SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2016
Accounting Policies [Abstract]
SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES	SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES Basis of Presentation The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”). The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and entities established to complete secured financing transactions that are considered to be variable interest entities (“VIEs”) and for which the Company is the primary beneficiary. Also included in the consolidated financial statements are the financial results of certain entities, which are not considered VIEs, but in which the Company is presumed to have control. The ownership interests held by third parties are reflected as noncontrolling interests in the accompanying financial statements. As a result of the Merger Transaction, the Company’s consolidated financial statements and transactional records prior to the effective date, or May 1, 2014 (the “Effective Date”), reflect the historical accounting basis of assets and liabilities and are labeled “Predecessor Company,” while such records subsequent to the Effective Date are labeled “Successor Company” and reflect the push down basis of accounting for the new estimated fair values in the Company’s consolidated financial statements. This change in accounting basis is represented in the consolidated financial statements by a vertical black line which appears between the columns entitled “Predecessor Company” and “Successor Company” on the statements and in the relevant notes. The black line signifies that the amounts shown for the periods prior to and subsequent to the Merger Transaction are not comparable. For the following assets not carried at fair value, as presented under the Predecessor Company, the Company adopted the fair value option of accounting as of the Effective Date: (i) corporate loans held for investment at amortized cost, net of an allowance for loan losses, (ii) corporate loans held for sale at lower of cost or estimated fair value and (iii) certain other investments at cost. In addition, the Company elected the fair value option of accounting for its CLO secured notes. As such, the accounting policies followed by the Company in the preparation of its consolidated financial statements for the Successor period present all financial assets and CLO secured notes at estimated fair value. The initial fair value presentation was a result of the push down basis of accounting, while the prospective fair value presentation was for the primary purpose of reporting values more closely aligned with KKR & Co.’s method of accounting. Unrealized gains and losses for the financial assets and liabilities carried at estimated fair value are reported in net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investments and net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on debt, respectively, in the consolidated statements of operations. Unrealized gains or losses primarily reflect the change in instrument values, including the reversal of previously recorded unrealized gains or losses when gains or losses are realized. Realized gains or losses are measured by the difference between the net proceeds from the repayment or sale and the amortized cost basis of the asset without regard to unrealized gains or losses previously recognized. For the Successor period, upon the sale of a corporate loan or debt security, the net realized gain or loss is computed using the specific identification method. Comparatively, for the Predecessor period, the realized net gain or loss was computed on a weighted average cost basis. In addition, for the Successor Company period, all purchases and sales of assets are recorded on the trade date. Comparatively, for the Predecessor Company periods, corporate loans were recorded on the settlement date. Use of Estimates The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. The Company uses historical experience and various other assumptions and information that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances in developing its estimates and judgments. Estimates and assumptions about future events and their effects cannot be predicted with certainty and, accordingly, these estimates may change as new events occur, as more experience is acquired, as additional information is obtained and as the Company’s operating environment changes. While the Company believes that the estimates and assumptions used in the preparation of the consolidated financial statements are appropriate, actual results could differ from those estimates. Consolidation KKR Financial CLO 2012-1, Ltd. (“CLO 2012-1"), KKR Financial CLO 2013-1, Ltd. (“CLO 2013-1"), KKR Financial CLO 2013-2, Ltd. (“CLO 2013-2"), KKR CLO 9, Ltd. (“CLO 9”), KKR CLO 10, Ltd. (“CLO 10”), KKR CLO 15, Ltd. ("CLO 15") and KKR CLO 16, Ltd. ("CLO 16") (collectively the “Cash Flow CLOs”) are entities established to complete secured financing transactions. During 2016, the Company called KKR 2016-1, Ltd. ("CLO 2016-1"), KKR Financial CLO 2007-1 (“CLO 2007-1") and KKR Financial CLO 2011-1 (“CLO 2011-1") and during 2015, the Company called KKR Financial CLO 2005-2, Ltd. (“CLO 2005-2"), KKR Financial CLO 2005-1, Ltd. ("CLO 2005-1") and KKR Financial CLO 2006-1, Ltd ("CLO 2006-1"), whereby the Company repaid all senior and mezzanine notes outstanding. These entities are VIEs which the Company consolidates as the Company has determined it has the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact these entities’ economic performance and the Company has both the obligation to absorb losses of these entities and the right to receive benefits from these entities that could potentially be significant to these entities. In CLO transactions, subordinated notes have the first risk of loss and conversely, the residual value upside of the transactions. In addition, during 2016, the Company declared a distribution in kind on its common shares of certain subordinated notes of KKR CLO 11, Ltd ("CLO 11") and KKR CLO 13, Ltd ("CLO 13") to its Parent as the sole holder of its common shares. CLO 11 and CLO 13 had previously been consolidated by the Company as they were VIEs which the Company determined it had the power to direct the activities that most significantly impacted these entities’ economic performance and the Company had both the obligation to absorb losses of these entities and the right to receive benefits from these entities that could potentially be significant to these entities. Following the distribution, the Company determined that it no longer met the consolidation criteria and de-consolidated CLO 11 and CLO 13, resulting in a reduction in both consolidated assets and liabilities of approximately $1.0 billion as of December 31, 2016. Also, as a result of the de-consolidation, the interest expense and management fees that were previously consolidated will no longer be included in the Company's consolidated statements of operations. The Company finances the majority of its corporate debt investments through its CLOs. As of December 31, 2016, the Company’s Cash Flow CLOs held $3.1 billion par amount, or $3.1 billion estimated fair value, of corporate debt investments. As of December 31, 2015, the Company's CLOs held $5.5 billion par amount, or $5.1 billion estimated fair value, of corporate debt investments. The assets in each CLO can be used only to settle the debt of the related CLO. As of December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, the aggregate par amount of CLO debt totaled $3.2 billion and $4.9 billion, respectively, held by unaffiliated third parties. The Company consolidates all non‑VIEs in which it holds a greater than 50 percent voting interest. Specifically, the Company consolidates majority owned entities for which the Company is presumed to have control. The ownership interests of these entities held by third parties are reflected as noncontrolling interests in the accompanying financial statements. The Company began consolidating a majority of these non‑VIE entities as a result of the asset contributions from its Parent during the second half of 2014. For certain of these entities, the Company previously held a percentage ownership, but following the incremental contributions from its Parent, were presumed to have control. In addition, the Company has noncontrolling interests in joint ventures and partnerships that do not qualify as VIEs and do not meet the control requirements for consolidation as defined by GAAP. All inter‑company balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. Fair Value Option In connection with the application of acquisition accounting related to the Merger Transaction, the Successor Company elected the fair value option of accounting for its financial assets and CLO secured notes for the primary purpose of reporting values that more closely aligned with KKR & Co.’s method of accounting. Related unrealized gains and losses are reported in net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investments in the consolidated statements of operations. Fair value is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Where available, fair value is based on observable market prices or parameters or derived from such prices or parameters. Where observable prices or inputs are not available, valuation techniques are applied. These valuation techniques involve varying levels of management estimation and judgment, the degree of which is dependent on a variety of factors including the price transparency for the instruments or market and the instruments’ complexity for disclosure purposes. Assets and liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets are categorized based upon the level of judgment associated with the inputs used to measure their value. Hierarchical levels, as defined under GAAP, are directly related to the amount of subjectivity associated with the inputs to the valuation of these assets and liabilities, and are as follows: Level 1: Inputs are unadjusted, quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities at the measurement date. Level 2: Inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. Level 2 inputs include quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets, and inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability. Level 3: Inputs are unobservable inputs for the asset or liability, and include situations where there is little, if any, market activity for the asset or liability. A significant decrease in the volume and level of activity for the asset or liability is an indication that transactions or quoted prices may not be representative of fair value because in such market conditions there may be increased instances of transactions that are not orderly. In those circumstances, further analysis of transactions or quoted prices is needed, and a significant adjustment to the transactions or quoted prices may be necessary to estimate fair value. The availability of observable inputs can vary depending on the financial asset or liability and is affected by a wide variety of factors, including, for example, the type of instrument, whether the instrument is new, whether the instrument is traded on an active exchange or in the secondary market, and the current market condition. To the extent that valuation is based on models or inputs that are less observable or unobservable in the market, the determination of fair value requires more judgment. Accordingly, the degree of judgment exercised by the Company in determining fair value is greatest for instruments categorized in Level 3. In certain cases, the inputs used to measure fair value may fall into different levels of the fair value hierarchy. In such cases, for disclosure purposes, the level in the fair value hierarchy within which the fair value measurement in its entirety falls is determined based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. The Company’s assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires judgment and consideration of factors specific to the asset. The variability and availability of the observable inputs affected by the factors described above may cause transfers between Levels 1, 2, and/or 3, which the Company recognizes at the end of the reporting period. Many financial assets and liabilities have bid and ask prices that can be observed in the marketplace. Bid prices reflect the highest price that the Company and others are willing to pay for an asset. Ask prices represent the lowest price that the Company and others are willing to accept for an asset. For financial assets and liabilities whose inputs are based on bid‑ask prices, the Company does not require that fair value always be a predetermined point in the bid‑ask range. The Company’s policy is to allow for mid‑market pricing and adjusting to the point within the bid‑ask range that meets the Company’s best estimate of fair value. Depending on the relative liquidity in the markets for certain assets, the Company may transfer assets to Level 3 if it determines that observable quoted prices, obtained directly or indirectly, are not available. The valuation techniques used for the assets and liabilities that are valued using Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy are described below. Securities and Corporate Loans, at Estimated Fair Value: Securities and corporate loans, at estimated fair value are initially valued at transaction price and are subsequently valued using market data for similar instruments (e.g., recent transactions or broker quotes), comparisons to benchmark derivative indices or valuation models. Valuation models are based on yield analysis techniques, where the key inputs are based on relative value analyses, which incorporate similar instruments from similar issuers. In addition, an illiquidity discount is applied where appropriate. Equity and Interests in Joint Ventures and Partnerships, at Estimated Fair Value: Equity and interests in joint ventures and partnerships, at estimated fair value, are initially valued at transaction price and are subsequently valued using observable market prices, if available, or internally developed models in the absence of readily observable market prices. Interests in joint ventures and partnerships include certain equity investments related to the oil and gas, commercial real estate and specialty lending sectors. Valuation models are generally based on market comparables and discounted cash flow approaches, in which various internal and external factors are considered. Factors include key financial inputs and recent public and private transactions for comparable investments. Key inputs used for the discounted cash flow approach, which incorporates significant assumptions and judgment, include the weighted average cost of capital and assumed inputs used to calculate terminal values, such as earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (“EBITDA”) exit multiples. Natural resources investments are generally valued using a discounted cash flow analysis. Key inputs used in this methodology that require estimates include the weighted average cost of capital. In addition, the valuations of natural resources investments generally incorporate both commodity prices as quoted on indices and long‑term commodity price forecasts, which may be substantially different from, and are currently higher than, commodity prices on certain indices for equivalent future dates. Long‑term commodity price forecasts are utilized to capture the value of the investments across a range of commodity prices within the portfolio associated with future development and to reflect price expectations. Upon completion of the valuations conducted using these approaches, a weighting is ascribed to each approach and an illiquidity discount is applied where appropriate. The ultimate fair value recorded for a particular investment will generally be within the range suggested by the two approaches. Over-the-counter (“OTC”) Derivative Contracts: OTC derivative contracts may include forward, swap and option contracts related to interest rates, foreign currencies, credit standing of reference entities and equity prices. OTC derivatives are initially valued using quoted market prices, if available, or models using a series of techniques, including closed‑form analytic formulae, such as the Black‑Scholes option‑pricing model, and/or simulation models in the absence of quoted market prices. Many pricing models employ methodologies that have pricing inputs observed from actively quoted markets, as is the case for generic interest rate swap and option contracts. Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities, at Estimated Fair Value: RMBS are initially valued at transaction price and are subsequently valued using a third party valuation servicer. The most significant inputs to the valuation of these instruments are default and loss expectations and constant prepayment rates. Collateralized Loan Obligation Secured Notes: As of January 1, 2015, the Company adopted the measurement alternative issued by the FASB whereby the financial liabilities of its consolidated CLOs were measured using the fair value of the financial assets of its consolidated CLOs, which was determined to be more observable. The Company considered the fair value of these financial assets, which were classified as Level 2 assets, as more observable than the fair value of these financial liabilities, which were classified as Level 3 liabilities. As a result of this new basis of measurement, the Company's CLO secured notes were transferred from Level 3 to Level 2 during the first quarter of 2015. Prior to this adoption, CLO secured notes were initially valued at transaction price and subsequently valued using a third party valuation servicer. The approach used to estimate the fair values was the discounted cash flow method, which included consideration of the cash flows of the debt obligation based on projected quarterly interest payments and quarterly amortization. The debt obligations were discounted based on the appropriate yield curve given the debt obligation's respective maturity and credit rating. The most significant inputs to the valuation of these instruments were default and loss expectations and discount margins. Key unobservable inputs that have a significant impact on the Company’s Level 3 valuations as described above are included in Note 8 to these consolidated financial statements. The Company utilizes several unobservable pricing inputs and assumptions in determining the fair value of its Level 3 investments. These unobservable pricing inputs and assumptions may differ by asset and in the application of the Company’s valuation methodologies. The reported fair value estimates could vary materially if the Company had chosen to incorporate different unobservable pricing inputs and other assumptions or, for applicable investments, if the Company only used either the discounted cash flow methodology or the market comparables methodology instead of assigning a weighting to both methodologies. Valuation Process Investments are generally valued based on quotations from third party pricing services, unless such a quotation is unavailable or is determined to be unreliable or inadequately representing the fair value of the particular assets. In that case, valuations are based on either valuation data obtained from one or more other third party pricing sources, including broker dealers, or will reflect the valuation committee’s good faith determination of estimated fair value based on other factors considered relevant. The Company utilizes a valuation committee, whose members consist of employees of the Manager or its affiliates. The valuation committee is responsible for coordinating and consistently implementing the Company’s quarterly valuation policies, guidelines and processes. The valuation process involved in Level 3 measurements for assets and liabilities is completed on a quarterly basis and is designed to subject the valuation of Level 3 investments to an appropriate level of consistency, oversight and review. For assets classified as Level 3, valuations may be performed by the relevant investment professionals or by independent third parties with input from the relevant investment professionals and are based on various factors including evaluation of financial and operating data, company specific developments, market discount rates and valuations of comparable companies and model projections. Asset valuations are approved by the valuation committee, which may be assisted by a subcommittee for the valuation of certain investments. Cash and Cash Equivalents Cash and cash equivalents include cash on hand, cash held in banks and highly liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less. Interest income earned on cash and cash equivalents is recorded in other within total revenues on the consolidated statements of operations. Restricted Cash and Cash Equivalents Restricted cash and cash equivalents represent amounts that are held by third parties under certain of the Company’s financing and derivative transactions. Interest income earned on restricted cash and cash equivalents is recorded in other within total revenues on the consolidated statements of operations. On the consolidated statements of cash flows, net additions or reductions to restricted cash and cash equivalents are classified as an investing activity as restricted cash and cash equivalents reflect the receipts from collections or sales of investments, as well as payments made to acquire investments held by third parties. Securities Securities Available‑for‑Sale The Predecessor Company and Successor Company both classify certain of their investments in securities as available‑for‑sale as the Companies may sell them prior to maturity and do not hold them principally for the purpose of selling them in the near term. These investments are carried at estimated fair value. The Successor Company elected the fair value option of accounting for its securities, with changes in estimated fair value reported in net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investments in the consolidated statements of operations. Comparatively, the Predecessor Company reported all unrealized gains and losses in accumulated other comprehensive loss on the consolidated balance sheets. The Predecessor Company monitored its available‑for‑sale securities portfolio for impairments. A loss was recognized when it was determined that a decline in the estimated fair value of a security below its amortized cost was other‑than‑temporary. The Predecessor Company considered many factors in determining whether the impairment of a security was deemed to be other‑than‑ temporary, including, but not limited to, the length of time the security had a decline in estimated fair value below its amortized cost and the severity of the decline, the amount of the unrealized loss, recent events specific to the issuer or industry, external credit ratings and recent changes in such ratings. In addition, for debt securities, the Predecessor Company considered its intent to sell the debt security, the Predecessor Company’s estimation of whether or not it expected to recover the debt security’s entire amortized cost if it intended to hold the debt security, and whether it was more likely than not that the Predecessor Company would have been required to sell the debt security before its anticipated recovery. For equity securities, the Predecessor Company also considered its intent and ability to hold the equity security for a period of time sufficient for a recovery in value. The amount of the loss that was recognized when it was determined that a decline in the estimated fair value of a security below its amortized cost was other‑than‑temporary was dependent on certain factors. If the security was an equity security or if the security was a debt security that the Predecessor Company intended to sell or estimated that it was more likely than not that the Predecessor Company would be required to sell before recovery of its amortized cost, then the impairment amount recognized in earnings was the entire difference between the estimated fair value of the security and its amortized cost. For debt securities that the Predecessor Company did not intend to sell or estimated that it was not more likely than not to be required to sell before recovery, the impairment was separated into the estimated amount relating to credit loss and the estimated amount relating to all other factors. Only the estimated credit loss amount was recognized in earnings, with the remainder of the loss amount recognized in accumulated other comprehensive loss. Unamortized premiums and unaccreted discounts on securities available‑ for‑sale were recognized in interest income over the contractual life, adjusted for actual prepayments, of the securities using the effective interest method. Other Securities, at Estimated Fair Value The Predecessor Company and Successor Company both elected the fair value option of accounting for certain of their securities for the purpose of enhancing the transparency of their financial condition as fair value is consistent with how the Predecessor Company and Successor Company manage the risks of these securities. All securities, at estimated fair value are included within securities on the consolidated balance sheets. Estimated fair values are based on quoted market prices, when available, on estimates provided by independent pricing sources or dealers who make markets in such securities, or internal valuation models when external sources of fair value are not available. In accounting for the Merger Transaction, the difference between the estimated fair value, as of the Effective Date, and the par amount became the new premium or discount to be amortized or accreted over the remaining terms, adjusted for actual prepayments, of the securities using the effective interest method. Residential Mortgage‑Backed Securities, at Estimated Fair Value The Predecessor Company and Successor Company both elected the fair value option of accounting for their residential mortgage investments for the purpose of enhancing the transparency of their financial condition as fair value is consistent with how the Predecessor Company and Successor Company manage the risks of these investments. RMBS, at estimated fair value are included within securities on the consolidated balance sheets. Equity Investments, at Estimated Fair Value The Predecessor Company and Successor Company both elected the fair value option of accounting for certain of their equity investments, at estimated fair value, including private equity investments received through restructuring debt transactions or issued by an entity in which the Predecessor Company and Successor Company may have significant influence. The fair value option was elected for the equity investments for the purpose of enhancing the transparency of their financial condition as fair value is consistent with how the Predecessor Company and Successor Company manage the risks of these investments. Equity investments carried at estimated fair value are presented separately on the consolidated balance sheets. Interests in Joint Ventures and Partnerships The Predecessor Company and Successor Company both elected the fair value option of accounting for certain of their interests in joint ventures and partnerships. The fair value option of accounting was elected for noncontrolling interests in joint ventures and partnerships for the purpose of enhancing the transparency of their financial condition as fair value is consistent with how the Predecessor Company and Successor Company manage the risks of these interests. Interests in joint ventures and partnerships are presented separately on the consolidated balance sheets. Equity Method Investments The Predecessor Company and Successor Company hold certain investments where the Predecessor Company and Successor Company do not control the investee nor are the primary beneficiary, but can exert significant influence over the financial and operating policies of the investee. Significant influence typically exists if the Predecessor Company and Successor Company have a 20% to 50% ownership interest in the investee unless predominant evidence to the contrary exists. The evaluation of whether the Predecessor Company and Successor Company exerts control or significant influence over the financial and operational policies of an investee may also require significant judgment based on the facts and circumstances surrounding each individual investment. Factors include investor voting or other rights, any influence the Predecessor Company and Successor Company may have on the governing board of the investee and the relationship between the Predecessor Company and Successor Company and other investors in the entity. The fair value option was elected to account for these equity investments with any changes in estimated fair value recorded in net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investments in the consolidated statements of operations. Corporate Loans, Net In connection with the Successor Company’s application of acquisition accounting related to the Merger Transaction and to align more closely with KKR & Co.’s method of accounting, the Successor Company elected to carry all of its corporate loans at estimated fair value as of the Effective Date, with changes in estimated fair value recorded in net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investments in the consolidated statements of operations. As presented under the Predecessor Company, corporate loans had previously been accounted for based on the following three categories: (i) corporate loans held for investment, which were measured based on their principal plus or minus unaccreted purchase discounts and unamortized purchase premiums, net of an allowance for loan losses; (ii) corporate loans held for sale, which were measured at lower of cost or estimated fair value; and (iii) corporate loans at estimated fair value, which were measured at fair value. As such, the disclosures related to loans held for investment and loans held for sale pertain to the Predecessor Company. Corporate Loans Prior to the Effective Date, corporate loans were generally held for investment and the Predecessor Company initially recorded corporate loans at their purchase prices. The Successor Company subsequently accounted for corporate loans based on their outstanding principal plus or minus unaccreted purchase discounts and unamortized purchase premiums and corporate loans that the Predecessor Company transferred to held for sale were transferred at the lower of cost or estimated fair value. As of the Effective Date, the Successor Company initially recorded corporate loans at their purchase prices and subsequently accounts for all corporate loans at estimated fair value. Interest income on corporate loans includes interest at stated coupon rates adjusted for accretion of purchase discounts and the amortization of purchase premiums. Unamortized premiums and unaccreted discounts are recognized in interest income over the contractual life, adjusted for actual prepayments, of the corporate loans using the effective interest method. Other than corporate loans measured at estimated fair value, corporate loans acquired with deteriorated credit quality are recorded at initial cost and interest income is recognized as the difference between the Predecessor Company’s estimate of all cash flows that it will receive from the loan in excess of its initial investment on a level-yield basis over the life of the corporate loan (accretable yield) using the effective interest method. A corporate loan is typically placed on non-accrual status at such time as: (i) management believes that scheduled debt service payments may not be paid when contractually due; (ii) the corporate loan becomes 90 days delinquent; (iii) management determines the borrower is incapable of, or has ceased efforts toward, curing the cause of the impairment; or (iv) the net realizable value of the collateral securing the corporate loan decreases below the Predecessor Company’s or Successor Company's carrying value of such corporate loan. As such, corporate loans placed on non-accrual status may or may not be contractually past due at the time of such determination. While on non-accrual status, previously recognized accrued interest is reversed if it is determined that such amounts are not collectible and interest income is recognized using the cost-recovery method, cash-basis method or some combination of the two methods. A corporate loan is placed back on accrual status when the ultimate collectability of the principal and interest is no longer in doubt. Prior to the Effective Date, the Predecessor Company may have modified corporate loans in transactions where the borrower was experiencing financial difficulty and a concession was granted to the borrower as part of the modification. These concessions may have included one or a combination of the following: a reduction of the stated interest rate; payment extensions; forgiveness of principal; or an exchange of assets. Such modifications typically qualified as troubled debt restructurings (“TDRs”). In order to determine whether the borrower was experiencing financial difficulty, an evaluation was performed including the following considerations: whether the borrower was or would have been in payment default on any of its debt in the foreseeable future without the modification; whether there was a potential for a bankruptcy filing; whether there was a going-concern issue; or whether the borrower was unable to secure financing elsewhere. Corporate loans whose terms had been modified in a TDR were considered impaired, unless accounted for at fair value or the lower of cost or estimated fair value, and were typically placed on non-accrual status, but could have been moved to accrual status when, among other criteria, payment in full of all amounts due under the restructured terms was expected and the borrower demonstrated a sustained period of repayment performance, typically 6 months. TDRs were separately identified for impairment disclosures and were measured at either the estimated fair value or the present value of estimated future cash flows using the respective corporate loan’s effective rate at inception. Impairments associated with TDRs were included within the allocated component of the Predecessor Company’s allowance for loan losses. The Predecessor Company may have also identified receivables that were newly considered impaired and disclosed the total amount of receivables and the allowance for credit losses as of the end of the period of adoption related to those receivables that were newly considered impaired. The corporate loans the Predecessor Company invested in were generally deemed in default upon the non-payment of a single interest payment or as a result of the violation of a covenant in the respective corporate loan agreement. The Predecessor Company charged-off a portion or all of its amortized cost basis in a corporate loan when it determined that it was uncollectible due to either: (i) the estimation based on a recovery value analysis of a defaulted corporate loan that less than the amortized cost amount would have been recovered through the agreed upon restructuring of the corporate loan or as a result of a bankruptcy process of the issuer of the corporate loan or (ii) the determination by the Predecessor Company to transfer a corporate loan to held for sale with the corporate loan having an estimated fair value below the amortized cost basis of the corporate loan. In addition to TDRs, the Predecessor Company may have also modified corporate loans which usually involved changes in existing interest rates combined with changes of existing maturities to prevailing market rates/maturities for similar instruments at the time of modification. Such modifications typically did not meet the definition of a TDR since the respective borrowers were neither experiencing financial difficulty nor were seeking a concession as part of the modification. Allowance for Loan Losses As a result of the Merger Transaction, the acquisition method of accounting and adoption of fair value for corporate loans eliminated the need for an allowance for loan losses. The reevaluation of assets required by the acquisition method of accounting resulted in all loans being reported at their estimated fair values as of the Effective Date. The estimated fair value took into account the contractual payments on loans that were not expected to be received and consequently, no allowance for loan losses was carried over for the Successor Company. As of the Effective Date, no allowance for loan losses will be recorded as all corporate loans are carried at estimated fair value. As such, the disclosure related to the allowance for loan losses pertains to the Predecessor Company. The Predecessor Company and Successor Company’s corporate loan portfolio is comprised of a single portfolio segment which includes one class of financing receivables, that is, high yield loans that are typically purchased via assignment or participation in either the primary or secondary market. High yield loans are generally characterized as having below investment grade ratings or being unrated. Prior to the Effective Date, the Predecessor Company’s allowance for loan losses represented its estimate of probable credit losses inherent in its corporate loan portfolio held for investment as of the balance sheet date. Estimating the Predecessor's Company’s allowance for loan losses involved a high degree of management judgment and was based upon a comprehensive review of the Company’s corporate loan portfolio that was performed on a quarterly basis. The Predecessor Company’s allowance for loan losses consisted of two components, an allocated component and an unallocated component. The allocated component of the allowance for loan losses pertained to specific corporate loans that the Predecessor Company had determined were impaired. The Predecessor Company determined a corporate loan was impaired when management estimated that it was probable that the Predecessor Company would be unable to collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms of the corporate loan agreement. On a quarterly basis the Predecessor Company performed a comprehensive review of its entire corporate loan portfolio and identified certain corporate loans that it had determined were impaired. Once a corporate loan was identified as being impaired, the Predecessor Company placed the corporate loan on non-accrual status, unless the corporate loan was already on non-accrual status, and recorded an allowance that reflected management’s best estimate of the loss that the Predecessor Company expected to recognize from the corporate loan. The expected loss was estimated as being the difference between the Predecessor Company’s current cost basis of the corporate loan, including accrued interest receivable, and the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the corporate loan’s effective interest rate, except as a practical expedient, the corporate loan’s observable estimated fair value may have been used. The Predecessor Company also estimated the probable credit losses inherent in its unfunded loan commitments as of the balance sheet date. Any credit loss reserve for unfunded loan commitments was recorded in accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities on the Predecessor Company’s consolidated balance sheets. The unallocated component of the Predecessor Company’s allowance for loan losses represented its estimate of probable losses inherent in the corporate loan portfolio as of the balance sheet date where the specific loan that the loan loss relates to was indeterminable. The Predecessor Company estimated the unallocated component of the allowance for loan losses through a comprehensive review of its corporate loan portfolio and identified certain corporate loans that demonstrated possible indicators of impairment, including internally assigned credit quality indicators. This assessment excluded all corporate loans that were determined to be impaired and as a result, an allocated reserve had been recorded as described in the preceding paragraph. Such indicators included the current and/or forecasted financial performance, liquidity profile of the issuer, specific industry or economic conditions that may have impacted the issuer, and the observable trading price of the corporate loan if available. All corporate loans were first categorized based on their assigned risk grade and further stratified based on the seniority of the corporate loan in the issuer’s capital structure. The seniority classifications assigned to corporate loans were senior secured, second lien and subordinate. Senior secured consisted of corporate loans that were the most senior debt in an issuer’s capital structure and therefore had a lower estimated loss severity than other debt that was subordinate to the senior secured loan. Senior secured corporate loans often had a first lien on some or all of the issuer’s assets. Second lien consisted of corporate loans that were secured by a second lien interest on some or all of the issuer’s assets; however, the corporate loan was subordinate to the first lien debt in the issuer’s capital structure. Subordinate consisted of corporate loans that were generally unsecured and subordinate to other debt in the issuer’s capital structure. There were three internally assigned risk grades that were applied to loans that have not been identified as being impaired: high, moderate and low. High risk meant that there was evidence of possible loss due to the current and/or forecasted financial performance, liquidity profile of the issuer, specific industry or economic conditions that may have impacted the issuer, observable trading price of the corporate loan if available, or other factors that indicated that the breach of a covenant contained in the related loan agreement was possible. Moderate risk meant that while there was not observable evidence of possible loss, there were issuer and/or industry specific trends that indicated a loss may have occurred. Low risk meant that while there was no identified evidence of loss, there was the risk of loss inherent in the loan that had not been identified. All loans held for investment, with the exception of loans that had been identified as impaired, were assigned a risk grade of high, moderate or low. The Predecessor Company applied a range of default and loss severity estimates in order to estimate a range of loss outcomes upon which to base its estimate of probable losses that resulted in the determination of the unallocated component of the Company’s allowance for loan losses. Corporate Loans Held for Sale As described above, corporate loans held for sale related to the Predecessor Company. From time to time the Predecessor Company made the determination to transfer certain of its corporate loans from held for investment to held for sale. The decision to transfer a loan to held for sale was generally as a result of the Predecessor Company determining that the respective loan’s credit quality in relation to the loan’s expected risk-adjusted return no longer met the Company’s investment objective and/or the Predecessor Company deciding to reduce or eliminate its exposure to a particular loan for risk management purposes. Corporate loans held for sale were stated at lower of cost or estimated fair value and were assessed on an individual basis. Prior to transferring a loan to held for sale, any difference between the carrying amount of the loan and its outstanding principal balance was recognized as an adjustment to the yield by the effective interest method. The loan was transferred from held for investment to held for sale at the lower of its cost or estimated fair value and was carried at the lower of its cost or estimated fair value thereafter. Subsequent to transfer and while the loan was held for sale, recognition as an adjustment to yield by the effective interest method was discontinued for any difference between the carrying amount of the loan and its outstanding principal balance. From time to time the Predecessor Company also made the determination to transfer certain of its corporate loans from held for sale back to held for investment. The decision to transfer a loan back to held for investment was generally as a result of the circumstances that led to the initial transfer to held for sale no longer being present. Such circumstances may have included deteriorated market conditions often resulting in price depreciation or assets becoming illiquid, changes in restrictions on sales and certain loans amending their terms to extend the maturity, whereby the Predecessor Company determined that selling the asset no longer met its investment objective and strategy. The loan was transferred from held for sale back to held for investment at the lower of its cost or estimated fair value, whereby a new cost basis was established based on this amount. Interest income on corporate loans held for sale was recognized through accrual of the stated coupon rate for the loans, unless the loans were placed on non-accrual status, at which point previously recognized accrued interest was reversed if it was determined that such amounts were not collectible and interest income was recognized using either the cost-recovery method or on a cash-basis. Corporate Loans, at Estimated Fair Value The Predecessor Company and Successor Company both elected the fair value option of accounting for certain of their corporate loans for the purpose of enhancing the transparency of their financial condition as fair value is consistent with how the Predecessor Company and Successor Company manage the risks of these corporate loans. All corporate loans carried at estimated fair value are included within corporate loans, net on the consolidated balance sheets. Estimated fair values are based on quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets and inputs other than observable quoted prices, or internal valuation models when external sources of fair value are not available. In accounting for the Merger Transaction, the difference between the estimated fair value, as of the Effective Date, and the par amount became the new premium or discount to be amortized or accreted over the remaining terms, adjusted for actual prepayments, of the corporate loans using the effective interest method. As described above under “Basis of Presentation,” as of the Effective Date, purchases and sales of corporate loans are recorded on the trade date. Oil and Gas Revenue Recognition Oil, natural gas and natural gas liquid (“NGL”) revenues are recognized when production is sold to a purchaser at fixed or determinable prices, when delivery has occurred and title has transferred and collectability of the revenue is reasonably assured. The Predecessor Company and Successor Company follow the sales method of accounting for natural gas revenues. Under this method of accounting, revenues are recognized based on volumes sold, which may differ from the volume to which the Predecessor Company and Successor Company is entitled based on their working interest. An imbalance is recognized as a liability only when the estimated remaining reserves will not be sufficient to enable the under‑produced owners to recoup their entitled share through future production. Under the sales method, no receivables are recorded when the Predecessor Company and Successor Company have taken less than its share of production and no payables are recorded when the Predecessor Company and Successor Company have taken more than its share of production. Borrowings The Company finances the majority of its investments through the use of secured borrowings in the form of securitization transactions structured as non‑recourse secured financings and other secured and unsecured borrowings. The Company recognizes interest expense on all borrowings on an accrual basis. In connection with the Company’s application of acquisition accounting related to the Merger Transaction and to align more closely with KKR & Co.’s method of accounting, the Company elected to carry its CLO secured notes at estimated fair value as of the Effective Date, with changes in estimated fair value recorded in net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on debt in the consolidated statements of operations. Prior to the Effective Date, the Company's CLO secured notes were carried at amortized cost. As mentioned above, beginning January 1, 2015, the Company adopted the measurement alternative issued by the FASB whereby the financial liabilities of its consolidated CLOs were measured using the fair value of the financial assets of its consolidated CLOs, which was determined to be more observable. Accordingly, these financial assets were measured at fair value and these financial liabilities were measured as (i) the sum of the fair value of the financial assets and the carrying value of any nonfinancial assets that are incidental to the operations of the CLOs less, (ii) the sum of the fair value of any beneficial interests retained by the reporting entity (other than those that represent compensation for services) and the Company’s carrying value of any beneficial interests that represent compensation for services. The resulting amount was allocated to the individual financial liabilities (other than the beneficial interests retained by the Company) using a reasonable and consistent methodology. Trust Preferred Securities The Company also established six 30 year trusts between 2006 and 2007 for the sole purpose of issuing trust preferred securities. These trusts issued preferred securities to unaffiliated investors and common securities to the Company. The combined proceeds were invested by the trusts in junior subordinated notes issued by the Company. The junior subordinated notes are the sole assets of trusts and mature between 2036 and 2037. Interest is payable on the junior subordinated notes quarterly and based on the associated trust ranges from between LIBOR plus 2.25% and LIBOR plus 2.65%. The Company may redeem the junior subordinated notes, in whole or in part, at any time, at a redemption price equal to 100% of the principal amount redeemed plus accrued and unpaid interest to the redemption date. As of December 31, 2016, the aggregate outstanding principal amount of the junior subordinated notes was approximately $283.5 million. These trusts are not consolidated by the Company as the Company has determined that it is not the primary beneficiary of such trusts. The Company’s investment in the common securities of such trusts is included within other assets on the consolidated balance sheets. Preferred Shares Distributions on the Company’s Series A LLC Preferred Shares are cumulative and payable quarterly when and if declared by the Company’s board of directors at a 7.375% rate per annum. The Company accrues for the distribution upon declaration and is included within accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities on the consolidated balance sheets. Derivative Instruments The Company recognizes all derivatives on the consolidated balance sheet at estimated fair value. On the date the Company enters into a derivative contract, the Company designates and documents each derivative contract as one of the following at the time the contract is executed: (i) a hedge of a recognized asset or liability (“fair value” hedge); (ii) a hedge of a forecasted transaction or of the variability of cash flows to be received or paid related to a recognized asset or liability (“cash flow” hedge); (iii) a hedge of a net investment in a foreign operation; or (iv) a derivative instrument not designated as a hedging instrument (“free‑standing derivative”). For a fair value hedge, the Company records changes in the estimated fair value of the derivative instrument and, to the extent that it is effective, changes in the fair value of the hedged asset or liability in the current period earnings in the same financial statement category as the hedged item. For a cash flow hedge, the Company records changes in the estimated fair value of the derivative to the extent that it is effective in accumulated other comprehensive loss and subsequently reclassifies these changes in estimated fair value to net income in the same period(s) that the hedged transaction affects earnings. The effective portion of the cash flow hedges is recorded in the same financial statement category as the hedged item. For free‑standing derivatives, the Company reports changes in the fair values in net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on derivatives and foreign exchange on the consolidated statements of operations. The Company formally documents at inception its hedge relationships, including identification of the hedging instruments and the hedged items, its risk management objectives, strategy for undertaking the hedge transaction and the Company’s evaluation of effectiveness of its hedged transactions. Periodically, the Company also formally assesses whether the derivative it designated in each hedging relationship is expected to be and has been highly effective in offsetting changes in estimated fair values or cash flows of the hedged item using either the dollar offset or the regression analysis method. If the Company determines that a derivative is not highly effective as a hedge, it discontinues hedge accounting. In connection with the Merger Transaction, the Company discontinued hedge accounting for its cash flow hedges and, as of the Effective Date, classifies all derivative instruments as free‑standing derivatives. As a result, the Company records changes in the estimated fair value of the derivative instruments in net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on derivatives and foreign exchange on the consolidated statements of operations. Foreign Currency The Company makes investments in non‑United States dollar denominated assets including securities, loans, equity investments and interests in joint ventures and partnerships. As a result, the Company is subject to the risk of fluctuation in the exchange rate between the United States dollar and the foreign currency in which it makes an investment. In order to reduce the currency risk, the Company may hedge the applicable foreign currency. All investments denominated in a foreign currency are converted to the United States dollar using prevailing exchange rates on the balance sheet date. Income, expenses, gains and losses on investments denominated in a foreign currency are converted to the United States dollar using the prevailing exchange rates on the dates when they are recorded. Foreign exchange gains and losses are recorded in net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on derivatives and foreign exchange on the consolidated statements of operations. Noncontrolling Interests Noncontrolling interests represent noncontrolling interests in consolidated entities held by third party investors. Income (loss) is allocated to noncontrolling interests based on the relative ownership interests of third party investors and is presented as net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests on the consolidated statements of operations. Noncontrolling interests are also presented separately within equity in the consolidated balance sheets. Manager Compensation The Management Agreement provides for the payment of a base management fee to the Manager, as well as an incentive fee if the Company’s financial performance exceeds certain benchmarks. Additionally, the Management Agreement provides for the Manager to be reimbursed for certain expenses incurred on the Company’s behalf. The base management fee and the incentive fee are accrued and expensed during the period for which they are earned by the Manager. Income Taxes The Company intends to continue to operate so as to qualify, for United States federal income tax purposes, as a partnership and not as an association or publicly traded partnership taxable as a corporation. Therefore, the Company generally is not subject to United States federal income tax at the entity level, but is subject to limited state and foreign taxes. Holders of the Company’s Series A LLC Preferred Shares will be allocated a share of the Company’s gross ordinary income for the taxable year of the Company ending within or with their taxable year. Holders of the Company’s Series A LLC Preferred Shares will not be allocated any gains or losses from the sale of the Company’s assets. The Company owns equity interests in entities that have elected or intend to elect to be taxed as real estate investment trusts (“REITs”) under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). A REIT generally is not subject to United States federal income tax to the extent that it currently distributes its income and satisfies certain asset, income and ownership tests, and recordkeeping requirements, but it may be subject to some amount of federal, state, local and foreign taxes based on its taxable income. The Company has wholly‑owned domestic and foreign subsidiaries that are taxable as corporations for United States federal income tax purposes and thus are not consolidated with the Company for United States federal income tax purposes. For financial reporting purposes, current and deferred taxes are provided for on the portion of earnings recognized by the Company with respect to its interest in the domestic taxable corporate subsidiaries, because each is taxed as a regular corporation under the Code. Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are computed based on temporary differences between the GAAP consolidated financial statements and the United States federal income tax basis of assets and liabilities as of each consolidated balance sheet date. The foreign corporate subsidiaries were formed to make certain foreign and domestic investments from time to time. The foreign corporate subsidiaries are organized as exempted companies incorporated with limited liability under the laws of the Cayman Islands, and are anticipated to be exempt from United States federal and state income tax at the corporate entity level because they restrict their activities in the United States to trading in stock and securities for their own account. However, the Company will be required to include their current taxable income in the Company’s calculation of its gross ordinary income allocable to holders of its Series A LLC Preferred Shares. The Company must recognize the tax impact from an uncertain tax position only if it is more likely than not that the tax position will be sustained on examination by the taxing authorities, based on the technical merits of the position. The tax impact recognized in the financial statements from such a position is measured based on the largest benefit that has a greater than 50% likelihood of being realized upon ultimate resolution. Penalties and interest related to uncertain tax positions are recorded as tax expense. Significant judgment is required in the identification of uncertain tax positions and in the estimation of penalties and interest on uncertain tax positions. If it is determined that recognition for an uncertain tax provision is necessary, the Company would record a liability for an unrecognized tax expense from an uncertain tax position taken or expected to be taken. Share-Based Compensation In connection with the Merger Transaction, the Predecessor Company’s common shares were converted into 0.51 KKR & Co. common units. Prior to the Effective Date, the Company accounted for share-based compensation issued to its directors and to its Manager using the fair value based methodology in accordance with relevant accounting guidance. Compensation cost related to restricted common shares issued to the Company’s directors was measured at its estimated fair value at the grant date, and was amortized and expensed over the vesting period on a straight-line basis. Compensation cost related to restricted common shares and common share options issued to the Manager was initially measured at estimated fair value at the grant date, and was remeasured on subsequent dates to the extent the awards were unvested. The Company elected to use the graded vesting attribution method to amortize compensation expense for the restricted common shares and common share options granted to the Manager. After the Effective Date, the Company did not report share-based compensation. Earnings Per Common Share In connection with the Merger Transaction, as of the Effective Date, the Company is a subsidiary of KKR Fund Holdings, which owns 100 common shares of the Company constituting all of the Company’s outstanding common shares. As KKR Fund Holdings is the Company’s sole shareholder, earnings per common share is not reported for the Successor Company. Prior to the Effective Date, the Company presented both basic and diluted earnings per common share (‘‘EPS’’) in its consolidated financial statements and footnotes thereto. Basic earnings per common share (‘‘Basic EPS’’) excluded dilution and was computed by dividing net income or loss available to common shareholders by the weighted average number of common shares, including vested restricted common shares, outstanding for the period. The Company calculated EPS using the more dilutive of the two-class method or the if-converted method. The two-class method was an earnings allocation formula that determined EPS for common shares and participating securities. Unvested share-based payment awards that contained non-forfeitable rights to dividends or dividend equivalents (whether paid or unpaid) were participating securities and were included in the computation of EPS using the two-class method. Accordingly, all earnings (distributed and undistributed) were allocated to common shares, preferred shares and participating securities based on their respective rights to receive dividends. Diluted earnings per common share (‘‘Diluted EPS’’) reflected the potential dilution of common share options and unvested restricted common shares using the treasury method or if-converted method. After the Effective Date, the Company did not report EPS. Recent Accounting Pronouncements Going Concern In August 2014, the FASB issued guidance pertaining to management’s responsibility to evaluate whether there is substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern and to provide related footnote disclosures. The new guidance requires that management evaluate each annual and interim reporting period whether conditions exist that give rise to substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year from the financial statement issuance date, and if so, provide related disclosures. Substantial doubt exists when conditions and events, considered in the aggregate, indicate that it is probable that a company will be unable to meet its obligations as they become due within one year after the financial statement issuance date. The new guidance applies to all companies. The guidance is effective for annual reporting periods ending after December 15, 2016, and for annual and interim periods thereafter. This guidance has been adopted for the year ended December 31, 2016 and its adoption had no material impact on the Company's consolidated financial statements. Consolidation In February 2015, the FASB issued guidance which eliminates the presumption that a general partner should consolidate a limited partnership and also eliminates the consolidation model specific to limited partnerships. The amendments also clarify how to treat fees paid to an asset manager or other entity that makes the decisions for the investment vehicle and whether such fees should be considered in determining when a variable interest entity should be reported on an asset manager's balance sheet. The guidance is effective for reporting periods starting after December 15, 2015 and for interim periods within the fiscal year. Early adoption is permitted, and a full retrospective or modified retrospective approach is required. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the Company's consolidated financial statements. In October 2016, the FASB issued guidance that reporting entities deciding whether they are primary beneficiaries no longer have to consider indirect interests held through related parties that are under common control to be the equivalent of direct interests in their entirety. Decision makers would include those indirect interests on a proportionate basis. The guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating its potential impact on the consolidated financial statements. Financial Instruments In January 2016, the FASB issued amended guidance that (i) requires equity investments (except those accounted for under the equity method of accounting or those that result in consolidation of the investee) to be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income; (ii) eliminates the requirement to disclose the method(s) and significant assumptions used to estimate the fair value that is currently required to be disclosed for financial instruments measured at fair value; (iii) requires an entity to present separately in other comprehensive income the portion of the total change in the fair value of a liability resulting from a change in the instrument-specific credit risk when the entity has elected to measure the liability at fair value in accordance with the fair value option for financial instruments and (iv) requires separate presentation of financial assets and financial liabilities by measurement category and form of financial asset (that is, securities or loans and receivables) on the balance sheet or the accompanying notes to the financial statements. This guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years and should be applied by means of a cumulative-effect adjustment to the balance sheet as of the beginning of the fiscal year of adoption. The amended guidance related to equity securities without readily determinable fair values (including the disclosure requirements) should be applied prospectively to equity investments that exist as of the date of adoption. The Company is currently evaluating its potential impact on its consolidated financial statements. Investments In March 2016, the FASB issued guidance which simplifies the equity method of accounting by eliminating the requirement to retrospectively apply the equity method to an investment that subsequently qualifies for such accounting as a result of an increase in the level of ownership interest or degree of influence. The guidance is effective for all entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those fiscal years, with early adoption permitted for all entities. Entities are required to apply the guidance prospectively to increases in the level of ownership interest or degree of influence occurring after the effective date. Additional transition disclosures are not required upon adoption. The Company is currently evaluating its potential impact on its consolidated financial statements. Cash Flow Classification In August 2016, the FASB issued amended guidance on the classification of certain cash receipts and payments in the statement of cash flows. The amended guidance adds or clarifies guidance on eight cash flow matters: (i) debt prepayment or debt extinguishment costs, (ii) settlement of zero-coupon debt instruments or other debt instruments with coupon interest rates that are insignificant in relation to the effective interest rate of the borrowing, (iii) contingent consideration payments made after a business combination, (iv) proceeds from the settlement of insurance claims, (v) proceeds from the settlement of corporate-owned life insurance policies, (vi) distributions received from equity method investees, (vii) beneficial interests in securitization transactions and (viii) separately identifiable cash flows and application of the predominance principle. The guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. The guidance must be applied retrospectively to all periods presented but may be applied prospectively from the earliest date practicable if retrospective application would be impracticable. The Company is currently evaluating its potential impact on its consolidated financial statements. In November 2016, the FASB issued guidance to add or clarify existing guidance on the classification and presentation of restricted cash in the statement of cash flows. The amended guidance requires the following: (i) restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents should be included in the cash and cash-equivalents balances in the statement of cash flows; (ii) changes in restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents that result from transfers between cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents should not be presented as cash flow activities in the statement of cash flows (iii) a reconciliation between the statement of financial position and the statement of cash flows must be disclosed when the statement of financial position includes more than one line item for cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash, and restricted cash equivalents; and (iv) the nature of the restrictions must be disclosed for material restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents amounts. The guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods therein. Early adoption is permitted. The guidance must be applied retrospectively to all periods presented. The Company is currently evaluating its potential impact on its consolidated financial statements. Income Taxes In October 2016, the FASB issued guidance which removed the prohibition against the immediate recognition of the current and deferred income tax effects of intra-entity transfers of assets other than inventory. The guidance is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those annual reporting periods. The Company is currently evaluating its potential impact on its consolidated financial statements.

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Basis of Presentation

The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”). The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and entities established to complete secured financing transactions that are considered to be variable interest entities (“VIEs”) and for which the Company is the primary beneficiary. Also included in the consolidated financial statements are the financial results of certain entities, which are not considered VIEs, but in which the Company is presumed to have control. The ownership interests held by third parties are reflected as noncontrolling interests in the accompanying financial statements.

As a result of the Merger Transaction, the Company’s consolidated financial statements and transactional records prior to the effective date, or May 1, 2014 (the “Effective Date”), reflect the historical accounting basis of assets and liabilities and are labeled “Predecessor Company,” while such records subsequent to the Effective Date are labeled “Successor Company” and reflect the push down basis of accounting for the new estimated fair values in the Company’s consolidated financial statements. This change in accounting basis is represented in the consolidated financial statements by a vertical black line which appears between the columns entitled “Predecessor Company” and “Successor Company” on the statements and in the relevant notes. The black line signifies that the amounts shown for the periods prior to and subsequent to the Merger Transaction are not comparable.

For the following assets not carried at fair value, as presented under the Predecessor Company, the Company adopted the fair value option of accounting as of the Effective Date: (i) corporate loans held for investment at amortized cost, net of an allowance for loan losses, (ii) corporate loans held for sale at lower of cost or estimated fair value and (iii) certain other investments at cost. In addition, the Company elected the fair value option of accounting for its CLO secured notes. As such, the accounting policies followed by the Company in the preparation of its consolidated financial statements for the Successor period present all financial assets and CLO secured notes at estimated fair value. The initial fair value presentation was a result of the push down basis of accounting, while the prospective fair value presentation was for the primary purpose of reporting values more closely aligned with KKR & Co.’s method of accounting.

Unrealized gains and losses for the financial assets and liabilities carried at estimated fair value are reported in net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investments and net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on debt, respectively, in the consolidated statements of operations. Unrealized gains or losses primarily reflect the change in instrument values, including the reversal of previously recorded unrealized gains or losses when gains or losses are realized. Realized gains or losses are measured by the difference between the net proceeds from the repayment or sale and the amortized cost basis of the asset without regard to unrealized gains or losses previously recognized. For the Successor period, upon the sale of a corporate loan or debt security, the net realized gain or loss is computed using the specific identification method. Comparatively, for the Predecessor period, the realized net gain or loss was computed on a weighted average cost basis.

In addition, for the Successor Company period, all purchases and sales of assets are recorded on the trade date. Comparatively, for the Predecessor Company periods, corporate loans were recorded on the settlement date.

Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. The Company uses historical experience and various other assumptions and information that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances in developing its estimates and judgments. Estimates and assumptions about future events and their effects cannot be predicted with certainty and, accordingly, these estimates may change as new events occur, as more experience is acquired, as additional information is obtained and as the Company’s operating environment changes. While the Company believes that the estimates and assumptions used in the preparation of the consolidated financial statements are appropriate, actual results could differ from those estimates.

Consolidation

KKR Financial CLO 2012-1, Ltd. (“CLO 2012-1"), KKR Financial CLO 2013-1, Ltd. (“CLO 2013-1"), KKR Financial CLO 2013-2, Ltd. (“CLO 2013-2"), KKR CLO 9, Ltd. (“CLO 9”), KKR CLO 10, Ltd. (“CLO 10”), KKR CLO 15, Ltd. ("CLO 15") and KKR CLO 16, Ltd. ("CLO 16") (collectively the “Cash Flow CLOs”) are entities established to complete secured financing transactions. During 2016, the Company called KKR 2016-1, Ltd. ("CLO 2016-1"), KKR Financial CLO 2007-1 (“CLO 2007-1") and KKR Financial CLO 2011-1 (“CLO 2011-1") and during 2015, the Company called KKR Financial CLO 2005-2, Ltd. (“CLO 2005-2"), KKR Financial CLO 2005-1, Ltd. ("CLO 2005-1") and KKR Financial CLO 2006-1, Ltd ("CLO 2006-1"), whereby the Company repaid all senior and mezzanine notes outstanding. These entities are VIEs which the Company consolidates as the Company has determined it has the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact these entities’ economic performance and the Company has both the obligation to absorb losses of these entities and the right to receive benefits from these entities that could potentially be significant to these entities. In CLO transactions, subordinated notes have the first risk of loss and conversely, the residual value upside of the transactions.

In addition, during 2016, the Company declared a distribution in kind on its common shares of certain subordinated notes of KKR CLO 11, Ltd ("CLO 11") and KKR CLO 13, Ltd ("CLO 13") to its Parent as the sole holder of its common shares. CLO 11 and CLO 13 had previously been consolidated by the Company as they were VIEs which the Company determined it had the power to direct the activities that most significantly impacted these entities’ economic performance and the Company had both the obligation to absorb losses of these entities and the right to receive benefits from these entities that could potentially be significant to these entities. Following the distribution, the Company determined that it no longer met the consolidation criteria and de-consolidated CLO 11 and CLO 13, resulting in a reduction in both consolidated assets and liabilities of approximately $1.0 billion as of December 31, 2016. Also, as a result of the de-consolidation, the interest expense and management fees that were previously consolidated will no longer be included in the Company's consolidated statements of operations.

The Company finances the majority of its corporate debt investments through its CLOs. As of December 31, 2016, the Company’s Cash Flow CLOs held $3.1 billion par amount, or $3.1 billion estimated fair value, of corporate debt investments. As of December 31, 2015, the Company's CLOs held $5.5 billion par amount, or $5.1 billion estimated fair value, of corporate debt investments. The assets in each CLO can be used only to settle the debt of the related CLO. As of December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, the aggregate par amount of CLO debt totaled $3.2 billion and $4.9 billion, respectively, held by unaffiliated third parties.

The Company consolidates all non‑VIEs in which it holds a greater than 50 percent voting interest. Specifically, the Company consolidates majority owned entities for which the Company is presumed to have control. The ownership interests of these entities held by third parties are reflected as noncontrolling interests in the accompanying financial statements. The Company began consolidating a majority of these non‑VIE entities as a result of the asset contributions from its Parent during the second half of 2014. For certain of these entities, the Company previously held a percentage ownership, but following the incremental contributions from its Parent, were presumed to have control.

In addition, the Company has noncontrolling interests in joint ventures and partnerships that do not qualify as VIEs and do not meet the control requirements for consolidation as defined by GAAP.

All inter‑company balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

Fair Value Option

In connection with the application of acquisition accounting related to the Merger Transaction, the Successor Company elected the fair value option of accounting for its financial assets and CLO secured notes for the primary purpose of reporting values that more closely aligned with KKR & Co.’s method of accounting. Related unrealized gains and losses are reported in net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investments in the consolidated statements of operations.

Fair value is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Where available, fair value is based on observable market prices or parameters or derived from such prices or parameters. Where observable prices or inputs are not available, valuation techniques are applied. These valuation techniques involve varying levels of management estimation and judgment, the degree of which is dependent on a variety of factors including the price transparency for the instruments or market and the instruments’ complexity for disclosure purposes. Assets and liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets are categorized based upon the level of judgment associated with the inputs used to measure their value. Hierarchical levels, as defined under GAAP, are directly related to the amount of subjectivity associated with the inputs to the valuation of these assets and liabilities, and are as follows:

Level 1: Inputs are unadjusted, quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities at the measurement date.

Level 2: Inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. Level 2 inputs include quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets, and inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability.

Level 3: Inputs are unobservable inputs for the asset or liability, and include situations where there is little, if any, market activity for the asset or liability.

A significant decrease in the volume and level of activity for the asset or liability is an indication that transactions or quoted prices may not be representative of fair value because in such market conditions there may be increased instances of transactions that are not orderly. In those circumstances, further analysis of transactions or quoted prices is needed, and a significant adjustment to the transactions or quoted prices may be necessary to estimate fair value.

The availability of observable inputs can vary depending on the financial asset or liability and is affected by a wide variety of factors, including, for example, the type of instrument, whether the instrument is new, whether the instrument is traded on an active exchange or in the secondary market, and the current market condition. To the extent that valuation is based on models or inputs that are less observable or unobservable in the market, the determination of fair value requires more judgment. Accordingly, the degree of judgment exercised by the Company in determining fair value is greatest for instruments categorized in Level 3. In certain cases, the inputs used to measure fair value may fall into different levels of the fair value hierarchy. In such cases, for disclosure purposes, the level in the fair value hierarchy within which the fair value measurement in its entirety falls is determined based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. The Company’s assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires judgment and consideration of factors specific to the asset. The variability and availability of the observable inputs affected by the factors described above may cause transfers between Levels 1, 2, and/or 3, which the Company recognizes at the end of the reporting period.

Many financial assets and liabilities have bid and ask prices that can be observed in the marketplace. Bid prices reflect the highest price that the Company and others are willing to pay for an asset. Ask prices represent the lowest price that the Company and others are willing to accept for an asset. For financial assets and liabilities whose inputs are based on bid‑ask prices, the Company does not require that fair value always be a predetermined point in the bid‑ask range. The Company’s policy is to allow for mid‑market pricing and adjusting to the point within the bid‑ask range that meets the Company’s best estimate of fair value.

Depending on the relative liquidity in the markets for certain assets, the Company may transfer assets to Level 3 if it determines that observable quoted prices, obtained directly or indirectly, are not available. The valuation techniques used for the assets and liabilities that are valued using Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy are described below.

Securities and Corporate Loans, at Estimated Fair Value: Securities and corporate loans, at estimated fair value are initially valued at transaction price and are subsequently valued using market data for similar instruments (e.g., recent transactions or broker quotes), comparisons to benchmark derivative indices or valuation models. Valuation models are based on yield analysis techniques, where the key inputs are based on relative value analyses, which incorporate similar instruments from similar issuers. In addition, an illiquidity discount is applied where appropriate.

Equity and Interests in Joint Ventures and Partnerships, at Estimated Fair Value: Equity and interests in joint ventures and partnerships, at estimated fair value, are initially valued at transaction price and are subsequently valued using observable market prices, if available, or internally developed models in the absence of readily observable market prices. Interests in joint ventures and partnerships include certain equity investments related to the oil and gas, commercial real estate and specialty lending sectors. Valuation models are generally based on market comparables and discounted cash flow approaches, in which various internal and external factors are considered. Factors include key financial inputs and recent public and private transactions for comparable investments. Key inputs used for the discounted cash flow approach, which incorporates significant assumptions and judgment, include the weighted average cost of capital and assumed inputs used to calculate terminal values, such as earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (“EBITDA”) exit multiples. Natural resources investments are generally valued using a discounted cash flow analysis. Key inputs used in this methodology that require estimates include the weighted average cost of capital. In addition, the valuations of natural resources investments generally incorporate both commodity prices as quoted on indices and long‑term commodity price forecasts, which may be substantially different from, and are currently higher than, commodity prices on certain indices for equivalent future dates. Long‑term commodity price forecasts are utilized to capture the value of the investments across a range of commodity prices within the portfolio associated with future development and to reflect price expectations.

Upon completion of the valuations conducted using these approaches, a weighting is ascribed to each approach and an illiquidity discount is applied where appropriate. The ultimate fair value recorded for a particular investment will generally be within the range suggested by the two approaches.

Over-the-counter (“OTC”) Derivative Contracts: OTC derivative contracts may include forward, swap and option contracts related to interest rates, foreign currencies, credit standing of reference entities and equity prices. OTC derivatives are initially valued using quoted market prices, if available, or models using a series of techniques, including closed‑form analytic formulae, such as the Black‑Scholes option‑pricing model, and/or simulation models in the absence of quoted market prices. Many pricing models employ methodologies that have pricing inputs observed from actively quoted markets, as is the case for generic interest rate swap and option contracts.

Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities, at Estimated Fair Value: RMBS are initially valued at transaction price and are subsequently valued using a third party valuation servicer. The most significant inputs to the valuation of these instruments are default and loss expectations and constant prepayment rates.

Collateralized Loan Obligation Secured Notes: As of January 1, 2015, the Company adopted the measurement alternative issued by the FASB whereby the financial liabilities of its consolidated CLOs were measured using the fair value of the financial assets of its consolidated CLOs, which was determined to be more observable. The Company considered the fair value of these financial assets, which were classified as Level 2 assets, as more observable than the fair value of these financial liabilities, which were classified as Level 3 liabilities. As a result of this new basis of measurement, the Company's CLO secured notes were transferred from Level 3 to Level 2 during the first quarter of 2015.

Prior to this adoption, CLO secured notes were initially valued at transaction price and subsequently valued using a third party valuation servicer. The approach used to estimate the fair values was the discounted cash flow method, which included consideration of the cash flows of the debt obligation based on projected quarterly interest payments and quarterly amortization. The debt obligations were discounted based on the appropriate yield curve given the debt obligation's respective maturity and credit rating. The most significant inputs to the valuation of these instruments were default and loss expectations and discount margins.

Key unobservable inputs that have a significant impact on the Company’s Level 3 valuations as described above are included in Note 8 to these consolidated financial statements. The Company utilizes several unobservable pricing inputs and assumptions in determining the fair value of its Level 3 investments. These unobservable pricing inputs and assumptions may differ by asset and in the application of the Company’s valuation methodologies. The reported fair value estimates could vary materially if the Company had chosen to incorporate different unobservable pricing inputs and other assumptions or, for applicable investments, if the Company only used either the discounted cash flow methodology or the market comparables methodology instead of assigning a weighting to both methodologies.

Valuation Process

Investments are generally valued based on quotations from third party pricing services, unless such a quotation is unavailable or is determined to be unreliable or inadequately representing the fair value of the particular assets. In that case, valuations are based on either valuation data obtained from one or more other third party pricing sources, including broker dealers, or will reflect the valuation committee’s good faith determination of estimated fair value based on other factors considered relevant. The Company utilizes a valuation committee, whose members consist of employees of the Manager or its affiliates. The valuation committee is responsible for coordinating and consistently implementing the Company’s quarterly valuation policies, guidelines and processes.

The valuation process involved in Level 3 measurements for assets and liabilities is completed on a quarterly basis and is designed to subject the valuation of Level 3 investments to an appropriate level of consistency, oversight and review. For assets classified as Level 3, valuations may be performed by the relevant investment professionals or by independent third parties with input from the relevant investment professionals and are based on various factors including evaluation of financial and operating data, company specific developments, market discount rates and valuations of comparable companies and model projections. Asset valuations are approved by the valuation committee, which may be assisted by a subcommittee for the valuation of certain investments.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

Cash and cash equivalents include cash on hand, cash held in banks and highly liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less. Interest income earned on cash and cash equivalents is recorded in other within total revenues on the consolidated statements of operations.

Restricted Cash and Cash Equivalents

Restricted cash and cash equivalents represent amounts that are held by third parties under certain of the Company’s financing and derivative transactions. Interest income earned on restricted cash and cash equivalents is recorded in other within total revenues on the consolidated statements of operations.

On the consolidated statements of cash flows, net additions or reductions to restricted cash and cash equivalents are classified as an investing activity as restricted cash and cash equivalents reflect the receipts from collections or sales of investments, as well as payments made to acquire investments held by third parties.

Securities

Securities Available‑for‑Sale

The Predecessor Company and Successor Company both classify certain of their investments in securities as available‑for‑sale as the Companies may sell them prior to maturity and do not hold them principally for the purpose of selling them in the near term. These investments are carried at estimated fair value. The Successor Company elected the fair value option of accounting for its securities, with changes in estimated fair value reported in net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investments in the consolidated statements of operations. Comparatively, the Predecessor Company reported all unrealized gains and losses in accumulated other comprehensive loss on the consolidated balance sheets.

The Predecessor Company monitored its available‑for‑sale securities portfolio for impairments. A loss was recognized when it was determined that a decline in the estimated fair value of a security below its amortized cost was other‑than‑temporary. The Predecessor Company considered many factors in determining whether the impairment of a security was deemed to be other‑than‑ temporary, including, but not limited to, the length of time the security had a decline in estimated fair value below its amortized cost and the severity of the decline, the amount of the unrealized loss, recent events specific to the issuer or industry, external credit ratings and recent changes in such ratings. In addition, for debt securities, the Predecessor Company considered its intent to sell the debt security, the Predecessor Company’s estimation of whether or not it expected to recover the debt security’s entire amortized cost if it intended to hold the debt security, and whether it was more likely than not that the Predecessor Company would have been required to sell the debt security before its anticipated recovery. For equity securities, the Predecessor Company also considered its intent and ability to hold the equity security for a period of time sufficient for a recovery in value.

The amount of the loss that was recognized when it was determined that a decline in the estimated fair value of a security below its amortized cost was other‑than‑temporary was dependent on certain factors. If the security was an equity security or if the security was a debt security that the Predecessor Company intended to sell or estimated that it was more likely than not that the Predecessor Company would be required to sell before recovery of its amortized cost, then the impairment amount recognized in earnings was the entire difference between the estimated fair value of the security and its amortized cost. For debt securities that the Predecessor Company did not intend to sell or estimated that it was not more likely than not to be required to sell before recovery, the impairment was separated into the estimated amount relating to credit loss and the estimated amount relating to all other factors. Only the estimated credit loss amount was recognized in earnings, with the remainder of the loss amount recognized in accumulated other comprehensive loss.

Unamortized premiums and unaccreted discounts on securities available‑ for‑sale were recognized in interest income over the contractual life, adjusted for actual prepayments, of the securities using the effective interest method.

Other Securities, at Estimated Fair Value

The Predecessor Company and Successor Company both elected the fair value option of accounting for certain of their securities for the purpose of enhancing the transparency of their financial condition as fair value is consistent with how the Predecessor Company and Successor Company manage the risks of these securities. All securities, at estimated fair value are included within securities on the consolidated balance sheets.

Estimated fair values are based on quoted market prices, when available, on estimates provided by independent pricing sources or dealers who make markets in such securities, or internal valuation models when external sources of fair value are not available. In accounting for the Merger Transaction, the difference between the estimated fair value, as of the Effective Date, and the par amount became the new premium or discount to be amortized or accreted over the remaining terms, adjusted for actual prepayments, of the securities using the effective interest method.

Residential Mortgage‑Backed Securities, at Estimated Fair Value

The Predecessor Company and Successor Company both elected the fair value option of accounting for their residential mortgage investments for the purpose of enhancing the transparency of their financial condition as fair value is consistent with how the Predecessor Company and Successor Company manage the risks of these investments. RMBS, at estimated fair value are included within securities on the consolidated balance sheets.

Equity Investments, at Estimated Fair Value

The Predecessor Company and Successor Company both elected the fair value option of accounting for certain of their equity investments, at estimated fair value, including private equity investments received through restructuring debt transactions or issued by an entity in which the Predecessor Company and Successor Company may have significant influence. The fair value option was elected for the equity investments for the purpose of enhancing the transparency of their financial condition as fair value is consistent with how the Predecessor Company and Successor Company manage the risks of these investments. Equity investments carried at estimated fair value are presented separately on the consolidated balance sheets.

Interests in Joint Ventures and Partnerships

The Predecessor Company and Successor Company both elected the fair value option of accounting for certain of their interests in joint ventures and partnerships. The fair value option of accounting was elected for noncontrolling interests in joint ventures and partnerships for the purpose of enhancing the transparency of their financial condition as fair value is consistent with how the Predecessor Company and Successor Company manage the risks of these interests. Interests in joint ventures and partnerships are presented separately on the consolidated balance sheets.

Equity Method Investments

The Predecessor Company and Successor Company hold certain investments where the Predecessor Company and Successor Company do not control the investee nor are the primary beneficiary, but can exert significant influence over the financial and operating policies of the investee. Significant influence typically exists if the Predecessor Company and Successor Company have a 20% to 50% ownership interest in the investee unless predominant evidence to the contrary exists. The evaluation of whether the Predecessor Company and Successor Company exerts control or significant influence over the financial and operational policies of an investee may also require significant judgment based on the facts and circumstances surrounding each individual investment. Factors include investor voting or other rights, any influence the Predecessor Company and Successor Company may have on the governing board of the investee and the relationship between the Predecessor Company and Successor Company and other investors in the entity. The fair value option was elected to account for these equity investments with any changes in estimated fair value recorded in net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investments in the consolidated statements of operations.

Corporate Loans, Net

In connection with the Successor Company’s application of acquisition accounting related to the Merger Transaction and to align more closely with KKR & Co.’s method of accounting, the Successor Company elected to carry all of its corporate loans at estimated fair value as of the Effective Date, with changes in estimated fair value recorded in net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investments in the consolidated statements of operations. As presented under the Predecessor Company, corporate loans had previously been accounted for based on the following three categories: (i) corporate loans held for investment, which were measured based on their principal plus or minus unaccreted purchase discounts and unamortized purchase premiums, net of an allowance for loan losses; (ii) corporate loans held for sale, which were measured at lower of cost or estimated fair value; and (iii) corporate loans at estimated fair value, which were measured at fair value. As such, the disclosures related to loans held for investment and loans held for sale pertain to the Predecessor Company.

Corporate Loans

Prior to the Effective Date, corporate loans were generally held for investment and the Predecessor Company initially recorded corporate loans at their purchase prices. The Successor Company subsequently accounted for corporate loans based on their outstanding principal plus or minus unaccreted purchase discounts and unamortized purchase premiums and corporate loans that the Predecessor Company transferred to held for sale were transferred at the lower of cost or estimated fair value. As of the Effective Date, the Successor Company initially recorded corporate loans at their purchase prices and subsequently accounts for all corporate loans at estimated fair value.

Interest income on corporate loans includes interest at stated coupon rates adjusted for accretion of purchase discounts and the amortization of purchase premiums. Unamortized premiums and unaccreted discounts are recognized in interest income over the contractual life, adjusted for actual prepayments, of the corporate loans using the effective interest method.

Other than corporate loans measured at estimated fair value, corporate loans acquired with deteriorated credit quality are recorded at initial cost and interest income is recognized as the difference between the Predecessor Company’s estimate of all cash flows that it will receive from the loan in excess of its initial investment on a level-yield basis over the life of the corporate loan (accretable yield) using the effective interest method.

A corporate loan is typically placed on non-accrual status at such time as: (i) management believes that scheduled debt service payments may not be paid when contractually due; (ii) the corporate loan becomes 90 days delinquent; (iii) management determines the borrower is incapable of, or has ceased efforts toward, curing the cause of the impairment; or (iv) the net realizable value of the collateral securing the corporate loan decreases below the Predecessor Company’s or Successor Company's carrying value of such corporate loan. As such, corporate loans placed on non-accrual status may or may not be contractually past due at the time of such determination. While on non-accrual status, previously recognized accrued interest is reversed if it is determined that such amounts are not collectible and interest income is recognized using the cost-recovery method, cash-basis method or some combination of the two methods. A corporate loan is placed back on accrual status when the ultimate collectability of the principal and interest is no longer in doubt.

Prior to the Effective Date, the Predecessor Company may have modified corporate loans in transactions where the borrower was experiencing financial difficulty and a concession was granted to the borrower as part of the modification. These concessions may have included one or a combination of the following: a reduction of the stated interest rate; payment extensions; forgiveness of principal; or an exchange of assets. Such modifications typically qualified as troubled debt restructurings (“TDRs”). In order to determine whether the borrower was experiencing financial difficulty, an evaluation was performed including the following considerations: whether the borrower was or would have been in payment default on any of its debt in the foreseeable future without the modification; whether there was a potential for a bankruptcy filing; whether there was a going-concern issue; or whether the borrower was unable to secure financing elsewhere.

Corporate loans whose terms had been modified in a TDR were considered impaired, unless accounted for at fair value or the lower of cost or estimated fair value, and were typically placed on non-accrual status, but could have been moved to accrual status when, among other criteria, payment in full of all amounts due under the restructured terms was expected and the borrower demonstrated a sustained period of repayment performance, typically 6 months.

TDRs were separately identified for impairment disclosures and were measured at either the estimated fair value or the present value of estimated future cash flows using the respective corporate loan’s effective rate at inception. Impairments associated with TDRs were included within the allocated component of the Predecessor Company’s allowance for loan losses.

The Predecessor Company may have also identified receivables that were newly considered impaired and disclosed the total amount of receivables and the allowance for credit losses as of the end of the period of adoption related to those receivables that were newly considered impaired.

The corporate loans the Predecessor Company invested in were generally deemed in default upon the non-payment of a single interest payment or as a result of the violation of a covenant in the respective corporate loan agreement. The Predecessor Company charged-off a portion or all of its amortized cost basis in a corporate loan when it determined that it was uncollectible due to either: (i) the estimation based on a recovery value analysis of a defaulted corporate loan that less than the amortized cost amount would have been recovered through the agreed upon restructuring of the corporate loan or as a result of a bankruptcy process of the issuer of the corporate loan or (ii) the determination by the Predecessor Company to transfer a corporate loan to held for sale with the corporate loan having an estimated fair value below the amortized cost basis of the corporate loan.

In addition to TDRs, the Predecessor Company may have also modified corporate loans which usually involved changes in existing interest rates combined with changes of existing maturities to prevailing market rates/maturities for similar instruments at the time of modification. Such modifications typically did not meet the definition of a TDR since the respective borrowers were neither experiencing financial difficulty nor were seeking a concession as part of the modification.

Allowance for Loan Losses

As a result of the Merger Transaction, the acquisition method of accounting and adoption of fair value for corporate loans eliminated the need for an allowance for loan losses. The reevaluation of assets required by the acquisition method of accounting resulted in all loans being reported at their estimated fair values as of the Effective Date. The estimated fair value took into account the contractual payments on loans that were not expected to be received and consequently, no allowance for loan losses was carried over for the Successor Company. As of the Effective Date, no allowance for loan losses will be recorded as all corporate loans are carried at estimated fair value. As such, the disclosure related to the allowance for loan losses pertains to the Predecessor Company.

The Predecessor Company and Successor Company’s corporate loan portfolio is comprised of a single portfolio segment which includes one class of financing receivables, that is, high yield loans that are typically purchased via assignment or participation in either the primary or secondary market. High yield loans are generally characterized as having below investment grade ratings or being unrated.

Prior to the Effective Date, the Predecessor Company’s allowance for loan losses represented its estimate of probable credit losses inherent in its corporate loan portfolio held for investment as of the balance sheet date. Estimating the Predecessor's Company’s allowance for loan losses involved a high degree of management judgment and was based upon a comprehensive review of the Company’s corporate loan portfolio that was performed on a quarterly basis. The Predecessor Company’s allowance for loan losses consisted of two components, an allocated component and an unallocated component. The allocated component of the allowance for loan losses pertained to specific corporate loans that the Predecessor Company had determined were impaired. The Predecessor Company determined a corporate loan was impaired when management estimated that it was probable that the Predecessor Company would be unable to collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms of the corporate loan agreement. On a quarterly basis the Predecessor Company performed a comprehensive review of its entire corporate loan portfolio and identified certain corporate loans that it had determined were impaired. Once a corporate loan was identified as being impaired, the Predecessor Company placed the corporate loan on non-accrual status, unless the corporate loan was already on non-accrual status, and recorded an allowance that reflected management’s best estimate of the loss that the Predecessor Company expected to recognize from the corporate loan. The expected loss was estimated as being the difference between the Predecessor Company’s current cost basis of the corporate loan, including accrued interest receivable, and the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the corporate loan’s effective interest rate, except as a practical expedient, the corporate loan’s observable estimated fair value may have been used. The Predecessor Company also estimated the probable credit losses inherent in its unfunded loan commitments as of the balance sheet date. Any credit loss reserve for unfunded loan commitments was recorded in accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities on the Predecessor Company’s consolidated balance sheets.

The unallocated component of the Predecessor Company’s allowance for loan losses represented its estimate of probable losses inherent in the corporate loan portfolio as of the balance sheet date where the specific loan that the loan loss relates to was indeterminable. The Predecessor Company estimated the unallocated component of the allowance for loan losses through a comprehensive review of its corporate loan portfolio and identified certain corporate loans that demonstrated possible indicators of impairment, including internally assigned credit quality indicators. This assessment excluded all corporate loans that were determined to be impaired and as a result, an allocated reserve had been recorded as described in the preceding paragraph. Such indicators included the current and/or forecasted financial performance, liquidity profile of the issuer, specific industry or economic conditions that may have impacted the issuer, and the observable trading price of the corporate loan if available. All corporate loans were first categorized based on their assigned risk grade and further stratified based on the seniority of the corporate loan in the issuer’s capital structure. The seniority classifications assigned to corporate loans were senior secured, second lien and subordinate. Senior secured consisted of corporate loans that were the most senior debt in an issuer’s capital structure and therefore had a lower estimated loss severity than other debt that was subordinate to the senior secured loan. Senior secured corporate loans often had a first lien on some or all of the issuer’s assets. Second lien consisted of corporate loans that were secured by a second lien interest on some or all of the issuer’s assets; however, the corporate loan was subordinate to the first lien debt in the issuer’s capital structure. Subordinate consisted of corporate loans that were generally unsecured and subordinate to other debt in the issuer’s capital structure.

There were three internally assigned risk grades that were applied to loans that have not been identified as being impaired: high, moderate and low. High risk meant that there was evidence of possible loss due to the current and/or forecasted financial performance, liquidity profile of the issuer, specific industry or economic conditions that may have impacted the issuer, observable trading price of the corporate loan if available, or other factors that indicated that the breach of a covenant contained in the related loan agreement was possible. Moderate risk meant that while there was not observable evidence of possible loss, there were issuer and/or industry specific trends that indicated a loss may have occurred. Low risk meant that while there was no identified evidence of loss, there was the risk of loss inherent in the loan that had not been identified. All loans held for investment, with the exception of loans that had been identified as impaired, were assigned a risk grade of high, moderate or low.

The Predecessor Company applied a range of default and loss severity estimates in order to estimate a range of loss outcomes upon which to base its estimate of probable losses that resulted in the determination of the unallocated component of the Company’s allowance for loan losses.

Corporate Loans Held for Sale

As described above, corporate loans held for sale related to the Predecessor Company. From time to time the Predecessor Company made the determination to transfer certain of its corporate loans from held for investment to held for sale. The decision to transfer a loan to held for sale was generally as a result of the Predecessor Company determining that the respective loan’s credit quality in relation to the loan’s expected risk-adjusted return no longer met the Company’s investment objective and/or the Predecessor Company deciding to reduce or eliminate its exposure to a particular loan for risk management purposes. Corporate loans held for sale were stated at lower of cost or estimated fair value and were assessed on an individual basis. Prior to transferring a loan to held for sale, any difference between the carrying amount of the loan and its outstanding principal balance was recognized as an adjustment to the yield by the effective interest method. The loan was transferred from held for investment to held for sale at the lower of its cost or estimated fair value and was carried at the lower of its cost or estimated fair value thereafter. Subsequent to transfer and while the loan was held for sale, recognition as an adjustment to yield by the effective interest method was discontinued for any difference between the carrying amount of the loan and its outstanding principal balance.

From time to time the Predecessor Company also made the determination to transfer certain of its corporate loans from held for sale back to held for investment. The decision to transfer a loan back to held for investment was generally as a result of the circumstances that led to the initial transfer to held for sale no longer being present. Such circumstances may have included deteriorated market conditions often resulting in price depreciation or assets becoming illiquid, changes in restrictions on sales and certain loans amending their terms to extend the maturity, whereby the Predecessor Company determined that selling the asset no longer met its investment objective and strategy. The loan was transferred from held for sale back to held for investment at the lower of its cost or estimated fair value, whereby a new cost basis was established based on this amount.

Interest income on corporate loans held for sale was recognized through accrual of the stated coupon rate for the loans, unless the loans were placed on non-accrual status, at which point previously recognized accrued interest was reversed if it was determined that such amounts were not collectible and interest income was recognized using either the cost-recovery method or on a cash-basis.

Corporate Loans, at Estimated Fair Value

The Predecessor Company and Successor Company both elected the fair value option of accounting for certain of their corporate loans for the purpose of enhancing the transparency of their financial condition as fair value is consistent with how the Predecessor Company and Successor Company manage the risks of these corporate loans. All corporate loans carried at estimated fair value are included within corporate loans, net on the consolidated balance sheets.

Estimated fair values are based on quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets and inputs other than observable quoted prices, or internal valuation models when external sources of fair value are not available. In accounting for the Merger Transaction, the difference between the estimated fair value, as of the Effective Date, and the par amount became the new premium or discount to be amortized or accreted over the remaining terms, adjusted for actual prepayments, of the corporate loans using the effective interest method.

As described above under “Basis of Presentation,” as of the Effective Date, purchases and sales of corporate loans are recorded on the trade date.

Oil and Gas Revenue Recognition

Oil, natural gas and natural gas liquid (“NGL”) revenues are recognized when production is sold to a purchaser at fixed or determinable prices, when delivery has occurred and title has transferred and collectability of the revenue is reasonably assured. The Predecessor Company and Successor Company follow the sales method of accounting for natural gas revenues. Under this method of accounting, revenues are recognized based on volumes sold, which may differ from the volume to which the Predecessor Company and Successor Company is entitled based on their working interest. An imbalance is recognized as a liability only when the estimated remaining reserves will not be sufficient to enable the under‑produced owners to recoup their entitled share through future production. Under the sales method, no receivables are recorded when the Predecessor Company and Successor Company have taken less than its share of production and no payables are recorded when the Predecessor Company and Successor Company have taken more than its share of production.

Borrowings

The Company finances the majority of its investments through the use of secured borrowings in the form of securitization transactions structured as non‑recourse secured financings and other secured and unsecured borrowings. The Company recognizes interest expense on all borrowings on an accrual basis.

In connection with the Company’s application of acquisition accounting related to the Merger Transaction and to align more closely with KKR & Co.’s method of accounting, the Company elected to carry its CLO secured notes at estimated fair value as of the Effective Date, with changes in estimated fair value recorded in net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on debt in the consolidated statements of operations. Prior to the Effective Date, the Company's CLO secured notes were carried at amortized cost.

As mentioned above, beginning January 1, 2015, the Company adopted the measurement alternative issued by the FASB whereby the financial liabilities of its consolidated CLOs were measured using the fair value of the financial assets of its consolidated CLOs, which was determined to be more observable. Accordingly, these financial assets were measured at fair value and these financial liabilities were measured as (i) the sum of the fair value of the financial assets and the carrying value of any nonfinancial assets that are incidental to the operations of the CLOs less, (ii) the sum of the fair value of any beneficial interests retained by the reporting entity (other than those that represent compensation for services) and the Company’s carrying value of any beneficial interests that represent compensation for services. The resulting amount was allocated to the individual financial liabilities (other than the beneficial interests retained by the Company) using a reasonable and consistent methodology.

Trust Preferred Securities

The Company also established six 30 year trusts between 2006 and 2007 for the sole purpose of issuing trust preferred securities. These trusts issued preferred securities to unaffiliated investors and common securities to the Company. The combined proceeds were invested by the trusts in junior subordinated notes issued by the Company. The junior subordinated notes are the sole assets of trusts and mature between 2036 and 2037. Interest is payable on the junior subordinated notes quarterly and based on the associated trust ranges from between LIBOR plus 2.25% and LIBOR plus 2.65%. The Company may redeem the junior subordinated notes, in whole or in part, at any time, at a redemption price equal to 100% of the principal amount redeemed plus accrued and unpaid interest to the redemption date. As of December 31, 2016, the aggregate outstanding principal amount of the junior subordinated notes was approximately $283.5 million. These trusts are not consolidated by the Company as the Company has determined that it is not the primary beneficiary of such trusts. The Company’s investment in the common securities of such trusts is included within other assets on the consolidated balance sheets.

Preferred Shares

Distributions on the Company’s Series A LLC Preferred Shares are cumulative and payable quarterly when and if declared by the Company’s board of directors at a 7.375% rate per annum. The Company accrues for the distribution upon declaration and is included within accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities on the consolidated balance sheets.

Derivative Instruments

The Company recognizes all derivatives on the consolidated balance sheet at estimated fair value. On the date the Company enters into a derivative contract, the Company designates and documents each derivative contract as one of the following at the time the contract is executed: (i) a hedge of a recognized asset or liability (“fair value” hedge); (ii) a hedge of a forecasted transaction or of the variability of cash flows to be received or paid related to a recognized asset or liability (“cash flow” hedge); (iii) a hedge of a net investment in a foreign operation; or (iv) a derivative instrument not designated as a hedging instrument (“free‑standing derivative”). For a fair value hedge, the Company records changes in the estimated fair value of the derivative instrument and, to the extent that it is effective, changes in the fair value of the hedged asset or liability in the current period earnings in the same financial statement category as the hedged item. For a cash flow hedge, the Company records changes in the estimated fair value of the derivative to the extent that it is effective in accumulated other comprehensive loss and subsequently reclassifies these changes in estimated fair value to net income in the same period(s) that the hedged transaction affects earnings. The effective portion of the cash flow hedges is recorded in the same financial statement category as the hedged item. For free‑standing derivatives, the Company reports changes in the fair values in net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on derivatives and foreign exchange on the consolidated statements of operations.

The Company formally documents at inception its hedge relationships, including identification of the hedging instruments and the hedged items, its risk management objectives, strategy for undertaking the hedge transaction and the Company’s evaluation of effectiveness of its hedged transactions. Periodically, the Company also formally assesses whether the derivative it designated in each hedging relationship is expected to be and has been highly effective in offsetting changes in estimated fair values or cash flows of the hedged item using either the dollar offset or the regression analysis method. If the Company determines that a derivative is not highly effective as a hedge, it discontinues hedge accounting.

In connection with the Merger Transaction, the Company discontinued hedge accounting for its cash flow hedges and, as of the Effective Date, classifies all derivative instruments as free‑standing derivatives. As a result, the Company records changes in the estimated fair value of the derivative instruments in net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on derivatives and foreign exchange on the consolidated statements of operations.

Foreign Currency

The Company makes investments in non‑United States dollar denominated assets including securities, loans, equity investments and interests in joint ventures and partnerships. As a result, the Company is subject to the risk of fluctuation in the exchange rate between the United States dollar and the foreign currency in which it makes an investment. In order to reduce the currency risk, the Company may hedge the applicable foreign currency. All investments denominated in a foreign currency are converted to the United States dollar using prevailing exchange rates on the balance sheet date.

Income, expenses, gains and losses on investments denominated in a foreign currency are converted to the United States dollar using the prevailing exchange rates on the dates when they are recorded. Foreign exchange gains and losses are recorded in net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on derivatives and foreign exchange on the consolidated statements of operations.

Noncontrolling Interests

Noncontrolling interests represent noncontrolling interests in consolidated entities held by third party investors. Income (loss) is allocated to noncontrolling interests based on the relative ownership interests of third party investors and is presented as net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests on the consolidated statements of operations. Noncontrolling interests are also presented separately within equity in the consolidated balance sheets.

Manager Compensation

The Management Agreement provides for the payment of a base management fee to the Manager, as well as an incentive fee if the Company’s financial performance exceeds certain benchmarks. Additionally, the Management Agreement provides for the Manager to be reimbursed for certain expenses incurred on the Company’s behalf. The base management fee and the incentive fee are accrued and expensed during the period for which they are earned by the Manager.

Income Taxes

The Company intends to continue to operate so as to qualify, for United States federal income tax purposes, as a partnership and not as an association or publicly traded partnership taxable as a corporation. Therefore, the Company generally is not subject to United States federal income tax at the entity level, but is subject to limited state and foreign taxes. Holders of the Company’s Series A LLC Preferred Shares will be allocated a share of the Company’s gross ordinary income for the taxable year of the Company ending within or with their taxable year. Holders of the Company’s Series A LLC Preferred Shares will not be allocated any gains or losses from the sale of the Company’s assets.

The Company owns equity interests in entities that have elected or intend to elect to be taxed as real estate investment trusts (“REITs”) under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). A REIT generally is not subject to United States federal income tax to the extent that it currently distributes its income and satisfies certain asset, income and ownership tests, and recordkeeping requirements, but it may be subject to some amount of federal, state, local and foreign taxes based on its taxable income.

The Company has wholly‑owned domestic and foreign subsidiaries that are taxable as corporations for United States federal income tax purposes and thus are not consolidated with the Company for United States federal income tax purposes. For financial reporting purposes, current and deferred taxes are provided for on the portion of earnings recognized by the Company with respect to its interest in the domestic taxable corporate subsidiaries, because each is taxed as a regular corporation under the Code. Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are computed based on temporary differences between the GAAP consolidated financial statements and the United States federal income tax basis of assets and liabilities as of each consolidated balance sheet date. The foreign corporate subsidiaries were formed to make certain foreign and domestic investments from time to time. The foreign corporate subsidiaries are organized as exempted companies incorporated with limited liability under the laws of the Cayman Islands, and are anticipated to be exempt from United States federal and state income tax at the corporate entity level because they restrict their activities in the United States to trading in stock and securities for their own account. However, the Company will be required to include their current taxable income in the Company’s calculation of its gross ordinary income allocable to holders of its Series A LLC Preferred Shares.

The Company must recognize the tax impact from an uncertain tax position only if it is more likely than not that the tax position will be sustained on examination by the taxing authorities, based on the technical merits of the position. The tax impact recognized in the financial statements from such a position is measured based on the largest benefit that has a greater than 50% likelihood of being realized upon ultimate resolution. Penalties and interest related to uncertain tax positions are recorded as tax expense. Significant judgment is required in the identification of uncertain tax positions and in the estimation of penalties and interest on uncertain tax positions. If it is determined that recognition for an uncertain tax provision is necessary, the Company would record a liability for an unrecognized tax expense from an uncertain tax position taken or expected to be taken.

Share-Based Compensation

In connection with the Merger Transaction, the Predecessor Company’s common shares were converted into 0.51 KKR & Co. common units. Prior to the Effective Date, the Company accounted for share-based compensation issued to its directors and to its Manager using the fair value based methodology in accordance with relevant accounting guidance. Compensation cost related to restricted common shares issued to the Company’s directors was measured at its estimated fair value at the grant date, and was amortized and expensed over the vesting period on a straight-line basis. Compensation

cost related to restricted common shares and common share options issued to the Manager was initially measured at estimated fair value at the grant date, and was remeasured on subsequent dates to the extent the awards were unvested. The Company elected to use the graded vesting attribution method to amortize compensation expense for the restricted common shares and common share options granted to the Manager. After the Effective Date, the Company did not report share-based compensation.

Earnings Per Common Share

In connection with the Merger Transaction, as of the Effective Date, the Company is a subsidiary of KKR Fund Holdings, which owns 100 common shares of the Company constituting all of the Company’s outstanding common shares. As KKR Fund Holdings is the Company’s sole shareholder, earnings per common share is not reported for the Successor Company. Prior to the Effective Date, the Company presented both basic and diluted earnings per common share (‘‘EPS’’) in its consolidated financial statements and footnotes thereto. Basic earnings per common share (‘‘Basic EPS’’) excluded dilution and was computed by dividing net income or loss available to common shareholders by the weighted average number of common shares, including vested restricted common shares, outstanding for the period. The Company calculated EPS using the more dilutive of the two-class method or the if-converted method. The two-class method was an earnings allocation formula that determined EPS for common shares and participating securities. Unvested share-based payment awards that contained non-forfeitable rights to dividends or dividend equivalents (whether paid or unpaid) were participating securities and were included in the computation of EPS using the two-class method. Accordingly, all earnings (distributed and undistributed) were allocated to common shares, preferred shares and participating securities based on their respective rights to receive dividends. Diluted earnings per common share (‘‘Diluted EPS’’) reflected the potential dilution of common share options and unvested restricted common shares using the treasury method or if-converted method. After the Effective Date, the Company did not report EPS.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Going Concern

In August 2014, the FASB issued guidance pertaining to management’s responsibility to evaluate whether there is substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern and to provide related footnote disclosures. The new guidance requires that management evaluate each annual and interim reporting period whether conditions exist that give rise to substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year from the financial statement issuance date, and if so, provide related disclosures. Substantial doubt exists when conditions and events, considered in the aggregate, indicate that it is probable that a company will be unable to meet its obligations as they become due within one year after the financial statement issuance date. The new guidance applies to all companies. The guidance is effective for annual reporting periods ending after December 15, 2016, and for annual and interim periods thereafter. This guidance has been adopted for the year ended December 31, 2016 and its adoption had no material impact on the Company's consolidated financial statements.

Consolidation

In February 2015, the FASB issued guidance which eliminates the presumption that a general partner should consolidate a limited partnership and also eliminates the consolidation model specific to limited partnerships. The amendments also clarify how to treat fees paid to an asset manager or other entity that makes the decisions for the investment vehicle and whether such fees should be considered in determining when a variable interest entity should be reported on an asset manager's balance sheet. The guidance is effective for reporting periods starting after December 15, 2015 and for interim periods within the fiscal year. Early adoption is permitted, and a full retrospective or modified retrospective approach is required. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the Company's consolidated financial statements.

In October 2016, the FASB issued guidance that reporting entities deciding whether they are primary beneficiaries no longer have to consider indirect interests held through related parties that are under common control to be the equivalent of direct interests in their entirety. Decision makers would include those indirect interests on a proportionate basis. The guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating its potential impact on the consolidated financial statements.

Financial Instruments

In January 2016, the FASB issued amended guidance that (i) requires equity investments (except those accounted for under the equity method of accounting or those that result in consolidation of the investee) to be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income; (ii) eliminates the requirement to disclose the method(s) and significant assumptions used to estimate the fair value that is currently required to be disclosed for financial instruments measured at fair value; (iii) requires an entity to present separately in other comprehensive income the portion of the total change in the fair value of a liability resulting from a change in the instrument-specific credit risk when the entity has elected to measure the liability at fair value in accordance with the fair value option for financial instruments and (iv) requires separate presentation of financial assets and financial liabilities by measurement category and form of financial asset (that is, securities or loans and receivables) on the balance sheet or the accompanying notes to the financial statements. This guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years and should be applied by means of a cumulative-effect adjustment to the balance sheet as of the beginning of the fiscal year of adoption. The amended guidance related to equity securities without readily determinable fair values (including the disclosure requirements) should be applied prospectively to equity investments that exist as of the date of adoption. The Company is currently evaluating its potential impact on its consolidated financial statements.

Investments

In March 2016, the FASB issued guidance which simplifies the equity method of accounting by eliminating the requirement to retrospectively apply the equity method to an investment that subsequently qualifies for such accounting as a result of an increase in the level of ownership interest or degree of influence. The guidance is effective for all entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those fiscal years, with early adoption permitted for all entities. Entities are required to apply the guidance prospectively to increases in the level of ownership interest or degree of influence occurring after the effective date. Additional transition disclosures are not required upon adoption. The Company is currently evaluating its potential impact on its consolidated financial statements.

Cash Flow Classification

In August 2016, the FASB issued amended guidance on the classification of certain cash receipts and payments in the statement of cash flows. The amended guidance adds or clarifies guidance on eight cash flow matters: (i) debt prepayment or debt extinguishment costs, (ii) settlement of zero-coupon debt instruments or other debt instruments with coupon interest rates that are insignificant in relation to the effective interest rate of the borrowing, (iii) contingent consideration payments made after a business combination, (iv) proceeds from the settlement of insurance claims, (v) proceeds from the settlement of corporate-owned life insurance policies, (vi) distributions received from equity method investees, (vii) beneficial interests in securitization transactions and (viii) separately identifiable cash flows and application of the predominance principle. The guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. The guidance must be applied retrospectively to all periods presented but may be applied prospectively from the earliest date practicable if retrospective application would be impracticable. The Company is currently evaluating its potential impact on its consolidated financial statements.

In November 2016, the FASB issued guidance to add or clarify existing guidance on the classification and presentation of restricted cash in the statement of cash flows. The amended guidance requires the following: (i) restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents should be included in the cash and cash-equivalents balances in the statement of cash flows; (ii) changes in restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents that result from transfers between cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents should not be presented as cash flow activities in the statement of cash flows (iii) a reconciliation between the statement of financial position and the statement of cash flows must be disclosed when the statement of financial position includes more than one line item for cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash, and restricted cash equivalents; and (iv) the nature of the restrictions must be disclosed for material restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents amounts. The guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods therein. Early adoption is permitted. The guidance must be applied retrospectively to all periods presented. The Company is currently evaluating its potential impact on its consolidated financial statements.

Income Taxes

In October 2016, the FASB issued guidance which removed the prohibition against the immediate recognition of the current and deferred income tax effects of intra-entity transfers of assets other than inventory. The guidance is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those annual reporting periods. The Company is currently evaluating its potential impact on its consolidated financial statements.