XML 17 R7.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.19.2
Basis of Presentation and Significant Accounting Policies
 3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2019
Accounting Policies [Abstract]  
Basis of Presentation and Significant Accounting Policies

NOTE 1: BASIS OF PRESENTATION AND SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

 

The accompanying condensed financial statements of Vivos Inc. (the “Company”) have been prepared without audit, pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Certain information and disclosures required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States have been condensed or omitted pursuant to such rules and regulations. These condensed financial statements reflect all adjustments that, in the opinion of management, are necessary to present fairly the results of operations of the Company for the period presented. The results of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2019, are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for any future period or the fiscal year ending December 31, 2019 and should be read in conjunction with the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 25, 2019.

 

In April of 2017, the Company filed a Certificate of Merger with the Delaware Division of Corporations in order to merge the Company’s wholly-owned subsidiary, IsoPet Solutions Corporation, with and into the Company. The Company therefore no longer prepares Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

The Company is a radiation oncology medical device company engaged in the development of its yttrium-90 based brachytherapy device RadioGel™ for the treatment of non-resectable tumors. A prominent team of radiochemists, scientists and engineers, collaborating with strategic partners, including national laboratories, universities and private corporations, lead the Company’s development efforts. The Company’s overall vision is to globally empower physicians, medical researchers and patients by providing them with new isotope technologies that offer safe and effective treatments for cancer.

 

The Company’s current focus is on the development of its RadioGel™ device. RadioGel™ is an injectable particle-gel, for brachytherapy radiation treatment of cancerous tumors in people and animals. RadioGel™ is comprised of a hydrogel, or a substance that is liquid at room temperature and then gels when reaching body temperature after injection into a tumor. In the gel are small, one micron, yttrium-90 phosphate particles (“Y-90”). Once injected, these inert particles are locked in place inside the tumor by the gel, delivering a very high local radiation dose. The radiation is beta, consisting of high-speed electrons. These electrons only travel a short distance so the device can deliver high radiation to the tumor with minimal dose to the surrounding tissue. Optimally, patients can go home immediately following treatment without the risk of radiation exposure to family members. Since Y-90 has a half-life of 2.7 days, the radioactively drops to 5% of its original value after ten days.

 

The Company’s lead brachytherapy products, including RadioGel™, incorporate patented technology developed for Battelle Memorial Institute (“Battelle”) at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, a leading research institute for government and commercial customers. Battelle has granted the Company an exclusive license to patents covering the manufacturing, processing and applications of RadioGel™ (the “Battelle License”). Other intellectual property protection includes proprietary production processes and trademark protection in 17 countries. The Company plans to continue efforts to develop new refinements on the production process, and the product and application hardware, as a basis for future patents.

 

The Company is currently focusing on obtaining approval from the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) to market and sell RadioGel™ as a Class II medical device. The Company first requested FDA approval of RadioGel™ in June 2013, at which time the FDA classified RadioGel™ as a medical device. The Company then followed with a 510(k) submission which the FDA responded, in turn, with a request for a physician letter of substantial equivalence and a reformatted 510(k) summary, which the Company provided in January 2014.

 

In February 2014, the FDA ruled the device as not substantially equivalent due to a lack of a predicate device and it was therefore classified as a Class III device. Class III devices are generally the highest risk devices and are therefore subject to the highest level of regulatory review, control and oversight. Class III devices must typically be approved by the FDA before they are marketed. Class II devices represent lower risk devices than Class III and require fewer regulatory controls to provide reasonable assurance of the device’s safety and effectiveness. In contrast, Class I devices are deemed to be lower risk than Class II or III, and are therefore subject to the least regulatory controls.

 

The Company is currently developing test plans to address issues raised by the FDA in connection with the Company’s previous submissions regarding RadioGel™, including developing specific test plans and specific indication of use. The Company intends to request that the FDA grant approval to re-apply for de novo classification of RadioGel™, which would reclassify the device from a Class III device to a Class II device, further simplifying the path to FDA approval. In the event the FDA denies the Company’s application and subsequently determines during the de novo review that RadioGel™ cannot be classified as a Class I or Class I1 device, the Company will then need to submit a pre-market approval application to obtain the necessary regulatory approval as a Class III device. See also Business – Regulatory History in Part I of this Annual Report on Form 10-K (“Annual Report”) for a discussion regarding the Company’s application for FDA approval of RadioGel™.

 

IsoPet Solutions

 

The Company’s IsoPet Solutions division was established in May 2016 to focus on the veterinary oncology market, namely engagement of university veterinarian hospital to develop the detailed therapy procedures to treat animal tumors and ultimately use of the technology in private clinics. The Company has worked with three different university veterinarian hospitals on IsoPet® testing and therapy. Washington State University treated five cats for feline sarcoma and served to develop the procedures which are incorporated in our label. They concluded that the product was safe and effective in killing cancer cells. Colorado State University demonstrated the CT and PET-CT imaging of IsoPet®. A contract was signed with University of Missouri to treat canine sarcomas and equine sarcoids starting in November 2017. To date, three dogs, listed below as Dog A, Dog B and Dog C, respectively, have been treated with IsoPet® at the University of Missouri.

 

Dog A was treated for canine soft tissue sarcoma in June 2018. Response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (“RECIST”) is a set of published rules that define when tumors in cancer patients improve (respond), stay the same (stabilize), or worsen (progress) during treatment. The criteria were published by an international collaboration including the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), National Cancer Institute of the United States, and the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. The principal investigator from the University of Missouri rated the tumor as CR, Complete Response, after three months. This RECIST rating means that the tumor was completely eliminated by the IsoPet therapy. Dog B which was treated in July 2018 has displayed encouraging results. This patient had transient mild acute radiation side effects, and had SD (stable disease) at the time of recheck. There was a small amount of growth, but not enough to be considered progression per the RECIST criteria. The CT on its last visit in February 2019 showed that the tumor site had a slightly larger but diffuse image. Based on this single observation, the diffuse image could mean that the hydrogel, in addition to trapping the particles, provides a secondary benefit of locking in the dead tumor tissue allowing for a slower rate of resorption of the necrotic tissue. This could be a positive outcome whereas killing a tumor and having it resorb within the tissue all at once might be a shock to the animal’s system. We will continue to monitor how this case proceeds.

 

Dog C was treated in January 2019. This very large, half-pound, tumor was initially scheduled for therapy in December 2018 but had to be rescheduled due to the hydrogel not meeting our rigid specifications. From this, we learned that frozen hydrogel has a limited shelf life and this allowed us to make the appropriate adjustments to our product specifications. This patient had mild to moderate acute radiation side effects and has SD (stable disease) one-month post treatment. The February follow-up included a CT scan. The mass showed no new growth and measured almost the same as it did at the time of treatment. There is a small region at the bottom of the tumor where the mass seems to be draining. The tumor around the highest dose region appears dead with no blood supply, according to the CT. Dog C was outside of the scope of our criteria as an eligible patient prospect and we deem the patient as likely terminal, however, we treated it for humanitarian reasons and for discovery to determine residual effects of the treatment. Dog D was treated for canine soft tissue sarcoma in February 2019, and we are awaiting a follow-up appointment for an examination of the dog. These animal therapies generate data to assure the private veterinary clinics of the safety and efficacy of IsoPet®.

 

The Company anticipates that future profits, if any, will be derived from direct sales of RadioGel™ (under the name IsoPet®) and related services, and from licensing to private medical and veterinary clinics in the U.S. and internationally. The Company intends to report the results from the IsoPet® Solutions division as a separate operating segment in accordance with GAAP.

 

Use of Estimates

 

The preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Estimates the Company considers include criteria for stock-based compensation expense, and valuation allowances on deferred tax assets. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

 

Financial Statement Reclassification

 

Certain account balances from prior periods have been reclassified in these financial statements so as to conform to current period classifications.

 

Cash Equivalents

 

For the purposes of the statement of cash flows, the Company considers all highly liquid debt instruments purchased with an original maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents.

 

Inventory

 

Inventory is reported at the lower of cost or market, determined using the first-in, first-out basis, or net realizable value. All inventories consisted of finished goods. The Company has no inventory for the three-months ended March 31, 2019 and for the year ended December 31, 2018.

 

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

 

Fair value of financial instruments requires disclosure of the fair value information, whether or not recognized in the balance sheet, where it is practicable to estimate that value. As of March 31, 2019 and December 31, 2018, the balances reported for cash, prepaid expenses, accounts receivable, accounts payable, and accrued expenses, approximate the fair value because of their short maturities.

 

Fair value is defined as 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. Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 820 established a three-tier fair value hierarchy which prioritizes the inputs used in measuring fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (level 1 measurements) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (level 3 measurements). These tiers include:

 

Level 1, defined as observable inputs such as quoted prices for identical instruments in active markets;

 

Level 2, defined as inputs other than quoted prices in active markets that are either directly or indirectly observable such as quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets or quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active; and

 

Level 3, defined as unobservable inputs in which little or no market data exists, therefore requiring an entity to develop its own assumptions, such as valuations derived from valuation techniques in which one or more significant inputs or significant value drivers are unobservable.

 

The Company measures certain financial instruments including options and warrants issued during the period at fair value on a recurring basis.

 

Derivative Liabilities

 

The Company evaluates its convertible debt, options, warrants or other contracts, if any, to determine if those contracts or embedded components of those contracts qualify as derivatives to be separately accounted for in accordance with ASC Topic 815, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities (“ASC 815”) as well as related interpretations of this standard and Accounting Standards Update 2017-11, which was adopted by the Company effective January 1, 2018. In accordance with this standard, derivative instruments are recognized as either assets or liabilities in the balance sheet and are measured at fair values with gains or losses recognized in earnings. Embedded derivatives that are not clearly and closely related to the host contract are bifurcated and are recognized at fair value with changes in fair value recognized as either a gain or loss in earnings.

 

The result of this accounting treatment is that the fair value of the derivative instrument is marked-to-market each balance sheet date and with the change in fair value recognized in the statement of operations as other income or expense.

 

Upon conversion, exercise or cancellation of a derivative instrument, the instrument is marked to fair value at the date of conversion, exercise or cancellation than that the related fair value is removed from the books. Gains or losses on debt extinguishment are recognized in the statement of operations upon conversion, exercise or cancellation of a derivative instrument after any shares issued in such a transaction are recorded at market value.

 

The classification of derivative instruments, including whether such instruments should be recorded as liabilities or as equity, is re-assessed at the end of each reporting period. Equity instruments that are initially classified as equity that become subject to reclassification are reclassified to liability at the fair value of the instrument on the reclassification date. Instruments that become a derivative after inception are recognized as a derivative on the date they become a derivative with the offsetting entry recorded in earnings.

 

The Company determines the fair value of derivative instruments and hybrid instruments, considering all of the rights and obligations of each instrument, based on available market data using a binomial model, adjusted for the effect of dilution, because it embodies all of the requisite assumptions (including trading volatility, estimated terms, dilution and risk-free rates) necessary to fair value these instruments. For instruments in default with no remaining time to maturity the Company uses a one-year term for their years to maturity estimate unless a sooner conversion date can be estimated or is known. Estimating fair values of derivative financial instruments requires the development of significant and subjective estimates that may, and are likely to, change over the duration of the instrument with related changes in internal and external market factors. In addition, option-based techniques (such as Black-Scholes model) are highly volatile and sensitive to changes in the trading market price of our common stock.

 

Fixed Assets

 

Fixed assets are carried at the lower of cost or net realizable value. Production equipment with a cost of $2,500 or greater and other fixed assets with a cost of $1,500 or greater are capitalized. Major betterments that extend the useful lives of assets are also capitalized. Normal maintenance and repairs are charged to expense as incurred. When assets are sold or otherwise disposed of, the cost and accumulated depreciation are removed from the accounts and any resulting gain or loss is recognized in operations.

 

Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method over the following estimated useful lives:

 

Production equipment: 3 to 7 years
Office equipment: 2 to 5 years
Furniture and fixtures: 2 to 5 years

 

Leasehold improvements and capital lease assets are amortized over the shorter of the life of the lease or the estimated life of the asset.

 

Management of the Company reviews the net carrying value of all of its equipment on an asset by asset basis whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that its carrying amount may not be recoverable. These reviews consider the net realizable value of each asset, as measured in accordance with the preceding paragraph, to determine whether impairment in value has occurred, and the need for any asset impairment write-down.

 

License Fees

 

License fees are stated at cost, less accumulated amortization. Amortization of license fees is computed using the straight-line method over the estimated economic useful life of the assets.

 

Effective March 2012, the Company entered into an exclusive license agreement with Battelle Memorial Institute regarding the use of its patented RadioGel™ technology. This license agreement originally called for a $17,500 nonrefundable license fee and a royalty based on a percent of gross sales for licensed products sold; the license agreement also contains a minimum royalty amount to be paid each year starting with 2013. The license agreement was most recently amended on December 20, 2018, and pursuant to the amendment the maintenance fee schedule was updated for minimum royalties, as well as the increase in royalties from one percent (1%) to two percent (2%).

 

Future minimum royalties for the years ended December 31 are noted below:

 

Calendar Year  

Minimum

Royalties per

Calendar Year

  
2019   $ 10,000  
2020     10,000  
2021     25,000  
2022     25,000  
Total   $ 70,000  

 

The Company periodically reviews the carrying values of capitalized license fees and any impairments are recognized when the expected future operating cash flows to be derived from such assets are less than their carrying value.

 

The Company entered into a Letter Amendment #2 with Battelle Memorial Institute on December 20, 2018. as a result of this Amendment, the Company has agreed to revised terms regarding the license fee as indicated in the chart above. $10,000 of this fee due within 1 year relates to the 2018 license fee which was paid in January 2019. The Company also agreed to increase the royalty fee on net sales from 1% to 2%.

 

Amortization is computed using the straight-line method over the estimated useful live of three years.

 

Patents and Intellectual Property

 

While patents are being developed or pending, they are not being amortized. Management has determined that the economic life of the patents to be ten years and amortization, over such 10-year period and on a straight-line basis will begin once the patents have been issued and the Company begins utilization of the patents through production and sales, resulting in revenues.

 

The Company evaluates the recoverability of intangible assets, including patents and intellectual property on a continual basis. Several factors are used to evaluate intangibles, including, but not limited to, management’s plans for future operations, recent operating results and projected and expected undiscounted future cash flows.

 

There have been no such costs in the three-months ended March 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively.

 

Revenue Recognition

 

In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standard Update (“ASU”) No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606). This standard provides a single set of guidelines for revenue recognition to be used across all industries and requires additional disclosures. The updated guidance introduces a five-step model to achieve its core principal of the entity recognizing revenue to depict the transfer of goods or services to customers at an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. The Company adopted the updated guidance effective January 1, 2018 using the full retrospective method.

 

Under ASC 606, in order to recognize revenue, the Company is required to identify an approved contract with commitments to preform respective obligations, identify rights of each party in the transaction regarding goods to be transferred, identify the payment terms for the goods transferred, verify that the contract has commercial substance and verify that collection of substantially all consideration is probable. The adoption of ASC 606 did not have an impact on the Company’s operations or cash flows.

 

Income from Grants and Deferred Income

 

Government grants are recognized when all conditions of such grants are fulfilled or there is reasonable assurance that they will be fulfilled. The Company has chosen to recognize income from grants as it incurs costs associated with those grants, and until such time as it recognizes the grant as income those funds received will be classified as deferred income on the balance sheet.

 

On December 22, 2017, the Company received notification that Washington State University awarded it $17,500 of grant funds from the sub-award project entitled “Optimized Injectable Radiogels for High-dose Therapy of Non-Resectable Solid Tumors”. The Company received the $17,500 of the grant award in the three-months ended March 31, 2018.

 

Loss Per Share

 

The Company accounts for its loss per common share by replacing primary and fully diluted earnings per share with basic and diluted earnings per share. Basic loss per share is computed by dividing loss available to common stockholders (the numerator) by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding (the denominator) for the period, and does not include the impact of any potentially dilutive common stock equivalents since the impact would be anti-dilutive. The computation of diluted earnings per share is similar to basic earnings per share, except that the denominator is increased to include the number of additional common shares that would have been outstanding if potentially dilutive common shares had been issued. For the given periods of loss, of the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, the basic earnings per share equals the diluted earnings per share.

 

The following represent common stock equivalents that could be dilutive in the future as of March 31, 2019 and 2018, which include the following:

 

    March 31, 2019     December 31, 2018  
Convertible debt     17,594       17,594  
Preferred stock     313,671,120       356,101,920  
Common stock options     90,544,169       90,544,169  
Common stock warrants     205,094,772       184,419,772  
Total potential dilutive securities     609,327,655       631,083,455  

 

Research and Development Costs

 

Research and developments costs, including salaries, research materials, administrative expenses and contractor fees, are charged to operations as incurred. The cost of equipment used in research and development activities which has alternative uses is capitalized as part of fixed assets and not treated as an expense in the period acquired. Depreciation of capitalized equipment used to perform research and development is classified as research and development expense in the year computed.

 

The Company incurred $23,686 and $32,814 research and development costs for the three-months ended March 31, 2019, and 2018, respectively, all of which were recorded in the Company’s operating expenses noted on the statements of operations for the three-months then ended.

 

Advertising and Marketing Costs

 

Advertising and marketing costs are expensed as incurred except for the cost of tradeshows which are deferred until the tradeshow occurs. There were no tradeshow expenses incurred and not expensed for the three-months ended March 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively. During the three-months ended March 31, 2019 and 2018, the Company incurred $0 and $10,000, respectively, in advertising and marketing costs.

 

Shipping and Handling Costs

 

Shipping and handling costs are expensed as incurred and included in cost of materials.

 

Contingencies

 

In the ordinary course of business, the Company is involved in legal proceedings involving contractual and employment relationships, product liability claims, patent rights, and a variety of other matters. The Company records contingent liabilities resulting from asserted and unasserted claims against it, when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss is reasonably estimable. The Company discloses contingent liabilities when there is a reasonable possibility that the ultimate loss will exceed the recorded liability. Estimated probable losses require analysis of multiple factors, in some cases including judgments about the potential actions of third-party claimants and courts. Therefore, actual losses in any future period are inherently uncertain. See Note 9 – Legal Matters for description of lawsuit filed against the Company on January 28, 2019. In addition, the Company has entered into various agreements that require them to pay certain fees to consultants and/or employees that have been fully accrued for as of March 31, 2019 and 2018.

 

Income Taxes

 

To address accounting for uncertainty in tax positions, the Company clarifies the accounting for income taxes by prescribing a minimum recognition threshold that a tax position is required to meet before being recognized in the financial statements. The Company also provides guidance on de-recognition, measurement, classification, interest, and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure and transition.

 

The Company files income tax returns in the U.S. federal jurisdiction. The Company did not have any tax expense for the three-months ended March 31, 2019 and 2018. The Company did not have any deferred tax liability or asset on its balance sheet on March 31, 2019 and December 31, 2018.

 

Interest costs and penalties related to income taxes, if any, will be classified as interest expense and general and administrative costs, respectively, in the Company’s financial statements. For the three-months ended March 31, 2019 and 2018, the Company did not recognize any interest or penalty expense related to income taxes. The Company believes that it is not reasonably possible for the amounts of unrecognized tax benefits to significantly increase or decrease within the next twelve months.

 

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “Act”) was enacted on December 22, 2017. The Act reduces the U.S. federal corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%, requires companies to pay a one-time transition tax on earnings of certain foreign subsidiaries that were previously tax deferred and creates new taxes on certain foreign sourced earnings.

 

These amounts are provisional and subject to change. The most significant impact of the legislation for the Company was a $3,300,000 reduction of the value of net deferred tax assets (which represent future tax benefits) as a result of lowering the U.S. corporate income tax rate from 35% to 21%. The Act also includes a requirement to pay a one-time transition tax on the cumulative value of earnings and profits that were previously not repatriated for U.S. income tax purposes. The Company has no earnings and profits that were previously not repatriated for U.S. income tax purposes.

 

Stock-Based Compensation

 

The Company recognizes compensation costs to employees under FASB ASC Topic 718, Compensation – Stock Compensation. Under FASB ASC Topic. 718, companies are required to measure the compensation costs of share-based compensation arrangements based on the grant-date fair value and recognize the costs in the financial statements over the period during which employees are required to provide services. Share based compensation arrangements include stock options, restricted share plans, performance-based awards, share appreciation rights and employee share purchase plans. As such, compensation cost is measured on the date of grant at their fair value. Such compensation amounts, if any, are amortized over the respective vesting periods of the option grant.

 

In May 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-09, “Compensation - Stock Compensation.” The update provides guidance about which changes to the terms or conditions of a share-based payment award require an entity to apply modification accounting in ASC Topic 718. An entity shall account for the effects of a modification described in ASC paragraphs 718-20-35-3 through 35-9, unless all the following are met: (1) The fair value of the modified award is the same as the fair value of the original award immediately before the original award is modified; (2) The vesting conditions of the modified award are the same as the vesting conditions of the original award immediately before the original award is modified; and (3) The classification of the modified award as an equity instrument or a liability instrument is the same as the classification of the original award immediately before the original award is modified. The provisions of this update become effective for annual periods and interim periods within those annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017. The Company’s adoption of this guidance on January 1, 2018 did not have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations, financial position and related disclosures.

 

In June 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-07 “Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Nonemployee Share-Based Payment Accounting.” These amendments expand the scope of Topic 718, Compensation - Stock Compensation (which currently only includes share-based payments to employees) to include share-based payments issued to nonemployees for goods or services. Consequently, the accounting for share-based payments to nonemployees and employees will be substantially aligned. The ASU supersedes Subtopic 505-50, Equity - Equity-Based Payments to Non-Employees. The guidance is effective for public companies for fiscal years, and interim fiscal periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2018. Early adoption is permitted, but no earlier than a company’s adoption date of Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. The adoption of this standard did not have a material impact on its financial statements.

 

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

 

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-04, “Intangibles – Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment”, which eliminates Step 2 from the goodwill impairment test. When an indication of impairment was identified after performing the first step of the goodwill impairment test, Step 2 required that an entity determine the fair value at the impairment testing date of its assets and liabilities (including unrecognized assets and liabilities) using the same procedure that would be required in determining the fair value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed in a business combination. Under the amendments in ASU No. 2017-04, an entity would perform its annual or interim goodwill impairment test by comparing the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying value. An entity would recognize an impairment charge for the amount by which the carrying value exceeds the reporting unit’s fair value.

 

In addition, an entity must consider income tax effects from any tax deductible goodwill on the carrying amount of the reporting unit when measuring the goodwill impairment loss, if applicable. A public business entity that is a SEC filer should adopt the amendments in ASU No. 2017-04 for its annual, or any interim, good will impairment tests in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019. The Company does not believe the guidance will have a material impact on its financial statements.

 

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-13, “Changes to Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurements,” which will improve the effectiveness of disclosure requirements for recurring and nonrecurring fair value measurements. The standard removes, modifies, and adds certain disclosure requirements, and is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2019. The Company does not believe the guidance will have a material impact on its financial statements.

 

Other accounting standards that have been issued or proposed by FASB that do not require adoption until a future date are not expected to have a material impact on the consolidated financial statements upon adoption. The Company does not discuss recent pronouncements that are not anticipated to have an impact on or are unrelated to its financial condition, results of operations, cash flows or disclosures.