XML 30 R19.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.5.0.2
Basis of Presentation (Policies)
6 Months Ended
Jul. 02, 2016
Organization, Consolidation and Presentation of Financial Statements [Abstract]  
Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements

Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements

In September 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-16, “Business Combinations (Topic 805) – Simplifying the Accounting for Measurement-Period Adjustments”. This guidance eliminates the requirement to revise prior period financial statements for measurement period adjustments in a business combination. This guidance requires that the cumulative impact of a measurement-period adjustment (including the impact on prior periods) be recognized in the reporting period in which the adjustment is identified. This ASU was effective for the Company on January 3, 2016. The adoption of this ASU did not have an impact on our financial statements.

In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-03, “Interest – Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs,” (ASU 2015-03) which will require debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability to be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of that debt liability, consistent with debt discounts (“original issue discount” or “OID”). The recognition and measurement guidance for debt issuance costs are not affected by the amendments in this ASU. This ASU is effective in financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2015. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-15, “Interest – Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Presentation and Subsequent Measurement of Debt Issuance Costs Associated with Line-of-Credit Arrangements - Amendments to SEC Paragraphs Pursuant to Staff Announcement at June 18, 2015 EITF Meeting,” which amends Subtopic 835-30 to add SEC paragraphs pursuant to the SEC Staff Announcement at the June 18, 2015 Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF) meeting about the presentation and subsequent measurement of debt issuance costs associated with line-of-credit arrangements, regarding the SECs views of the classification of debt issuance costs relating to line-of-credit arrangements as deferred assets when no borrowings exist under the arrangement. We retrospectively adopted ASU 2015-03 in the interim period ended April 2, 2016, with respect to all deferred financing costs, lender fees and original issue discount, including those associated with the revolving credit portion of the 2016 Credit Agreement (see Note 8). The effect of this change did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial condition. The effects on the Company’s consolidated balance sheet as of January 2, 2016 relating to the reclassification of deferred financing costs is as follows (in thousands):

 

     Previously      As  
     Reported      Reclassified  

Other current assets

   $ 8,490       $ 8,473   
  

 

 

    

 

 

 

Total current assets

   $ 126,989       $ 126,972   
  

 

 

    

 

 

 

Other assets

   $ 2,291       $ 607   
  

 

 

    

 

 

 

Total assets

   $ 345,729       $ 344,028   
  

 

 

    

 

 

 

Current portion of long-term debt

   $ 1,966       $ 1,949   
  

 

 

    

 

 

 

Total current liabilities

   $ 21,544       $ 21,527   
  

 

 

    

 

 

 

Long-term debt, less current portion

   $ 190,502       $ 188,818   
  

 

 

    

 

 

 

Total liabilities

   $ 238,768       $ 237,067   
  

 

 

    

 

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

   $ 345,729       $ 344,028   
  

 

 

    

 

 

 

In June 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued ASU No. 2014-12, Compensation—Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Accounting for Share-Based Payments When the Terms of an Award Provide That a Performance Target Could Be Achieved after the Requisite Service Period (a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force). The new standard requires that a performance target that affects vesting, and that could be achieved after the requisite service period, be treated as a performance condition. As such, the performance target should not be reflected in estimating the grant date fair value of the award. The update further clarifies that compensation cost should be recognized in the period in which it becomes probable that the performance target will be achieved and should represent the compensation cost attributable to the periods for which the requisite service has already been rendered. We prospectively adopted ASU 2014-12 in the first quarter ended April 2, 2016. The adoption of this ASU did not have an impact on our consolidated financial statements.

Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements

In addition to the pronouncements presented below, see Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements included in our recently filed Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended January 2, 2016.

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13, “Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments”. ASU 2016-13 amends the impairment model to utilize an expected loss methodology in place of the currently used incurred loss methodology, which will result in the more timely recognition of losses. This update is effective for our fiscal year beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those fiscal years. ASU 2016-13 also applies to employee benefit plan accounting, with an effective date of fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2020, and interim periods within those fiscal years. We are currently assessing the impact that adopting this new accounting standard will have on our consolidated financial statements, footnote disclosures and employee benefit plan accounting.

In May 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-12, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Narrow Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients. ASU 2016-12 clarifies certain core recognition principles including collectability, sales tax presentation, noncash consideration, contract modifications and completed contracts at transition and disclosures no longer required if the full retrospective transition method is adopted. This new standard has the same effective date and transition requirements as ASU 2014-09, which is the first quarter of 2018. We are currently evaluating the impact of adopting this guidance.

In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-10, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing,” which contains amendments to the new revenue recognition standard on identifying performance obligations and accounting for licenses of intellectual property, addressing issues raised by stakeholders and discussed by the Transition Resource Group. The amendments related to identifying performance obligations clarify when a promised good or service is separately identifiable and allows entities to disregard items that are immaterial in the context of a contract. The licensing implementation amendments clarify how an entity should evaluate the nature of its promise in granting a license of intellectual property, which will determine whether revenue is recognized over time or at a point in time. This new standard has the same effective date and transition requirements as ASU 2014-09, which is the first quarter of 2018. We are currently evaluating the impact of adopting this guidance.

 

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, “Compensation—Stock Compensation, Improvements to Employee Share-Based payment Accounting (Topic 718)”. This update is intended to provide simplification of the accounting for share based payment transactions, including the accounting for income taxes, forfeitures, and statutory tax withholding requirements, as well as classification in the statement of cash flows. This update is effective for our fiscal year beginning January 1, 2017. We are currently evaluating the impact of the adoption of ASU 2016-09 on our consolidated financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-08, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net),” which is an amendment to the new revenue recognition standard on assessing whether an entity is a principal or an agent in a revenue transaction. This amendment addresses implementation issues that were discussed by the Revenue Recognition TRG to clarify the principal versus agent assessment and lead to more consistent application. This new standard has the same effective date and transition requirements as ASU 2014-09, which is the first quarter of 2018. We are currently evaluating the impact of adopting this guidance.

In February 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2016-02, “Leases (Topic 842)”. This guidance supersedes the existing guidance for lease accounting, Leases (Topic 840). ASU 2016-02 requires lessees to recognize leases on their balance sheets, and leaves lessor accounting largely unchanged. The amendments in this ASU are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018 and interim periods within those fiscal years. Early application is permitted for all entities. ASU 2016-02 requires a modified retrospective approach for all leases existing at, or entered into after, the date of initial application, with an option to elect to use certain transition relief. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of this new standard on its consolidated financial statements.