XML 38 R26.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT

Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Policies)

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2019

Going Concern—In accordance with Accounting Standards Update ("ASU") 2014-15, Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity's Ability to Continue as a Going Concern (Subtopic 205-40), the Company’s management has evaluated whether there are conditions and events, considered in the aggregate, that raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the date the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements are issued.

We are party to a master lease agreement (the “Master Lease”) with Windstream Holdings, Inc. (“Windstream Holdings” and together with its consolidated subsidiaries “Windstream”), from which 68.2% of our revenue for the year ended December 31, 2018 was derived. Windstream was involved in litigation with an entity who acquired certain Windstream debt securities and thereafter issued a notice of default as to such securities related to our spin-off from Windstream (the “Spin-Off”). Windstream challenged the matter in federal court and a trial was held in July 2018. On February 15, 2019, the federal court judge issued a ruling against Windstream, finding that Windstream’s attempts to waive such default were not valid, that an “event of default” occurred with respect to such debt securities, and that the holder’s acceleration of such debt in December 2017 was effective. In response to the adverse outcome, on February 25, 2019, Windstream filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York.

In bankruptcy, Windstream has the option to assume or reject the Master Lease. Because the Master Lease is a single indivisible Master Lease with a single rent payment, it must be assumed or rejected in whole and cannot be sub-divided by facility or market. A significant amount of Windstream’s revenue is generated from the use of our network included in the Master Lease, and we believe that the Master Lease is essential to Windstream’s operations. Furthermore, Windstream is designated as a “carrier of last resort” in certain markets where it utilizes the Master Lease to provide service to its customers, and Windstream would require approval from the Public Utility Commissions and the Federal Communications Commission to cease providing service in those markets. As a result, we believe the probability of Windstream rejecting the Master Lease in bankruptcy to be remote. Windstream has filed claims that allege, among other things, that the Master Lease should be recharacterized as a financing transaction, which would impact its treatment in Windstream’s bankruptcy (including potentially through changing our status to that of a creditor that would share in creditor recoveries from the estate rather than receive rent payments) and could affect our status as a REIT, that the Master Lease is a lease of personal property, and that rent payments and tenant capital improvements made by Windstream under the Master Lease since at least the third quarter of 2017 constitute constructive fraudulent transfers. A mediation of these claims is ongoing in Windstream’s bankruptcy. In connection with the mediation, Uniti has agreed to an extension of the assumption deadline for the Master Lease to December 7, 2019. In exchange, Windstream has provided certain assurances regarding the continued payment of rent pursuant to the Master Lease during the extension period and following the expiration of the extension period, Windstream will continue to make payments under the Master Lease as they come due, unless and until Windstream obtains an order from the bankruptcy court permitting cessation of such payments. A rejection of the Master Lease, an adverse determination by a judge on Windstream’s claims, or even a temporary disruption in payments to us, may require us to fund certain expenses and obligations (e.g., real estate taxes, insurance and maintenance expenses) to preserve the value of our properties, and could materially adversely affect our consolidated results of operations, liquidity and financial condition, including our ability to service debt, comply with debt covenants and maintain our status as a REIT. As a result, conditions or events have been identified that raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern.

The Company has considered the mitigating effects of management’s plans to alleviate the substantial doubt about the ability to continue as going concern in the event there is a disruption in the payments due to us under the Master Lease prior to Windstream’s assumption or rejection of the lease or any adverse determinations in respect of Windstream’s claims. Those plans include deferring, reducing or delaying cash dividends and capital expenditures, if necessary, paying one or more dividends that are required to maintain our REIT status in shares to the extent allowed under the IRS REIT rules, curtailing acquisition activities, accessing the capital markets and identifying alternative sources of liquidity. Based on our analysis, including consideration of the timing of petitioners’ requirements to make post-petition lease payments under U.S. bankruptcy law, we believe that we have adequate liquidity to continue to fund our operations for twelve months after the issuance of the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements absent any adverse determination in respect to Windstream’s claims or disruptions in rent payments under the Master Lease.

Although management has concluded the probability of a rejection of the Master Lease to be remote, and has noted the absence of any provision in the Master Lease that contemplates renegotiation of the lease and the lack of any ability of the bankruptcy court to unilaterally reset the rent or terms of the lease, it is difficult to predict what could occur in Windstream’s bankruptcy restructuring, including any judicial decisions in respect of claims against us by Windstream or its creditors. The Company has evaluated its ability to continue as a going concern in light of the possibility of a consensual renegotiation of the Master Lease, and the impact of any renegotiated lease on our compliance with our debt covenants. We note that our Credit Agreement prohibits the Company from amending the Master Lease that, among other provisions, pro forma for any such amendment, would result in a consolidated secured leverage ratio that exceeds 5.0 to 1.0. Furthermore, management has no intention to enter into a lease amendment that would violate our debt covenants.

However, there can be no certainty as to the outcome of judicial decisions or Windstream’s decision to assume or reject the Master Lease, and uncertainties exist as to the outcome or impacts of any potential consensual renegotiation of the Master Lease. Therefore, substantial doubt exists about our ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the issuance of the financial statements.

The accompanying Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, which contemplates the realization of assets and satisfaction of liabilities in the ordinary course of business. The accompanying Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements do not include any adjustments that might be necessary if the Company is unable to continue as a going concern.

Concentration of Credit Risks

Concentration of Credit Risks—Revenue under the Master Lease provided 65.2% and 70.0% of our revenue for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively. Because a substantial portion of our revenue and cash flows are derived from lease payments by Windstream pursuant to the Master Lease, there could be a material adverse impact on our consolidated results of operations, liquidity, financial condition and/or ability to pay dividends and service debt if Windstream were to default under the Master Lease or otherwise experiences operating or liquidity difficulties and becomes unable to generate sufficient cash to make payments to us.

Windstream is a publicly traded company and is subject to the periodic filing requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Windstream filings can be found at www.sec.gov. Windstream filings are not incorporated by reference in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.

Straight-Line Revenue Receivable

Straight-Line Revenue Receivable—As discussed in “Recently Issued Accounting Standards” in this Note 2, we have adopted ASU No. 2016-02, Leases (“ASC 842”) effective January 1, 2019. This standard supersedes prior guidance regarding the evaluation of collectability of lease receivables, including straight-line revenue receivables. We have evaluated the collectability of our straight-line revenue receivable associated with the Master Lease in accordance with ASC 842, and in light of Windstream’s pending bankruptcy, we concluded that the receivable should be written-off. As a result, effective January 1, 2019, the Master Lease will be accounted for on a cash basis in accordance with ASC 842, until a time at which there is more certainty regarding Windstream’s decision to assume or reject the Master Lease. At the adoption of ASC 842, we reflected the write off as a $61.5 million adjustment to equity resulting from the change in accounting standard.

Exchangeable Notes and Related Transactions

Exchangeable Notes and Related Transactions—On June 28, 2019, Uniti Fiber Holdings, Inc. (“Uniti Fiber”), a subsidiary of the Company, issued $345 million aggregate principal amount of 4.00% Exchangeable Senior Notes due June 15, 2024 (the “Exchangeable Notes”). The Exchangeable Notes bear interest at a fixed rate of 4.00% per year, payable semiannually in arrears on June 15 and December 15 of each year, beginning on December 15, 2019. The Exchangeable Notes are exchangeable into cash, shares of the Company’s common stock, or a combination thereof, at Uniti Fiber’s election. In accordance with ASC 470-20, Debt – Debt with Conversion and Other Options, because the conversion feature in the Exchangeable Notes is not bifurcated pursuant to ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging, and because the conversion can be settled in cash, shares, or a combination thereof, the Exchangeable Notes was separated into a liability component and an equity component in a manner that reflects Uniti Fiber’s non-convertible debt borrowing rate. The carrying amount of the liability component was calculated by measuring the fair value of a similar liability that does not have an associated conversion feature. See Note 11.

In connection with the offering of the Exchangeable Notes, Uniti Fiber entered into exchangeable note hedge transactions with respect to the Company’s common stock (the “Note Hedge Transactions”) with certain of the Initial Purchasers (as defined in Note 11) or their respective affiliates (collectively, the “Counterparties”). In addition, the Company entered into warrant transactions to sell to the Counterparties warrants (the “Warrants”) to acquire, subject to anti-dilution adjustments, up to approximately 27.8 million shares of the Company’s common stock in the aggregate at an exercise price of $16.42 per share. The warrant transactions may have a dilutive effect with respect to the Company’s common stock to the extent the market price per share of the Company’s common stock exceeds the strike price of the Warrants. While the Note Hedge Transactions and the Warrants meet the definition of a derivative in ASC 815-10-15-83, they each meet the equity scope exception specified in ASC 815-10-15-74(a); as such, the Warrants and the Notes Hedge Transactions are not accounted for as derivatives that are remeasured each reporting period and instead, are recorded in stockholders’ equity. See Note 9.

Reclassifications

Reclassifications—Certain prior year asset categories and related amounts in Note 8 have been reclassified to conform with current year presentation.

Recently Issued Accounting Standards

Leases—Effective January 1, 2019, we account for leases in accordance with ASC 842. The standard requires lessees to apply a dual approach, classifying leases as either finance or operating leases based on the principle of whether or not the lease is effectively a financed purchase by the lessee. This classification will determine whether lease expense is comprised of amortization on the right-of-use asset (“ROU”) and interest expense recognized based on an effective interest method, or as a single lease cost recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease, respectively. A lessee is also required to record a right-of-use asset and a lease liability for all leases with a term of greater than 12 months regardless of their classification. The accounting for lessors remains largely unchanged. Leases with a term of 12 months or less will be accounted for similar to existing guidance for operating leases today.

We determine if an arrangement is a lease at contract inception. A lease exists when a contract conveys to the customer the right to control the use of identified property, plant, or equipment for a period of time in exchange for consideration. The definition of a lease embodies two conditions: (i) there is an identified asset in the contract that is land or a depreciable asset (i.e., property, plant, and equipment), and (ii) the customer has the right to control the use of the identified asset.

We enter into lease contracts including ground, towers, equipment, office, colocation and fiber lease arrangements, in which we are the lessee, and service contracts that may include embedded leases. Operating leases where we are the lessor are included in Leasing, Fiber Infrastructure and Tower revenues on our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income.

From time to time we enter into direct financing lease arrangements that include (i) a lessee obligation to purchase the leased equipment at the end of the lease term, (ii) a bargain purchase option, (iii) a lease term having a duration that is for the major part of the remaining economic life of the leased equipment or (iv) provides for minimum lease payments with a present value amounting to substantially all of the fair value of the leased asset at the date of lease inception.

ROU assets and lease liabilities related to operating leases where we are the lessee are included in other assets and accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities, respectively, on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. The lease liabilities are initially and subsequently measured at the present value of the unpaid lease payments at the lease commencement date.

ROU assets and lease liabilities related to finance leases where we are the lessee are included in property, plant and equipment, net and finance lease obligations, respectively, on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. The lease liabilities are initially measured in the same manner as operating leases and are subsequently measured at amortized cost using the effective interest method. ROU assets for finance leases are amortized on a straight-line basis over the remaining lease term.

Key estimates and judgments include how we determined (i) the discount rate we use to discount the unpaid lease payments to present value, (ii) lease term and (iii) lease payments.

ASC 842 requires a lessor to discount its unpaid lease payments using the interest rate implicit in the lease and a lessee to discount its unpaid lease payments using the interest rate implicit in the lease or, if that rate cannot be readily determined, its incremental borrowing rate. As we generally do not know the implicit rate for our leases where we are the lessee, we use our incremental borrowing rate based on the information available at commencement date in determining the present value of lease payments. Our incremental borrowing rate for a lease is the rate of interest we would have to pay on a collateralized basis to borrow an amount equal to the lease payments under similar terms.

ii.

The lease term for all of our leases includes the noncancellable period of the lease plus any additional periods covered by either a lessee option to extend (or not to terminate) the lease that the lessee is reasonably certain to exercise, or an option to extend (or not to terminate) the lease controlled by the lessor.

iii.

Lease payments included in the measurement of the lease asset or liability comprise the following: (i) fixed payments (including in-substance fixed payments), (ii) variable payments that depend on index or rate based on the index or rate at lease commencement, and (iii) the exercise price of a lessee option to purchase the underlying asset if the lessee is reasonably certain to exercise.

For operating leases where we are the lessor, we continue recognizing the underlying asset and depreciating it over its estimated useful life. Lease income is recognized on a straight-line basis over the lease term. Leasing revenue is not recognized when collection of all

contractual rents over the term of the agreement is not probable. When collection is not probable, the lessee is placed on non-accrual status and Leasing revenue is recognized when cash payments are received.

The ROU asset is initially measured at cost, which comprises the initial amount of the lease liability adjusted for lease payments made at or before the lease commencement date, plus any initial direct costs incurred less any lease incentives received.

For operating leases, the ROU asset is subsequently measured throughout the lease term at the carrying amount of the lease liability, plus initial direct costs, plus (minus) any prepaid (accrued) lease payments, less the unamortized balance of lease incentives received. Lease expense for lease payments is recognized on a straight-line basis over the lease term.

For finance leases, the ROU asset is subsequently amortized using the straight-line method from the lease commencement date to the earlier of the end of its useful life or the end of the lease term unless the lease transfers ownership of the underlying asset to us, or we are reasonably certain to exercise an option to purchase the underlying asset. In those cases, the ROU asset is amortized over the useful life of the underlying asset. Amortization of the ROU asset is recognized and presented separately from interest expense on the lease liability.

Variable lease payments associated with our leases are recognized when the event, activity, or circumstance in the lease agreement on which those payments are assessed occurs. Variable lease payments are presented within Leasing, Fiber Infrastructure and Tower revenues and general and administrative expense and operating expense in our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income in the same line item as revenue arising from fixed lease payments (operating leases where we are the lessor) and expense arising from fixed lease payments (operating leases where we are the lessee) or amortization of the ROU asset (finance leases), respectively.

We monitor for events or changes in circumstances that require a reassessment of a lease. When a reassessment results in the remeasurement of a lease liability, a corresponding adjustment is made to the carrying amount of the corresponding ROU asset unless doing so would reduce the carrying amount of the ROU asset to an amount less than zero. In that case, the amount of the adjustment that would result in a negative ROU asset balance is recorded in profit or loss.

We have lease agreements which include lease and nonlease components. For both leases where we are a lessor and leases where we are a lessee, we have elected to combine lease and nonlease components for all lease contracts. Nonlease components that are combined with lease components are primarily maintenance services related to the leased asset. Where we are the lessor, we determine whether the lease or nonlease component is the predominant component on a case-by-case basis. For all existing leases where we are the lessor, ASC Topic 842 has been applied to all combined components.

We have elected not to recognize ROU assets and lease liabilities for all short-term leases that have a lease term of 12 months or less. We recognize the lease payments associated with our short-term leases as an expense on a straight-line basis over the lease term.

We have elected to exclude sales taxes from lease payments in arrangements where we are a lessor.

We adopted ASC 842 using a modified retrospective transition approach as of the effective date as permitted by the amendments in ASU 2018-11, Leases (Topic 842): Target Improvements, which provides an alternative modified retrospective transition method. As a result, we were not required to adjust our comparative period financial information for effects of the standard or make the new required lease disclosures for periods before the date of adoption (i.e. January 1, 2019). We have elected to adopt the package of transition practical expedients and, therefore, have not reassessed (i) whether existing or expired contracts contain a lease, (ii) lease classification for existing or expired leases or (iii) the accounting for initial direct costs that were previously capitalized. We elected the practical expedient to use hindsight for leases existing at the adoption date. Further, we elected to adopt the amendments in ASU 2018-01, Land Easement Practical Expedient for Transition to Topic 842, which permits an entity to elect an optional transaction practical expedient to not evaluate land easements that exist or expire before the Company’s adoption of ASC 842 and that were not previously accounted for as leases under ASC 840, Leases (“ASC 840”).

In connection with the adoption of ASC 842, we have recorded an adjustment to equity of $63.2 million, net of tax for the cumulative effect from a change in accounting standard. Of this amount, $61.5 million related to the write-off of the Master Lease straight-line revenue receivable, and $1.7 million relates to the establishment of the ROU assets and lease liabilities.