, are necessary for a fair presentation of the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of financial condition, the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations, the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of comprehensive income (loss), the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of cash flows and the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of changes in equity of the Company for the periods presented.

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, which relates to how an entity recognizes the revenue it expects to be entitled to for the transfer of promised goods and services to customers. The ASU replaced certain previously existing revenue recognition guidance. The FASB has subsequently issued several additional amendments to the standard, including ASU

No. 2016-08, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net), which clarifies the guidance on principal versus agent analysis based on the notion of control and affects recognition of revenue on a gross or net basis. The Company adopted the new revenue recognition guidance on its required effective date of January 1, 2018 using the modified retrospective transition approach applied to contracts that were not completed as of the adoption date. Accordingly, the new revenue standard is applied prospectively in the Company’s financial statements from January 1, 2018 onward and reported financial information for historical comparable periods is not revised and continues to be reported under the accounting standards in effect during those historical periods. The new revenue recognition guidance does not apply to revenues associated with financial instruments, including loans and securities that are accounted for under other U.S. GAAP, and as a result, it did not have a material impact on the elements of the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations most closely associated with financial instruments such as revenues from Principal transactions. As a result, the adoption of the new revenue recognition guidance as of January 1, 2018 did not have a material impact on the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements. Further, the adoption of the new guidance on principal versus agent considerations impacted the Company’s presentation of revenues versus expenses incurred on behalf of customers for certain commissions contracts. The Company concluded that it controls the services provided by a third party on behalf of the customers and, therefore, acts as a principal under those contracts. Accordingly, upon adoption on January 1, 2018 and going forward, for these commission-related contracts the Company began to present expenses incurred on behalf of its customers along with a corresponding reimbursement revenue on a gross basis in its consolidated statements of operations, with no impact to Net income (loss) available to common stockholders. See Note 24—“Revenues from Contracts with Customers” for additional information.

In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01, Financial Instruments—Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities. This ASU requires entities to measure equity investments that do not result in consolidation and are not accounted for under the equity method at fair value and recognize any changes in fair value in net income (loss) unless the investments qualify for the new measurement alternative. The guidance also requires entities to record changes in instrument-specific credit risk for financial liabilities measured under the fair value option in other comprehensive income (loss). In February 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-03, Technical Corrections and Improvements to Financial Instruments—Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities, to clarify transition and subsequent accounting for equity investments without a readily determinable fair value, among other aspects of the guidance issued in ASU 2016-01. The amendments in ASU 2018-03 were effective for fiscal years beginning January 1, 2018 and interim periods beginning July 1, 2018. The amendments and technical corrections provided in ASU 2018-03 could be adopted concurrently with ASU 2016-01, which was effective for the Company on January 1, 2018. The Company adopted both ASUs on January 1, 2018 using the modified retrospective approach for equity securities with a readily determinable fair value and the prospective method for equity investments without a readily determinable fair value. As a result, upon transition the Company recognized a cumulative-effect adjustment as a decrease to both Retained deficit and Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) and an increase in Noncontrolling interest in subsidiaries of approximately $2.1 million, $2.9 million, and $0.8 million, respectively, on a pre-tax basis. The tax effect of the impact of the adoption was an increase to both Retained deficit and Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) and a decrease in Noncontrolling interest in subsidiaries of approximately $0.4 million, $0.6 million, and $0.2 million, respectively.

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-01, Business Combinations (Topic 805): Clarifying the Definition of a Business, which clarifies the definition of a business with the objective of providing additional guidance to assist entities with evaluating whether transactions should be accounted for as acquisitions (or disposals) of assets or businesses. The standard became effective for the Company beginning January 1, 2018 and is applied on a prospective basis. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

In February 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-05, Other Income—Gains and Losses from the Derecognition of Nonfinancial Assets (Subtopic 610-20): Clarifying the Scope of Asset Derecognition Guidance and Accounting for Partial Sales of Nonfinancial Assets, which clarifies the scope and application of ASC 610-20, Other Income—Gains and Losses from Derecognition of Nonfinancial Assets, and defines in substance nonfinancial assets. The ASU also impacts the accounting for partial sales of nonfinancial assets (including in substance real estate). Under this guidance, when an entity transfers its controlling interest in a nonfinancial asset but retains a noncontrolling ownership interest, the entity is required to measure the retained interest at fair value, which results in a full gain or loss recognition upon the sale of a controlling interest in a nonfinancial asset. The Company adopted the standard on its required effective date of January 1, 2018. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

In May 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-09, Compensation—Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Scope of Modification Accounting, which amends the scope of modification accounting for share-based payment arrangements and provides guidance on the types of changes to the terms or conditions of share-based payment awards to which an entity would be required to apply modification accounting. Under this guidance, an entity would not apply modification accounting if the fair value, the vesting conditions, and the classification of the awards (as equity or liability) are the same immediately before and after the modification. The standard was effective for the Company beginning January 1, 2018 on a prospective basis for awards modified on or after the adoption date. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842). This standard requires lessees to recognize an ROU asset and lease liability for all leases with terms of more than 12 months. Recognition, measurement and presentation of expenses will depend on classification as a finance or operating lease. The amendments also require certain quantitative and qualitative disclosures. Accounting guidance for lessors is mostly unchanged. In July 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-10, Codification Improvements to Topic 842, Leases, to clarify how to apply certain aspects of the new leases standard. The amendments address the rate implicit in the lease, impairment of the net investment in the lease, lessee reassessment of lease classification, lessor reassessment of lease term and purchase options, variable payments that depend on an index or rate and certain transition adjustments, among other issues. In addition, in July 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-11, Leases (Topic

842), Targeted Improvements, which provided an additional (and optional) transition method to adopt the new leases standard. Under the new transition method, a reporting entity would initially apply the new lease requirements at the effective date and recognize a cumulative-effect adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings in the period of adoption; continue to report comparative periods presented in the financial statements in the period of adoption in accordance with legacy U.S. GAAP (i.e., ASC 840, Leases); and provide the required disclosures under ASC 840 for all periods presented under legacy U.S. GAAP. Further, ASU 2018-11 contains a practical expedient that allows lessors to avoid separating lease and associated non-lease components within a contract if certain criteria are met. In December 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-20, Leases (Topic 842), Narrow-Scope Improvements for Lessors, to clarify guidance for lessors on sales taxes and other similar taxes collected from lessees, certain lessor costs and recognition of variable payments for contracts with lease and non-lease components. In March 2019, the FASB issued ASU 2019-01, Leases (Topic 842), Codification Improvements, to clarify certain application and transitional disclosure aspects of the new leases standard. The amendments address determination of the fair value of the underlying asset by lessors that are not manufacturers or dealers and clarify interim period transition disclosure requirements, among other issues. The guidance in ASUs 2016-02, 2018-10, 2018-11 and 2018-20 was effective beginning January 1, 2019, with early adoption permitted; whereas the guidance in ASU 2019-01 is effective beginning January 1, 2020, with early adoption permitted. The Company adopted the abovementioned standards on January 1, 2019 using the effective date as the date of initial application. Therefore, pursuant to this transition method financial information was not updated and the disclosures required under the new leases standards were not provided for dates and periods before January 1, 2019. The guidance provides a number of optional practical expedients to be utilized by lessees upon transition. Accordingly, BGC elected the “package of practical expedients,” which permitted the Company not to reassess under the new standard its prior conclusions about lease identification, lease classification and initial direct costs. BGC did not elect the use-of-hindsight or the practical expedient pertaining to land easements, with the latter not being applicable to the Company. The standard also provides practical expedients for an entity’s ongoing accounting as a lessee. BGC elected the short-term lease recognition exemption for all leases that qualify. This means, for those leases that qualify, the Company will not recognize ROU assets and lease liabilities, and this includes not recognizing ROU assets and lease liabilities for existing short-term leases of those assets upon transition. The Company also elected the practical expedient to not separate lease and non-lease components for all of leases other than leases of real estate. As a result upon adoption, acting primarily as a lessee, BGC recognized a $192.4 million ROU asset and a $206.0 million lease liability on its unaudited condensed consolidated statements of financial condition for its real estate and equipment operating leases. The adoption of the guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations, unaudited condensed consolidated statements of changes in equity and unaudited condensed consolidated statements of cash flows. See Note 25 —“Leases” for additional information on the Company’s leasing arrangements.

In August 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-12, Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities. The guidance intends to better align an entity’s risk management activities and financial reporting for hedging relationships through changes to both the designation and measurement guidance for qualifying hedging relationships and the presentation of hedge results. To meet that objective, the amendments expand and refine hedge accounting for both nonfinancial and financial risk components and align the recognition and presentation of the effects of the hedging instrument and the hedged item in the financial statements. In October 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-16, Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Inclusion of the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR) Overnight Index Swap (OIS) Rate as a Benchmark Interest Rate for Hedge Accounting Purposes. Based on concerns about the sustainability of LIBOR, in 2017, a committee convened by the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York identified a broad Treasury repurchase agreement (repo) financing rate referred to as the SOFR as its preferred alternative reference rate. The guidance in ASU No. 2018-16 adds the OIS rate based on SOFR as a U.S. benchmark interest rate to facilitate the LIBOR to SOFR transition and provide sufficient lead time for entities to prepare for changes to interest rate risk hedging strategies for both risk management and hedge accounting purposes. The amendments in this ASU were required to be adopted concurrently with the guidance in ASU No. 2017-12. The guidance became effective for the Company on January 1, 2019 and was required to be applied on a prospective and modified retrospective basis. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on BGC’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

In February 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-02, Income Statement—Reporting Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Reclassification of Certain Tax Effects from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income. The guidance helps organizations address certain stranded income tax effects in accumulated other comprehensive income resulting from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act by providing an option to reclassify these stranded tax effects to retained earnings in each period in which the effect of the change in the U.S. federal corporate income tax rate in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (or portion thereof) is recorded. The standard became effective for BGC on January 1, 2019. The guidance was required to be applied either in the period of adoption or retrospectively to each period (or periods) in which the effect of the change in the U.S. federal corporate income tax rate in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is recognized. The Company adopted the guidance starting on January 1, 2019. The adoption of the standard did not have a material impact on the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

In June 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-07, Compensation—Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Nonemployee Share-Based Payment Accounting. The guidance largely aligns the accounting for share-based payment awards issued to employees and nonemployees, whereby the existing employee guidance will apply to nonemployee share-based transactions (as long as the transaction is not effectively a form of financing), with the exception of specific guidance related to the attribution of compensation cost. The cost of nonemployee awards will continue to be recorded as if the grantor had paid cash for the goods or services. In addition, the contractual term will be able to be used in lieu of an expected term in the option-pricing model for nonemployee awards. The standard became effective for the Company on January 1, 2019. The ASU was required to be applied on a prospective basis to all new awards granted after the date of adoption. In addition, any liability-classified awards that were not settled and equity-classified awards for which a measurement date had not been established by the adoption date were remeasured at fair value as of the adoption date with a cumulative effect adjustment to opening retained earnings in the year of adoption. BGC adopted this standard on its effective date. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

In July 2019, the FASB issued ASU No. 2019-07, Codification Updates to SEC Sections—Amendments to SEC Paragraphs Pursuant to SEC Final Rule Releases No. 33-10532, Disclosure Update and Simplification, and Nos. 33-10231 and 33-10442, Investment Company Reporting Modernization, and Miscellaneous Updates. The guidance clarifies or improves the disclosure and presentation requirements of a variety of codification topics by aligning them with already effective SEC final rules, thereby eliminating redundancies and making the codification easier to apply. This ASU was effective upon issuance, and it did not have a material impact on the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements and related disclosures.

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13, Financial Instruments—Credit Losses (Topic 326)—Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments, which requires financial assets that are measured at amortized cost to be presented, net of an allowance for credit losses, at the amount expected to be collected over their estimated life. Expected credit losses for newly recognized financial assets, as well as changes to credit losses during the period, are recognized in earnings. For certain PCD assets, the initial allowance for expected credit losses is recorded as an increase to the purchase price. Expected credit losses, including losses on off-balance-sheet exposures such as lending commitments, are measured based on historical experience, current conditions and reasonable and supportable forecasts that affect the collectability of the reported amount. The new standard became effective for the Company beginning January 1, 2020, under a modified retrospective approach, and early adoption was permitted. In November 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-19, Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments—Credit Losses, to clarify that operating lease receivables accounted for under ASC 842, Leases, are not in the scope of the new credit losses guidance, and, instead, impairment of receivables arising from operating leases should be accounted for in accordance with ASC 842, Leases. In April 2019, the FASB issued ASU No. 2019-04, Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments—Credit Losses, Topic 815, Derivatives and Hedging, and Topic 825, Financial Instruments. The ASU makes changes to the guidance introduced or amended by ASU No. 2016-13, Financial Instruments—Credit Losses (Topic 326)—Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments. See below for the description of the amendments stipulated in ASU No. 2019-04. In addition, in May 2019, the FASB issued ASU No. 2019-05, Financial Instruments—Credit Losses (Topic 326): Targeted Transition Relief. The amendments in this ASU allow entities, upon adoption of ASU No. 2016-13, to irrevocably elect the fair value option for financial instruments that were previously carried at amortized cost and are eligible for the fair value option under ASC 825-10, Financial Instruments: Overall. In November 2019, the FASB issued ASU No. 2019-11, Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments—Credit Losses. The amendments in this ASU require entities to include certain expected recoveries of the amortized cost basis previously written off, or expected to be written off, in the allowance for credit losses for PCD assets; provide transition relief related to troubled debt restructurings; allow entities to exclude accrued interest amounts from certain required disclosures; and clarify the requirements for applying the collateral maintenance practical expedient. The amendments in ASUs No. 2018-19, 2019-04, 2019-05 and 2019-11 were required to be adopted concurrently with the guidance in ASU No. 2016-13. BGC adopted the standards on their required effective date beginning January 1, 2020. The primary effect of adoption related to the increase in the allowances for credit losses for Accrued commissions receivable, and Loans, forgivable loans and other receivables from employees and partners. As a result, on a pre-tax basis, the Company recognized a decrease in assets and noncontrolling interest in subsidiaries, and an increase in retained deficit, of approximately $1.9 million, $0.6 million, and $1.3 million, respectively, as of January 1, 2020. The tax effect of the impact of the adoption was an increase in assets and noncontrolling interest in subsidiaries, and a decrease in retained deficit of approximately $0.6 million, $0.2 million, and $0.4 million, respectively.

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-04, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment, which eliminates the requirement to determine the fair value of individual assets and liabilities of a reporting unit to measure goodwill impairment. Under the amendments in the ASU, goodwill impairment testing is performed by comparing the fair value of the reporting unit with its carrying amount and recognizing an impairment charge for the amount by which the carrying amount exceeds the reporting unit’s fair value. The Company adopted the standard on its required effective date beginning January 1, 2020, and the guidance will be applied on a prospective basis. The adoption of this standard did not have a material impact on the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-13, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Disclosure Framework—Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement. The guidance is part of the FASB’s disclosure framework project, whose objective and primary focus are to improve the effectiveness of disclosures in the notes to financial statements. The ASU eliminates, amends and adds certain disclosure requirements for fair value measurements. The FASB concluded that these changes improve the overall usefulness of the footnote disclosures for financial statement users and reduce costs for preparers. Certain disclosures are required to be applied prospectively and other disclosures need to be adopted retrospectively in the period of adoption. As permitted by the transition guidance in the ASU, the Company early adopted, eliminated and modified disclosure requirements as of September 30, 2018. The early adoption of this guidance did not have an impact on the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements. The additional disclosure requirements were adopted by BGC beginning January 1, 2020, and the adoption of these fair value measurement disclosures did not have an impact on the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements. See Note 13—“Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities” for additional information.

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 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 (a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force). The guidance on the accounting for implementation, setup, and other upfront costs (collectively referred to as implementation costs) applies to entities that are a customer in a hosting arrangement that is a service contract. The amendments align 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). The accounting for the service element of a hosting arrangement that is a service contract is not affected by the guidance in this ASU. BGC adopted the standard on its effective date beginning January 1, 2020. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

In October 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-17, Consolidation (Topic 810): Targeted Improvements to Related Party Guidance for Variable Interest Entities. The guidance was issued in response to stakeholders’ observations that Topic 810, Consolidation, could be improved in the areas of applying the variable interest entity guidance to private companies under common control and in considering indirect interests held through related parties under common control for determining whether fees paid to decision makers and service providers are variable interests. BGC adopted the standard on its effective date beginning January 1, 2020. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

In April 2019, the FASB issued ASU No. 2019-04, Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments—Credit Losses, Topic 815, Derivatives and Hedging, and Topic 825, Financial Instruments. The ASU amends guidance introduced or amended by ASU No. 2016-13, Financial Instruments—Credit Losses (Topic 326)—Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments, ASU No. 2017-12, Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities, and ASU No. 2016-01, Financial Instruments—Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities. The amendments to ASU No. 2016-13 clarify the scope of the credit losses standard and address guidance related to accrued interest receivable balances, recoveries, variable interest rates and prepayments, among other issues. With respect to amendments to ASU No. 2017-12, the guidance addresses partial-term fair value hedges, fair value hedge basis adjustments, and certain transition requirements, along with other issues. The clarifying guidance pertaining to ASU No. 2016-01 requires an entity to remeasure an equity security without a readily determinable fair value accounted for under the measurement alternative at fair value in accordance with guidance in ASC 820, Fair Value Measurement; specifies that equity securities without a readily determinable fair value denominated in nonfunctional currency must be remeasured at historical exchange rates; and provides fair value measurement disclosure guidance. BGC adopted the standard on the required effective date beginning January 1, 2020. The adoption of the hedge accounting and the recognition and measurement guidance amendments did not have a material impact on the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements. See above for the impact of adoption of the amendments related to the credit losses standard.

In November 2019, the FASB issued ASU No. 2019-08, Compensation—Stock Compensation (Topic 718) and Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Codification Improvements—Share-Based Consideration Payable to a Customer. The ASU simplifies and increases comparability of accounting for nonemployee share-based payments, specifically those made to customers. Under the guidance, such awards will be accounted for as a reduction of the transaction price in revenue, but should be measured and classified following the stock compensation guidance in ASC 718, Compensation—Stock Compensation. BGC adopted standard on the required effective date beginning January 1, 2020. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

In March 2020, the FASB issued ASU No. 2020-03, Codification Improvements to Financial Instruments. This ASU which makes narrow-scope amendments related to various aspects pertaining to financial instruments and related disclosures by clarifying or improving the Codification. For the most part, the guidance was effective upon issuance, and the adoption of the standard did not have a material impact on the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

In December 2019, the FASB issued ASU No. 2019-12, Income Taxes (Topic 740): Simplifying the Accounting for Income Taxes. The ASU is part of the FASB’s simplification initiative, and it is expected to reduce cost and complexity related to accounting for income taxes by eliminating certain exceptions to the guidance in ASC 740, Income Taxes related to the approach for intraperiod tax allocation, the methodology for calculating income taxes in an interim period and the recognition of deferred tax liabilities for outside basis differences. The new guidance also simplifies aspects of the accounting for franchise taxes and enacted changes in tax laws or rates, and clarifies the

accounting for transactions that result in a step-up in the tax basis of goodwill. The new standard will become effective for the Company beginning January 1, 2021 and, with certain exceptions, will be applied prospectively. Early adoption is permitted. Management is currently evaluating the impact of the new guidance on the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

In January 2020, the FASB issued ASU No. 2020-01, Investments—Equity Securities (Topic 321), Investments—Equity Method and Joint Ventures (Topic 323), and Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815)—Clarifying the Interactions between Topic 321, Topic 323, and Topic 815 (a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force). These amendments improve current guidance by reducing diversity in practice and increasing comparability of the accounting for the interactions between these codification topics as they pertain to certain equity securities, investments under the equity method of accounting and forward contracts or purchased options to purchase securities that, upon settlement of the forward contract or exercise of the purchased option, would be accounted for under the equity method of accounting or the fair value option. The new standard will become effective for the Company beginning January 1, 2021 and will be applied prospectively. Early adoption is permitted. Management is currently evaluating the impact of the new guidance on the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

In March 2020, the FASB issued ASU No. 2020-04, Reference Rate Reform (Topic 848): Facilitation of the Effects of Reference Rate Reform on Financial Reporting. The guidance is designed to provide relief from the accounting analysis and impacts that may otherwise be required for modifications to agreements (e.g., loans, debt securities, derivatives, and borrowings) necessitated by reference rate reform as entities transition away from LIBOR and other interbank offered rates to alternative reference rates. This ASU also provides optional expedients to enable companies to continue to apply hedge accounting to certain hedging relationships impacted by reference rate reform. Application of the guidance is optional and only available in certain situations. The ASU is effective upon issuance and generally can be applied through December 31, 2022. Management is currently evaluating the impact of the new guidance on the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.