In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, “Leases”. The FASB issued this ASU to increase transparency and comparability among organizations by recognizing lease assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet by lessees for those leases classified as operating leases under current U.S. GAAP and disclosing key information about leasing arrangements. The amendments in this ASU were effective for annual periods, and interim periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2018. The Company adopted this guidance on its effective date using a modified retrospective transition approach, applying the new standard to all leases existing at the date of initial application, January 1, 2019. Consequently, financial information was not required to be updated and the disclosures required under the new standard were provided beginning January 1, 2019.

The new standard provides a number of optional practical expedients in transition. The Company has elected the practical expedients option which does not require reassessment of its prior conclusions about lease identification, lease classification and initial direct costs. The Company has not elected the use-of-hindsight or the practical expedient pertaining to land easements; the latter not being applicable to it.

The effect of this adoption was the recognition at January 1, 2019 of a $16.4 million operating lease right-of-use (ROU) asset, which has been adjusted for previously recorded accrued rent of $1.7 million, and an $18.1 million operating lease obligation. No opening retained earnings adjustments are necessary under the modified retrospective transition approach. The adoption of this guidance did not have an impact on the consolidated results of operations of the Company.

The ASU also includes disclosure requirements for lessors which encompass the Company’s direct financing leases. The first disclosure requirement is to discuss significant shifts, if any, in the balance of unguaranteed residual assets and deferred selling profit on direct financing leases. The Company’s direct financing lease portfolio consists primarily of vehicles which are sold at the end of lease terms. The Company does not hold title to the vehicles prior to inception of the lease and, thus, selling profit is not expected or deferred. However, sales of the vehicles may result in income when sales prices exceed residual values. This income is reported in the consolidated statements of operations under non-interest income. Since the majority of the portfolio is comprised of vehicle leases, sales prices may differ from residual values as a result of changes in the used vehicle market for both commercial vehicles, such as trucks, and passenger vehicles.

Additionally, the Company is required to disclose the scheduled maturities of its direct financing leases reconciled to the total lease receivables in the consolidated balance sheet, which are as follows (in thousands):


Remaining 2020		$ 41,520
2021		120,670
2022		87,382
2023		56,629
2024		27,709
2025 and thereafter		8,026
Total undiscounted cash flows		341,936
Residual value *		134,546
Difference between undiscounted cash flows and discounted cash flows		(45,807)
Present value of lease payments recorded as lease receivables		$ 430,675

*Of the $134,546,000, $30,050,000 is not guaranteed by the lessee or other guarantors.

In June 2016, the FASB issued an update ASU 2016-13 – “Financial Instruments – Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments”. The Update changes the accounting for credit losses on loans and debt securities. For loans and held-to-maturity debt securities, the Update requires a CECL approach to determine the allowance for credit losses. CECL requires loss estimates for the remaining estimated life of the financial asset using historical experience, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts. Also, the Update eliminates the existing guidance for purchased credit impaired loans, but requires an allowance for purchased financial assets with more than insignificant deterioration since origination. In addition, the Update modifies the OTTI impairment model for available-for-sale debt securities to require an allowance for credit impairment instead of a direct write-down, which allows for reversal of credit impairments in future periods based on improvements in credit. The guidance was effective in the first quarter of 2020 with a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the year of adoption. As a result of the Company’s adoption of the guidance in the first quarter of 2020, it recorded a $2.4 million charge to retained earnings and an $834,000 deferred tax asset, which were offset by $2.6 million in the allowance for credit losses and a $569,000 credit to other liabilities. The $569,000 reflected a reserve on unfunded commitments.

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-13, “Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820) Disclosure Framework—Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement” which eliminates certain fair value disclosures, adds new disclosures and amends another disclosure applicable to the Company as follows. The amendment states that disclosure of measurement uncertainty of the fair values to changes in inputs will be required for the reporting date and not future dates. New fair value disclosures consist of disclosure of: a) total gains and losses in OCI from fair value changes in Level 3 assets and liabilities that are held on the balance sheet date; b) the range and weighted average of inputs and how the weighted average was calculated and c) if weighted average is not meaningful, other quantitative information that better reflects the distribution of inputs. ASU 2018-13 was implemented in first quarter 2020, and the disclosures discussed are included in the financial statements. There was no material impact on the financial statements.