New Accounting Pronouncements	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2019
Accounting Policies [Abstract]
New Accounting Pronouncements	Note 2: New Accounting Pronouncements In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016‑02, Leases (Topic 842). This new guidance supersedes the lease requirements in Topic 840, Leases and is based on the principle that a lessee should recognize in the balance sheet a liability to make lease payments (the lease liability) and a right-of-use asset representing its right to use the underlying asset for the lease term. The accounting applied by a lessor is largely unchanged from that applied under the previous guidance. In addition, the guidance requires an entity to separate the lease components from the nonlease components in a contract. The ASU requires disclosures about the amount, timing, and judgments related to a reporting entity’s accounting for leases and related cash flows. The standard is required to be applied to all leases in existence as of the date of adoption using a modified retrospective transition approach. This guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company adopted this ASU on January 1, 2019 and has recognized lease liabilities and right-of-use assets associated with these lease agreements. The new guidance requires lessees to record a right-of-use asset and a lease liability for all leases with a term greater than 12 months. While the guidance requires all leases to be recognized in the balance sheet, there continues to be a differentiation between finance leases and operating leases for purposes of income statement recognition and cash flow statement presentation. For finance leases, interest on the lease liability and amortization of the right-of-use asset will be recognized separately in the consolidated statement of income. Repayments of principal on those lease liabilities will be classified within financing activities and payments of interest on the lease liability will be classified within operating activities in the statement of cash flows. For operating leases, a single lease cost is recognized in the consolidated statement of income and allocated over the lease term, generally on a straight-line basis. All cash payments are presented within operating activities in the statement of cash flows. The accounting applied by lessors is largely unchanged from existing GAAP, however, the guidance eliminates the accounting model for leveraged leases for leases that commence after the effective date of the guidance. In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016‑13, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses (Topic 326). This new guidance significantly changes how entities will measure credit losses for most financial assets and certain other instruments that are not measured at fair value through net income. This ASU will replace the "incurred loss" model under existing guidance with an "expected loss" model for instruments measured at amortized cost, and require entities to record allowances for available-for-sale debt securities rather than reduce the carrying amount, as they do today under the other-than-temporary impairment model. This ASU also simplifies the accounting model for purchased credit-impaired debt securities and loans. This guidance requires adoption through a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the first reporting period in which the guidance is adopted. This ASU was originally effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption was permitted for all companies as of fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. In July 2019, the FASB decided to add a project to its technical agenda to propose staggered effective dates for certain accounting standards, including ASU 2016-13. The FASB has proposed an approach that ASU 2016-13 will still be effective for Public Business Entities that are SEC filers, excluding smaller reporting companies such as the Company, for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019 and interim periods within those fiscal years. For all other entities, including smaller reporting companies like the Company, ASU 2016-13 will now be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2022, including interim periods within those fiscal years. For all entities, early adoption will continue to be permitted; that is, early adoption is allowed for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years (that is, effective January 1, 2019, for calendar-year-end companies). The FASB is currently in the process of drafting a proposed ASU for this project to be voted upon by FASB members after a 30 day comment period. The Company is currently a smaller reporting company, and if this proposal is approved and becomes effective, the Company’s expected adoption date for ASU 2016-13 would change from calendar year 2020 to calendar year 2023, including interim periods within those years. The Company is currently evaluating the impact the guidance will have on the Company’s consolidated financial statements, and expects an increase in the allowance for credit losses resulting from the change to expected losses for the estimated life of the financial asset, including an allowance for debt securities. The amount of the increase in the allowance for credit losses resulting from the new guidance will be impacted by the portfolio composition and asset quality at the adoption date, as well as economic conditions and forecasts at the time of adoption. The Company is currently running a second model concurrently in 2019 and does not anticipate a material impact to the consolidated financial statements. In March 2017, the FASB issued an Update (ASU 2017‑08) to its guidance on “Receivables – Nonrefundable Fees and Other Costs (Subtopic 310‑20) related to premium amortization on purchased callable debt securities. The amendments in this update shorten the amortization period for certain callable debt securities held at a premium. Specifically, the amendments require the premium to be amortized to the earliest call date. The amendments do not require an accounting change for securities held at a discount; the discount continues to be amortized to maturity. For public companies, the amendments in this update are effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2018. An entity should apply the amendments in this update on a modified retrospective basis through a cumulative-effect adjustment directly to retained earnings as of the beginning of the period of adoption. Additionally, in the period of adoption, an entity should provide disclosure about a change in accounting principle. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on our consolidated results of operations or financial position. In August 2018, the FASB has issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2018‑15, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other—Internal Use Software (Subtopic 350‑40): Customer’s Accounting for Implementation Costs Incurred in a Cloud Computing Arrangement That Is a Service Contract, a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force, which amends the FASB ASC to provide guidance on accounting for costs of implementation activities performed in a cloud computing arrangement that is a service contract. In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015‑05, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other—Internal-Use Software (Subtopic 350‑40): Customer’s Accounting for Fees Paid in a Cloud Computing Arrangement, which provided guidance to customers concerning whether a cloud computing arrangement (e.g., software, platform, or infrastructure offered as a service) includes a software license. Pursuant to that guidance, (1) if a cloud computing arrangement includes a software license, the software license element of the arrangement should be accounted for in a manner consistent with the acquisition of other software licenses, or (2) if the arrangement does not include a software license, then the arrangement should be accounted for as a service contract, with the fees associated with the hosting element (service) of the arrangement expensed as they are incurred. Following the issuance of ASU No. 2015‑05, constituents requested that the FASB provide additional guidance on the accounting for costs of implementation activities performed in a cloud computing arrangement that is a service contract. Accordingly, because U.S. GAAP do not contain explicit guidance on accounting for such costs, and to address the resulting diversity in practice, the FASB has issued ASU No. 2018‑15 to align the requirements for capitalizing implementation costs incurred in a hosting arrangement that is a service contract with the requirements for capitalizing implementation costs incurred to develop or obtain internal-use software (and hosting arrangements that include an internal-use software license). Note that the guidance on accounting for the service element of a hosting arrangement that is a service contract is not affected by the amendments in ASU No. 2018‑15. The amended guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, and for interim periods within those fiscal years.

Note 2: New Accounting Pronouncements

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016‑02, Leases (Topic 842). This new guidance supersedes the lease requirements in Topic 840, Leases and is based on the principle that a lessee should recognize in the balance sheet a liability to make lease payments (the lease liability) and a right-of-use asset representing its right to use the underlying asset for the lease term. The accounting applied by a lessor is largely unchanged from that applied under the previous guidance. In addition, the guidance requires an entity to separate the lease components from the nonlease components in a contract. The ASU requires disclosures about the amount, timing, and judgments related to a reporting entity’s accounting for leases and related cash flows. The standard is required to be applied to all leases in existence as of the date of adoption using a modified retrospective transition approach. This guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company adopted this ASU on January 1, 2019 and has recognized lease liabilities and right-of-use assets associated with these lease agreements.

The new guidance requires lessees to record a right-of-use asset and a lease liability for all leases with a term greater than 12 months. While the guidance requires all leases to be recognized in the balance sheet, there continues to be a differentiation between finance leases and operating leases for purposes of income statement recognition and cash flow statement presentation. For finance leases, interest on the lease liability and amortization of the right-of-use asset will be recognized separately in the consolidated statement of income. Repayments of principal on those lease liabilities will be classified within financing activities and payments of interest on the lease liability will be classified within operating activities in the statement of cash flows. For operating leases, a single lease cost is recognized in the consolidated statement of income and allocated over the lease term, generally on a straight-line basis. All cash payments are presented within operating activities in the statement of cash flows. The accounting applied by lessors is largely unchanged from existing GAAP, however, the guidance eliminates the accounting model for leveraged leases for leases that commence after the effective date of the guidance.

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016‑13, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses (Topic 326). This new guidance significantly changes how entities will measure credit losses for most financial assets and certain other instruments that are not measured at fair value through net income. This ASU will replace the "incurred loss" model under existing guidance with an "expected loss" model for instruments measured at amortized cost, and require entities to record allowances for available-for-sale debt securities rather than reduce the carrying amount, as they do today under the other-than-temporary impairment model. This ASU also simplifies the accounting model for purchased credit-impaired debt securities and loans. This guidance requires adoption through a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the first reporting period in which the guidance is adopted. This ASU was originally effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption was permitted for all companies as of fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years.

In July 2019, the FASB decided to add a project to its technical agenda to propose staggered effective dates for certain accounting standards, including ASU 2016-13. The FASB has proposed an approach that ASU 2016-13 will still be effective for Public Business Entities that are SEC filers, excluding smaller reporting companies such as the Company, for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019 and interim periods within those fiscal years. For all other entities, including smaller reporting companies like the Company, ASU 2016-13 will now be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2022, including interim periods within those fiscal years. For all entities, early adoption will continue to be permitted; that is, early adoption is allowed for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years (that is, effective January 1, 2019, for calendar-year-end companies). The FASB is currently in the process of drafting a proposed ASU for this project to be voted upon by FASB members after a 30 day comment period. The Company is currently a smaller reporting company, and if this proposal is approved and becomes effective, the Company’s expected adoption date for ASU 2016-13 would change from calendar year 2020 to calendar year 2023, including interim periods within those years. The Company is currently evaluating the impact the guidance will have on the Company’s consolidated financial statements, and expects an increase in the allowance for credit losses resulting from the change to expected losses for the estimated life of the financial asset, including an allowance for debt securities. The amount of the increase in the allowance for credit losses resulting from the new guidance will be impacted by the portfolio composition and asset quality at the adoption date, as well as economic conditions and forecasts at the time of adoption. The Company is currently running a second model concurrently in 2019 and does not anticipate a material impact to the consolidated financial statements.

In March 2017, the FASB issued an Update (ASU 2017‑08) to its guidance on “Receivables – Nonrefundable Fees and Other Costs (Subtopic 310‑20) related to premium amortization on purchased callable debt securities. The amendments in this update shorten the amortization period for certain callable debt securities held at a premium. Specifically, the amendments require the premium to be amortized to the earliest call date. The amendments do not require an accounting change for securities held at a discount; the discount continues to be amortized to maturity. For public companies, the amendments in this update are effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2018. An entity should apply the amendments in this update on a modified retrospective basis through a cumulative-effect adjustment directly to retained earnings as of the beginning of the period of adoption. Additionally, in the period of adoption, an entity should provide disclosure about a change in accounting principle. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on our consolidated results of operations or financial position.

In August 2018, the FASB has issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2018‑15, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other—Internal Use Software (Subtopic 350‑40): Customer’s Accounting for Implementation Costs Incurred in a Cloud Computing Arrangement That Is a Service Contract, a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force, which amends the FASB ASC to provide guidance on accounting for costs of implementation activities performed in a cloud computing arrangement that is a service contract. In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015‑05, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other—Internal-Use Software (Subtopic 350‑40): Customer’s Accounting for Fees Paid in a Cloud Computing Arrangement, which provided guidance to customers concerning whether a cloud computing arrangement (e.g., software, platform, or infrastructure offered as a service) includes a software license. Pursuant to that guidance, (1) if a cloud computing arrangement includes a software license, the software license element of the arrangement should be accounted for in a manner consistent with the acquisition of other software licenses, or (2) if the arrangement does not include a software license, then the arrangement should be accounted for as a service contract, with the fees associated with the hosting element (service) of the arrangement expensed as they are incurred.

Following the issuance of ASU No. 2015‑05, constituents requested that the FASB provide additional guidance on the accounting for costs of implementation activities performed in a cloud computing arrangement that is a service contract. Accordingly, because U.S. GAAP do not contain explicit guidance on accounting for such costs, and to address the resulting diversity in practice, the FASB has issued ASU No. 2018‑15 to align the requirements for capitalizing implementation costs incurred in a hosting arrangement that is a service contract with the requirements for capitalizing implementation costs incurred to develop or obtain internal-use software (and hosting arrangements that include an internal-use software license). Note that the guidance on accounting for the service element of a hosting arrangement that is a service contract is not affected by the amendments in ASU No. 2018‑15. The amended guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, and for interim periods within those fiscal years.