New Accounting Pronouncements	6 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2016
Accounting Changes and Error Corrections [Abstract]
New Accounting Pronouncements	NEW ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-04, “Simplifying the Accounting for Goodwill Impairment” (ASU No. 2017-04). ASU No. 2017-04 removes Step 2 of the current goodwill impairment test, which currently requires a hypothetical purchase price allocation if the fair value of a reporting unit were to be less than its book value, for purposes of determining the amount of goodwill impaired. Under ASU No. 2017-04, the Company would now recognize an impairment charge for the amount by which the carrying amount of a reporting unit exceeds the fair value of the reporting unit; however, the loss recognized would not exceed the total amount of goodwill allocated to that reporting unit. ASU No. 2017-04 will be effective for the Company beginning in the first quarter of fiscal 2021, to be applied on a prospective basis. The pending adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-01, “Clarifying the Definition of a Business” (ASU No. 2017-01). ASU No. 2017-01 narrows the definition of a business, in part by concluding that an integrated set of assets and activities (referred to as a “set”) is not a business when substantially all of the fair value of the gross assets acquired (or disposed of) is concentrated in a single identifiable asset or group of similar identifiable assets. ASU No. 2017-01 is effective for the Company beginning in the first quarter of fiscal year 2019, to be applied on a prospective basis. The pending adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09, “Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting” (“ASU No. 2016-09”). ASU No. 2016-09 identifies areas for simplification involving several aspects of accounting for share-based payment transactions, including presenting the excess tax benefit or deficit from the exercise or vesting of share-based payments in the income statement, a revision to the criteria for classifying an award as equity or liability, an option to recognize gross stock compensation expense with actual forfeitures recognized as they occur, as well as certain classifications on the statement of cash flows. In addition, ASU No. 2016-09 eliminates the excess tax benefit from the assumed proceeds calculation under the treasury stock method for purposes of calculating diluted shares. ASU No. 2016-09 is effective for the Company beginning in the first quarter of fiscal year 2018, with early adoption permitted. Certain provisions of ASU No. 2016-09 are required to be adopted prospectively, most notably the requirement to recognize the excess tax benefit or deficit in the income statement, while other provisions of ASU No. 2016-09 require modified retrospective application or in some cases full retrospective application. The most significant impact of the pending adoption of this guidance on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, specifically the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Earnings, will largely be dependent upon the intrinsic value of the Company’s share-based compensation awards at the time of exercise or vesting and may result in more variability in the Company’s effective tax rates and Net earnings, and may also impact the dilution of common stock equivalents. During the three and six months ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, the Company recorded $1.1 million and $4.1 million, respectively, and $22.0 million and $5.5 million, respectively, to consolidated equity as excess tax benefits from share-based compensation awards. In addition, upon adoption of ASU 2016-09, the Company will classify the excess tax benefit or deficit as an operating activity in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows rather than as a financing activity. In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, “Leases” (“ASU No. 2016-02”). Under ASU No. 2016-02, all lease arrangements, with certain limited exceptions, exceeding a twelve month term must now be recognized as assets and liabilities on the balance sheet of the lessee by recording a right-of-use asset and corresponding lease obligation generally equal to the present value of the future lease payments over the lease term. Further, the income statement will reflect lease expense for leases classified as operating and amortization/interest expense for leases classified as financing, determined using classification criteria substantially similar to the current lease guidance for distinguishing between an operating and capital lease. ASU No. 2016-02 also contains certain additional qualitative and quantitative disclosures to supplement the amounts recorded in the financial statements so that users can understand more about the nature of an entity’s leasing activities, including significant judgments and changes in judgments. ASU No. 2016-02 is effective for the Company in the first quarter of fiscal year 2020 and will be adopted on a modified retrospective basis, which will require adjustment to all comparative periods presented in the consolidated financial statements. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of the pending adoption of ASU No. 2016-02 on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01, “Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities” (“ASU No. 2016-01”), which provides guidance for the recognition, measurement, presentation, and disclosure of financial assets and liabilities. ASU No. 2016-01 is effective for the Company beginning in the first quarter of fiscal year 2019. The pending adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. In November 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-17, “Balance Sheet Classification of Deferred Taxes” (“ASU No. 2015-17”). The amendments in ASU No. 2015-17 require entities that present a classified balance sheet to classify all deferred tax liabilities and assets as a noncurrent amount. The amendments in ASU No. 2015-17 are effective for the Company in the first quarter of fiscal year 2018, applied either prospectively to all deferred tax liabilities and assets or retrospectively to all periods presented. The pending adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-05, “Customer’s Accounting for Fees Paid in a Cloud Computing Arrangement” (“ASU No. 2015-05”). ASU No. 2015-05 provides guidance to customers about whether a cloud computing arrangement includes a software license. If a cloud computing arrangement includes a software license, then the customer should account for the software license element of the arrangement consistent with the acquisition of other software licenses. If a cloud computing arrangement does not include a software license, the customer should account for the arrangement as a service contract. ASU No. 2015-05 does not change the accounting for a customer’s accounting for service contracts. Following adoption of ASU No. 2015-05, all software licenses within its scope are accounted for consistent with other licenses of intangible assets. The Company adopted No. 2015-05 effective in the first quarter of fiscal year 2017 prospectively to all arrangements entered into or materially modified after the effective date. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers” (“ASU No. 2014-9”), to supersede nearly all existing revenue recognition guidance under U.S. GAAP. The core principle of ASU No. 2014-09 is to recognize revenues when promised goods or services are transferred to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration that is expected to be received for those goods or services. ASU No. 2014-09 defines a five step process to achieve this core principle and, in doing so, it is possible more judgment and estimates may be required within the revenue recognition process than are required under existing U.S. GAAP including identifying performance obligations in the contract, estimating the amount of variable consideration to include in the transaction price and allocating the transaction price to each separate performance obligation. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-14, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers - Deferral of the Effective Date,” which defers the effective date of ASU No. 2014-09 by one year, with an option that would permit companies to adopt the standard as early as the original effective date. As a result, ASU No. 2014-09 will be effective for the Company as of the first quarter of fiscal year 2019 using either of two methods: (i) retrospective to each prior reporting period presented with the option to elect certain practical expedients as defined within ASU No. 2014-09; or (ii) retrospective with the cumulative effect of initially applying ASU No. 2014-09 recognized at the date of initial application and providing certain additional disclosures as defined per ASU No. 2014-09. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-08, “Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net)” (“ASU No. 2016-08”), which provides clarifying implementation guidance to the principal versus agent provisions of ASU No. 2014-09. In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-10 “Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing” (“ASU No. 2016-10”), which provides clarifying implementation guidance for applying ASU No. 2014-09 with respect to identifying performance obligations and the accounting for licensing arrangements. In May 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-12 “Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients” (“ASU No. 2016-12”), which provides certain clarifying guidance for ASU No. 2014-09 relative to treatment of sales taxes, noncash consideration, collectibility and certain aspects of transitional guidance. In December 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-20 “Technical Corrections and Improvements to Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers”, which provides certain technical corrections for ASU No. 2014-09 including the impairment testing of capitalized contract costs, disclosure of remaining performance obligations, and certain other matters. Each of ASU No. 2016-08, ASU No. 2016-10, ASU No. 2016-12 and ASU No. 2016-20 have the same effective date as ASU No. 2014-09. The Company has not yet elected a transition method. While the Company is still in process of evaluating the full impact of the pending adoption of ASU No. 2014-09 and related amendments on its Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements and related disclosures, including assessing the need for system or process changes or enhancements, to date the Company has identified certain expected impacts of the new standard on its Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. Specifically, the Company expects to capitalize certain sales commissions as well as capitalize certain additional costs that are part of setting up or converting a client’s systems to function with the Company’s technology, both of which are currently expensed. Additionally, expected changes to the timing of revenue recognition include deferral of revenue from certain transaction processing platform enhancements as well as acceleration of revenue from certain multi-year software license arrangements that are currently recognized over the term of the software subscription.

NEW ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-04, “Simplifying the Accounting for Goodwill Impairment” (ASU No. 2017-04). ASU No. 2017-04 removes Step 2 of the current goodwill impairment test, which currently requires a hypothetical purchase price allocation if the fair value of a reporting unit were to be less than its book value, for purposes of determining the amount of goodwill impaired. Under ASU No. 2017-04, the Company would now recognize an impairment charge for the amount by which the carrying amount of a reporting unit exceeds the fair value of the reporting unit; however, the loss recognized would not exceed the total amount of goodwill allocated to that reporting unit. ASU No. 2017-04 will be effective for the Company beginning in the first quarter of fiscal 2021, to be applied on a prospective basis. The pending adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-01, “Clarifying the Definition of a Business” (ASU No. 2017-01). ASU No. 2017-01 narrows the definition of a business, in part by concluding that an integrated set of assets and activities (referred to as a “set”) is not a business when substantially all of the fair value of the gross assets acquired (or disposed of) is concentrated in a single identifiable asset or group of similar identifiable assets. ASU No. 2017-01 is effective for the Company beginning in the first quarter of fiscal year 2019, to be applied on a prospective basis. The pending adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09, “Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting” (“ASU No. 2016-09”). ASU No. 2016-09 identifies areas for simplification involving several aspects of accounting for share-based payment transactions, including presenting the excess tax benefit or deficit from the exercise or vesting of share-based payments in the income statement, a revision to the criteria for classifying an award as equity or liability, an option to recognize gross stock compensation expense with actual forfeitures recognized as they occur, as well as certain classifications on the statement of cash flows. In addition, ASU No. 2016-09 eliminates the excess tax benefit from the assumed proceeds calculation under the treasury stock method for purposes of calculating diluted shares. ASU No. 2016-09 is effective for the Company beginning in the first quarter of fiscal year 2018, with early adoption permitted. Certain provisions of ASU No. 2016-09 are required to be adopted prospectively, most notably the requirement to recognize the excess tax benefit or deficit in the income statement, while other provisions of ASU No. 2016-09 require modified retrospective application or in some cases full retrospective application. The most significant impact of the pending adoption of this guidance on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, specifically the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Earnings, will largely be dependent upon the intrinsic value of the Company’s share-based compensation awards at the time of exercise or vesting and may result in more variability in the Company’s effective tax rates and Net earnings, and may also impact the dilution of common stock equivalents. During the three and six months ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, the Company recorded $1.1 million and $4.1 million, respectively, and $22.0 million and $5.5 million, respectively, to consolidated equity as excess tax benefits from share-based compensation awards. In addition, upon adoption of ASU 2016-09, the Company will classify the excess tax benefit or deficit as an operating activity in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows rather than as a financing activity.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, “Leases” (“ASU No. 2016-02”). Under ASU No. 2016-02, all lease arrangements, with certain limited exceptions, exceeding a twelve month term must now be recognized as assets and liabilities on the balance sheet of the lessee by recording a right-of-use asset and corresponding lease obligation generally equal to the present value of the future lease payments over the lease term. Further, the income statement will reflect lease expense for leases classified as operating and amortization/interest expense for leases classified as financing, determined using classification criteria substantially similar to the current lease guidance for distinguishing between an operating and capital lease. ASU No. 2016-02 also contains certain additional qualitative and quantitative disclosures to supplement the amounts recorded in the financial statements so that users can understand more about the nature of an entity’s leasing activities, including significant judgments and changes in judgments. ASU No. 2016-02 is effective for the Company in the first quarter of fiscal year 2020 and will be adopted on a modified retrospective basis, which will require adjustment to all comparative periods presented in the consolidated financial statements. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of the pending adoption of ASU No. 2016-02 on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01, “Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities” (“ASU No. 2016-01”), which provides guidance for the recognition, measurement, presentation, and disclosure of financial assets and liabilities. ASU No. 2016-01 is effective for the Company beginning in the first quarter of fiscal year 2019. The pending adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

In November 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-17, “Balance Sheet Classification of Deferred Taxes” (“ASU No.

2015-17”). The amendments in ASU No. 2015-17 require entities that present a classified balance sheet to classify all deferred tax liabilities and assets as a noncurrent amount. The amendments in ASU No. 2015-17 are effective for the Company in the first quarter of fiscal year 2018, applied either prospectively to all deferred tax liabilities and assets or retrospectively to all periods presented. The pending adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-05, “Customer’s Accounting for Fees Paid in a Cloud Computing Arrangement” (“ASU No. 2015-05”). ASU No. 2015-05 provides guidance to customers about whether a cloud computing arrangement includes a software license. If a cloud computing arrangement includes a software license, then the customer should account for the software license element of the arrangement consistent with the acquisition of other software licenses. If a cloud computing arrangement does not include a software license, the customer should account for the arrangement as a service contract. ASU No. 2015-05 does not change the accounting for a customer’s accounting for service contracts. Following adoption of ASU No. 2015-05, all software licenses within its scope are accounted for consistent with other licenses of intangible assets. The Company adopted No. 2015-05 effective in the first quarter of fiscal year 2017 prospectively to all arrangements entered into or materially modified after the effective date. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers” (“ASU No. 2014-9”), to supersede nearly all existing revenue recognition guidance under U.S. GAAP. The core principle of ASU No. 2014-09 is to recognize revenues when promised goods or services are transferred to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration that is expected to be received for those goods or services. ASU No. 2014-09 defines a five step process to achieve this core principle and, in doing so, it is possible more judgment and estimates may be required within the revenue recognition process than are required under existing U.S. GAAP including identifying performance obligations in the contract, estimating the amount of variable consideration to include in the transaction price and allocating the transaction price to each separate performance obligation. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-14, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers - Deferral of the Effective Date,” which defers the effective date of ASU No. 2014-09 by one year, with an option that would permit companies to adopt the standard as early as the original effective date. As a result, ASU No. 2014-09 will be effective for the Company as of the first quarter of fiscal year 2019 using either of two methods: (i) retrospective to each prior reporting period presented with the option to elect certain practical expedients as defined within ASU No. 2014-09; or (ii) retrospective with the cumulative effect of initially applying ASU No. 2014-09 recognized at the date of initial application and providing certain additional disclosures as defined per ASU No. 2014-09.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-08, “Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net)” (“ASU No. 2016-08”), which provides clarifying implementation guidance to the principal versus agent provisions of ASU No. 2014-09.

In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-10 “Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing” (“ASU No. 2016-10”), which provides clarifying implementation guidance for applying ASU No. 2014-09 with respect to identifying performance obligations and the accounting for licensing arrangements.

In May 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-12 “Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients” (“ASU No. 2016-12”), which provides certain clarifying guidance for ASU No. 2014-09 relative to treatment of sales taxes, noncash consideration, collectibility and certain aspects of transitional guidance.

In December 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-20 “Technical Corrections and Improvements to Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers”, which provides certain technical corrections for ASU No. 2014-09 including the impairment testing of capitalized contract costs, disclosure of remaining performance obligations, and certain other matters.

Each of ASU No. 2016-08, ASU No. 2016-10, ASU No. 2016-12 and ASU No. 2016-20 have the same effective date as ASU No. 2014-09. The Company has not yet elected a transition method. While the Company is still in process of evaluating the full impact of the pending adoption of ASU No. 2014-09 and related amendments on its Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements and related disclosures, including assessing the need for system or process changes or enhancements, to date the Company has identified certain expected impacts of the new standard on its Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. Specifically, the Company expects to capitalize certain sales commissions as well as capitalize certain additional costs that are part of setting up or converting a client’s systems to function with the Company’s technology, both of which are currently expensed. Additionally, expected changes to the timing of revenue recognition include deferral of revenue from certain transaction processing platform enhancements as well as acceleration of revenue from certain multi-year software license arrangements that are currently recognized over the term of the software subscription.