Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Policies)	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2017
Accounting Policies [Abstract]
Basis of Presentation	Basis of Presentation Bank of Hawaii Corporation (the “Parent”) is a Delaware corporation and a bank holding company headquartered in Honolulu, Hawaii. Bank of Hawaii Corporation and its subsidiaries (collectively, the “Company”) provide a broad range of financial products and services to customers in Hawaii, Guam, and other Pacific Islands. The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Parent and its subsidiaries. The Parent’s principal operating subsidiary is Bank of Hawaii (the “Bank”). The consolidated financial statements in this report have not been audited by an independent registered public accounting firm, but in the opinion of management, reflect all adjustments necessary for a fair presentation of the results for the interim periods. All such adjustments are of a normal recurring nature. Intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. Certain prior period information has been reclassified to conform to the current period presentation. Operating results for the interim periods disclosed herein are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the full fiscal year or for any future period. The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Rule 10-01 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and accompanying notes required by GAAP for complete financial statements and should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and related notes included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016.
Use of Estimates in the Preparation of Financial Statements	Use of Estimates in the Preparation of Financial Statements The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results may differ from those estimates and such differences could be material to the financial statements.
Variable Interest Entities	Variable Interest Entities Variable interests are defined as contractual ownership or other interests in an entity that change with fluctuations in an entity’s net asset value. The primary beneficiary consolidates the variable interest entity (“VIE”). The primary beneficiary is defined as the enterprise that has both the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance and the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits that could be significant to the VIE. The Company has limited partnership interests in several low-income housing partnerships. These partnerships provide funds for the construction and operation of apartment complexes that provide affordable housing to lower-income households. If these developments successfully attract a specified percentage of residents falling in that lower-income range, state and/or federal income tax credits are made available to the partners. The tax credits are generally recognized over 10 years. In order to continue receiving the tax credits each year over the life of the partnership, the low-income residency targets must be maintained. Prior to January 1, 2015, the Company utilized the effective yield method whereby the Company recognized tax credits generally over 10 years and amortized the initial cost of the investment to provide a constant effective yield over the period that tax credits are allocated to the Company. On January 1, 2015, the Company adopted ASU No. 2014-01, “Accounting for Investments in Qualified Affordable Housing Projects” prospectively for new investments. ASU No. 2014-01 permits reporting entities to make an accounting policy election to account for their investments in qualified affordable housing projects using the proportional amortization method if certain conditions are met. As permitted by ASU No. 2014-01, the Company elected to continue to utilize the effective yield method for investments made prior to January 1, 2015. Unfunded commitments to fund these low-income housing partnerships were $18.1 million and $16.2 million as of June 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively. These unfunded commitments are unconditional and legally binding and are recorded in other liabilities in the consolidated statements of condition. See Note 5 Affordable Housing Projects Tax Credit Partnerships for more information. The Company also has limited partnership interests in solar energy tax credit partnership investments. These partnerships develop, build, own and operate solar renewable energy projects. Over the course of these investments, the Company expects to receive federal and state tax credits, tax-related benefits, and excess cash available for distribution, if any. The Company may be called to sell its interest in the limited partnerships through a call option once all investment tax credits have been recognized. Tax benefits associated with these investments are generally recognized over six years. These entities meet the definition of a VIE; however, the Company is not the primary beneficiary of the entities as the general partner has both the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact the economic performance of the entities and the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits that could be significant to the entities. While the partnership agreements allow the limited partners, through a majority vote, to remove the general partner, this right is not deemed to be substantive as the general partner can only be removed for cause. The investments in these entities are initially recorded at cost, which approximates the maximum exposure to loss as a result of the Company’s involvement with these unconsolidated entities. The balance of the Company’s investments in these entities was $77.5 million and $78.9 million as of June 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively, and is included in other assets in the consolidated statements of condition.
Accounting Standards Adopted in the Current Year or Pending Adoption	Accounting Standards Adopted in 2017 In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09, “Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting.” This ASU includes provisions intended to simplify various aspects related to how share-based payments are accounted for and presented in the financial statements. Some of the key provisions of this new ASU include: (1) companies will no longer record excess tax benefits and certain tax deficiencies in additional paid-in capital (“APIC”). Instead, they will record all excess tax benefits and tax deficiencies as income tax expense or benefit in the income statement, and APIC pools will be eliminated. The guidance also eliminates the requirement that excess tax benefits be realized before companies can recognize them. In addition, the guidance requires companies to present excess tax benefits as an operating activity on the statement of cash flows rather than as a financing activity; (2) increase the amount an employer can withhold to cover income taxes on awards and still qualify for the exception to liability classification for shares used to satisfy the employer’s statutory income tax withholding obligation. The new guidance will also require an employer to classify the cash paid to a tax authority when shares are withheld to satisfy its statutory income tax withholding obligation as a financing activity on its statement of cash flows (current guidance did not specify how these cash flows should be classified); and (3) permit companies to make an accounting policy election for the impact of forfeitures on the recognition of expense for share-based payment awards. Forfeitures can be estimated, as required today, or recognized when they occur. ASU No. 2016-09 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016. The Company adopted ASU No. 2016-09 on January 1, 2017 and elected to recognize forfeitures as they occur. As allowed by the ASU, the Company’s adoption was prospective, therefore, prior periods have not been adjusted. The adoption of ASU No. 2016-09 could result in increased volatility to reported income tax expense related to excess tax benefits and tax deficiencies for employee share-based transactions, however, the actual amounts recognized in income tax expense will be dependent on the amount of employee share-based transactions and the stock price at the time of vesting or exercise. For the first six months of 2017, the adoption of ASU No. 2016-09 resulted in a decrease to the provision for income taxes primarily due to the tax benefit from the exercise of stock options and the vesting of restricted stock. Accounting Standards Pending Adoption In May 2014, the FASB and the International Accounting Standards Board (the “IASB”) jointly issued a comprehensive new revenue recognition standard that will supersede nearly all existing revenue recognition guidance under GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”). Previous revenue recognition guidance in GAAP consisted of broad revenue recognition concepts together with numerous revenue requirements for particular industries or transactions, which sometimes resulted in different accounting for economically similar transactions. In contrast, IFRS provided limited revenue recognition guidance and, consequently, could be difficult to apply to complex transactions. Accordingly, the FASB and the IASB initiated a joint project to clarify the principles for recognizing revenue and to develop a common revenue standard for U.S. GAAP and IFRS that would: (1) remove inconsistencies and weaknesses in revenue requirements; (2) provide a more robust framework for addressing revenue issues; (3) improve comparability of revenue recognition practices across entities, industries, jurisdictions, and capital markets; (4) provide more useful information to users of financial statements through improved disclosure requirements; and (5) simplify the preparation of financial statements by reducing the number of requirements to which an entity must refer. To meet those objectives, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers.” The standard’s core principle is that a company will recognize revenue when it transfers promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the company expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. In doing so, companies generally will be required to use more judgment and make more estimates than under current guidance. These may include identifying performance obligations in the contract, estimating the amount of variable consideration to include in the transaction price and allocating the transaction price to each separate performance obligation. The standard was initially effective for public entities for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016; early adoption was not permitted. However, in August 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-14, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers - Deferral of the Effective Date” which deferred the effective date by one year (i.e., interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017). For financial reporting purposes, the standard allows for either full retrospective adoption, meaning the standard is applied to all of the periods presented, or modified retrospective adoption, meaning the standard is applied only to the most current period presented in the financial statements with the cumulative effect of initially applying the standard recognized at the date of initial application. In addition, the FASB has begun to issue targeted updates to clarify specific implementation issues of ASU 2014-09. These updates include ASU No. 2016-08, “Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net),” ASU No. 2016-10, “Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing,” ASU No. 2016-12, “Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients,” and ASU No. 2016-20 “Technical Corrections and Improvements to Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers.” Since the guidance does not apply to revenue associated with financial instruments, including loans and securities that are accounted for under other GAAP, the Company does not expect the new guidance to have a material impact on revenue most closely associated with financial instruments, including interest income and expense. The Company is continuing its overall assessment of revenue streams and reviewing contracts potentially affected by the ASU including trust and asset management fees, deposit related fees, interchange fees, and merchant income, to determine the potential impact the new guidance is expected to have on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. In addition, the Company continues to follow certain implementation issues relevant to the banking industry which are still pending resolution. The Company plans to adopt ASU No. 2014-09 on January 1, 2018 utilizing the modified retrospective approach. In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01, “Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities.” This ASU addresses certain aspects of recognition, measurement, presentation, and disclosure of financial instruments by making targeted improvements to GAAP as follows: (1) require 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. However, an entity may choose to measure equity investments that do not have readily determinable fair values at cost minus impairment, if any, plus or minus changes resulting from observable price changes in orderly transactions for the identical or a similar investment of the same issuer; (2) simplify the impairment assessment of equity investments without readily determinable fair values by requiring a qualitative assessment to identify impairment. When a qualitative assessment indicates that impairment exists, an entity is required to measure the investment at fair value; (3) eliminate the requirement to disclose the fair value of financial instruments measured at amortized cost for entities that are not public business entities; (4) eliminate the requirement for public business entities to disclose the method(s) and significant assumptions used to estimate the fair value that is required to be disclosed for financial instruments measured at amortized cost on the balance sheet; (5) require public business entities to use the exit price notion when measuring the fair value of financial instruments for disclosure purposes; (6) require 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; (7) require 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; and (8) clarify that an entity should evaluate the need for a valuation allowance on a deferred tax asset related to available-for-sale securities in combination with the entity’s other deferred tax assets. ASU No. 2016-01 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. Early application is permitted as of the beginning of the fiscal year of adoption only for provisions (3) and (6) above. Early adoption of the other provisions mentioned above is not permitted. The Company has performed a preliminary evaluation of the provisions of ASU No. 2016-01. Based on this evaluation, the Company has determined that ASU No. 2016-01 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements; however, the Company will continue to closely monitor developments and additional guidance. In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, “Leases.” Under the new guidance, lessees will be required to recognize the following for all leases (with the exception of short-term leases): 1) a lease liability, which is the present value of a lessee’s obligation to make lease payments, and 2) a right-of-use asset, which is an asset that represents the lessee’s right to use, or control the use of, a specified asset for the lease term. Lessor accounting under the new guidance remains largely unchanged as it is substantially equivalent to existing guidance for sales-type leases, direct financing leases, and operating leases. Leveraged leases have been eliminated, although lessors can continue to account for existing leveraged leases using the current accounting guidance. Other limited changes were made to align lessor accounting with the lessee accounting model and the new revenue recognition standard. All entities will classify leases to determine how to recognize lease-related revenue and expense. Quantitative and qualitative disclosures will be required by lessees and lessors to meet the objective of enabling users of financial statements to assess the amount, timing, and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases. The intention is to require enough information to supplement the amounts recorded in the financial statements so that users can understand more about the nature of an entity’s leasing activities. ASU No. 2016-02 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018; early adoption is permitted. All entities are required to use a modified retrospective approach for leases that exist or are entered into after the beginning of the earliest comparative period in the financial statements. They have the option to use certain relief; full retrospective application is prohibited. The Company has several lease agreements, such as branch locations, which are currently considered operating leases, and therefore, not recognized on the Company’s consolidated statements of condition. The Company expects the new guidance will require these lease agreements to now be recognized on the consolidated statements of condition as a right-of-use asset and a corresponding lease liability. Therefore, the Company’s preliminary evaluation indicates the provisions of ASU No. 2016-02 are expected to impact the Company’s consolidated statements of condition. However, the Company continues to evaluate the extent of potential impact the new guidance will have on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13, “Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments.” This ASU significantly changes how entities will measure credit losses for most financial assets and certain other instruments that aren’t measured at fair value through net income. In issuing the standard, the FASB is responding to criticism that today’s guidance delays recognition of credit losses. The standard will replace today’s “incurred loss” approach with an “expected loss” model. The new model, referred to as the current expected credit loss (“CECL”) model, will apply to: (1) financial assets subject to credit losses and measured at amortized cost, and (2) certain off-balance sheet credit exposures. This includes, but is not limited to, loans, leases, held-to-maturity securities, loan commitments, and financial guarantees. The CECL model does not apply to available-for-sale (“AFS”) debt securities. For AFS debt securities with unrealized losses, entities will measure credit losses in a manner similar to what they do today, except that the losses will be recognized as allowances rather than reductions in the amortized cost of the securities. As a result, entities will recognize improvements to estimated credit losses immediately in earnings rather than as interest income over time, as they do today. The ASU also simplifies the accounting model for purchased credit-impaired debt securities and loans. ASU 2016-13 also expands the disclosure requirements regarding an entity’s assumptions, models, and methods for estimating the allowance for loan and lease losses. In addition, entities will need to disclose the amortized cost balance for each class of financial asset by credit quality indicator, disaggregated by the year of origination. ASU No. 2016-13 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019; early adoption is permitted for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018. Entities will apply the standard’s provisions as a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the first reporting period in which the guidance is effective (i.e., modified retrospective approach). The Company is continuing its implementation efforts through its Company-wide implementation team. This team has assigned roles and responsibilities, key tasks to complete, and a general timeline to be followed. The implementation team meets periodically to discuss the latest developments and ensure progress is being made. The team also keeps current on the latest news via webcasts, publications, conferences, and peer bank meetings. The Company’s preliminary evaluation indicates the provisions of ASU No. 2016-13 are expected to impact the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements, in particular the level of the reserve for credit losses. However, the Company continues to evaluate the extent of the potential impact. In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-15, “Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments.” Current GAAP is unclear or does not include specific guidance on how to classify certain transactions in the statement of cash flows. This ASU is intended to reduce diversity in practice in how eight particular transactions are classified in the statement of cash flows. ASU No. 2016-15 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. Early adoption is permitted, provided that all of the amendments are adopted in the same period. Entities will be required to apply the guidance retrospectively. If it is impracticable to apply the guidance retrospectively for an issue, the amendments related to that issue would be applied prospectively. As this guidance only affects the classification within the statement of cash flows, ASU No. 2016-15 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-04, “Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment.” The guidance removes Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test, which requires a hypothetical purchase price allocation. Goodwill impairment will now be the amount by which a reporting unit’s carrying value exceeds its fair value, not to exceed the carrying amount of goodwill. All other goodwill impairment guidance will remain largely unchanged. ASU No. 2017-04 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019, applied prospectively. Early adoption is permitted for any impairment tests performed after January 1, 2017. The Company expects to early adopt upon the next goodwill impairment test in 2017. ASU No. 2017-04 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. In March 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-07, “Improving the Presentation of Net Periodic Pension Cost and Net Periodic Postretirement Benefit Cost.” Under the new guidance, employers will present the service cost component of the net periodic benefit cost in the same income statement line item (e.g., Salaries and Benefits) as other employee compensation costs arising from services rendered during the period. In addition, only the service cost component will be eligible for capitalization in assets. Employers will present the other components separately (e.g., Other Noninterest Expense) from the line item that includes the service cost. ASU No. 2017-07 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. Early adoption is permitted, however, the Company has decided not to early adopt. Employers will apply the guidance on the presentation of the components of net periodic benefit cost in the income statement retrospectively. The guidance limiting the capitalization of net periodic benefit cost in assets to the service cost component will be applied prospectively. The Company expects to utilize the ASU’s practical expedient allowing entities to estimate amounts for comparative periods using the information previously disclosed in their pension and other postretirement benefit plan footnote. ASU No. 2017-07 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. In March 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-08, “Premium Amortization on Purchased Callable Debt Securities.” This ASU shortens the amortization period for the premium on certain purchased callable debt securities to the earliest call date. Today, entities generally amortize the premium over the contractual life of the security. The new guidance does not change the accounting for purchased callable debt securities held at a discount; the discount continues to be amortized to maturity. ASU No. 2017-08 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018; early adoption is permitted. The guidance calls for a modified retrospective transition approach under which a cumulative-effect adjustment will be made to retained earnings as of the beginning of the first reporting period in which the guidance is adopted. The Company is currently evaluating the provisions of ASU No. 2017-08 to determine the potential impact the new standard will have on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. In May 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-09, “Stock Compensation, Scope of Modification Accounting.” This ASU clarifies when changes to the terms of conditions of a share-based payment award must be accounted for as modifications. Companies will apply the modification accounting guidance if the value, vesting conditions or classification of the award changes. The new guidance should reduce diversity in practice and result in fewer changes to the terms of an award being accounted for as modifications, as the guidance will allow companies to make certain non-substantive changes to awards without accounting for them as modifications. It does not change the accounting for modifications. ASU No. 2017-09 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017; early adoption is permitted. ASU No. 2017-09 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

Accounting Standards Adopted in 2017

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09, “Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting.” This ASU includes provisions intended to simplify various aspects related to how share-based payments are accounted for and presented in the financial statements. Some of the key provisions of this new ASU include: (1) companies will no longer record excess tax benefits and certain tax deficiencies in additional paid-in capital (“APIC”). Instead, they will record all excess tax benefits and tax deficiencies as income tax expense or benefit in the income statement, and APIC pools will be eliminated. The guidance also eliminates the requirement that excess tax benefits be realized before companies can recognize them. In addition, the guidance requires companies to present excess tax benefits as an operating activity on the statement of cash flows rather than as a financing activity; (2) increase the amount an employer can withhold to cover income taxes on awards and still qualify for the exception to liability classification for shares used to satisfy the employer’s statutory income tax withholding obligation. The new guidance will also require an employer to classify the cash paid to a tax authority when shares are withheld to satisfy its statutory income tax withholding obligation as a financing activity on its statement of cash flows (current guidance did not specify how these cash flows should be classified); and (3) permit companies to make an accounting policy election for the impact of forfeitures on the recognition of expense for share-based payment awards. Forfeitures can be estimated, as required today, or recognized when they occur. ASU No. 2016-09 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016. The Company adopted ASU No. 2016-09 on January 1, 2017 and elected to recognize forfeitures as they occur. As allowed by the ASU, the Company’s adoption was prospective, therefore, prior periods have not been adjusted. The adoption of ASU No. 2016-09 could result in increased volatility to reported income tax expense related to excess tax benefits and tax deficiencies for employee share-based transactions, however, the actual amounts recognized in income tax expense will be dependent on the amount of employee share-based transactions and the stock price at the time of vesting or exercise. For the first six months of 2017, the adoption of ASU No. 2016-09 resulted in a decrease to the provision for income taxes primarily due to the tax benefit from the exercise of stock options and the vesting of restricted stock.

Accounting Standards Pending Adoption

In May 2014, the FASB and the International Accounting Standards Board (the “IASB”) jointly issued a comprehensive new revenue recognition standard that will supersede nearly all existing revenue recognition guidance under GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”). Previous revenue recognition guidance in GAAP consisted of broad revenue recognition concepts together with numerous revenue requirements for particular industries or transactions, which sometimes resulted in different accounting for economically similar transactions. In contrast, IFRS provided limited revenue recognition guidance and, consequently, could be difficult to apply to complex transactions. Accordingly, the FASB and the IASB initiated a joint project to clarify the principles for recognizing revenue and to develop a common revenue standard for U.S. GAAP and IFRS that would: (1) remove inconsistencies and weaknesses in revenue requirements; (2) provide a more robust framework for addressing revenue issues; (3) improve comparability of revenue recognition practices across entities, industries, jurisdictions, and capital markets; (4) provide more useful information to users of financial statements through improved disclosure requirements; and (5) simplify the preparation of financial statements by reducing the number of requirements to which an entity must refer. To meet those objectives, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers.” The standard’s core principle is that a company will recognize revenue when it transfers promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the company expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. In doing so, companies generally will be required to use more judgment and make more estimates than under current guidance. These may include identifying performance obligations in the contract, estimating the amount of variable consideration to include in the transaction price and allocating the transaction price to each separate performance obligation. The standard was initially effective for public entities for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016; early adoption was not permitted. However, in August 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-14, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers - Deferral of the Effective Date” which deferred the effective date by one year (i.e., interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017). For financial reporting purposes, the standard allows for either full retrospective adoption, meaning the standard is applied to all of the periods presented, or modified retrospective adoption, meaning the standard is applied only to the most current period presented in the financial statements with the cumulative effect of initially applying the standard recognized at the date of initial application. In addition, the FASB has begun to issue targeted updates to clarify specific implementation issues of ASU 2014-09. These updates include ASU No. 2016-08, “Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net),” ASU No. 2016-10, “Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing,” ASU No. 2016-12, “Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients,” and ASU No. 2016-20 “Technical Corrections and Improvements to Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers.” Since the guidance does not apply to revenue associated with financial instruments, including loans and securities that are accounted for under other GAAP, the Company does not expect the new guidance to have a material impact on revenue most closely associated with financial instruments, including interest income and expense. The Company is continuing its overall assessment of revenue streams and reviewing contracts potentially affected by the ASU including trust and asset management fees, deposit related fees, interchange fees, and merchant income, to determine the potential impact the new guidance is expected to have on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. In addition, the Company continues to follow certain implementation issues relevant to the banking industry which are still pending resolution. The Company plans to adopt ASU No. 2014-09 on January 1, 2018 utilizing the modified retrospective approach.

In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01, “Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities.” This ASU addresses certain aspects of recognition, measurement, presentation, and disclosure of financial instruments by making targeted improvements to GAAP as follows: (1) require 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. However, an entity may choose to measure equity investments that do not have readily determinable fair values at cost minus impairment, if any, plus or minus changes resulting from observable price changes in orderly transactions for the identical or a similar investment of the same issuer; (2) simplify the impairment assessment of equity investments without readily determinable fair values by requiring a qualitative assessment to identify impairment. When a qualitative assessment indicates that impairment exists, an entity is required to measure the investment at fair value; (3) eliminate the requirement to disclose the fair value of financial instruments measured at amortized cost for entities that are not public business entities; (4) eliminate the requirement for public business entities to disclose the method(s) and significant assumptions used to estimate the fair value that is required to be disclosed for financial instruments measured at amortized cost on the balance sheet; (5) require public business entities to use the exit price notion when measuring the fair value of financial instruments for disclosure purposes; (6) require 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; (7) require 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; and (8) clarify that an entity should evaluate the need for a valuation allowance on a deferred tax asset related to available-for-sale securities in combination with the entity’s other deferred tax assets. ASU No. 2016-01 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. Early application is permitted as of the beginning of the fiscal year of adoption only for provisions (3) and (6) above. Early adoption of the other provisions mentioned above is not permitted. The Company has performed a preliminary evaluation of the provisions of ASU No. 2016-01. Based on this evaluation, the Company has determined that ASU No. 2016-01 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements; however, the Company will continue to closely monitor developments and additional guidance.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, “Leases.” Under the new guidance, lessees will be required to recognize the following for all leases (with the exception of short-term leases): 1) a lease liability, which is the present value of a lessee’s obligation to make lease payments, and 2) a right-of-use asset, which is an asset that represents the lessee’s right to use, or control the use of, a specified asset for the lease term. Lessor accounting under the new guidance remains largely unchanged as it is substantially equivalent to existing guidance for sales-type leases, direct financing leases, and operating leases. Leveraged leases have been eliminated, although lessors can continue to account for existing leveraged leases using the current accounting guidance. Other limited changes were made to align lessor accounting with the lessee accounting model and the new revenue recognition standard. All entities will classify leases to determine how to recognize lease-related revenue and expense. Quantitative and qualitative disclosures will be required by lessees and lessors to meet the objective of enabling users of financial statements to assess the amount, timing, and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases. The intention is to require enough information to supplement the amounts recorded in the financial statements so that users can understand more about the nature of an entity’s leasing activities. ASU No. 2016-02 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018; early adoption is permitted. All entities are required to use a modified retrospective approach for leases that exist or are entered into after the beginning of the earliest comparative period in the financial statements. They have the option to use certain relief; full retrospective application is prohibited. The Company has several lease agreements, such as branch locations, which are currently considered operating leases, and therefore, not recognized on the Company’s consolidated statements of condition. The Company expects the new guidance will require these lease agreements to now be recognized on the consolidated statements of condition as a right-of-use asset and a corresponding lease liability. Therefore, the Company’s preliminary evaluation indicates the provisions of ASU No. 2016-02 are expected to impact the Company’s consolidated statements of condition. However, the Company continues to evaluate the extent of potential impact the new guidance will have on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13, “Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments.” This ASU significantly changes how entities will measure credit losses for most financial assets and certain other instruments that aren’t measured at fair value through net income. In issuing the standard, the FASB is responding to criticism that today’s guidance delays recognition of credit losses. The standard will replace today’s “incurred loss” approach with an “expected loss” model. The new model, referred to as the current expected credit loss (“CECL”) model, will apply to: (1) financial assets subject to credit losses and measured at amortized cost, and (2) certain off-balance sheet credit exposures. This includes, but is not limited to, loans, leases, held-to-maturity securities, loan commitments, and financial guarantees. The CECL model does not apply to available-for-sale (“AFS”) debt securities. For AFS debt securities with unrealized losses, entities will measure credit losses in a manner similar to what they do today, except that the losses will be recognized as allowances rather than reductions in the amortized cost of the securities. As a result, entities will recognize improvements to estimated credit losses immediately in earnings rather than as interest income over time, as they do today. The ASU also simplifies the accounting model for purchased credit-impaired debt securities and loans. ASU 2016-13 also expands the disclosure requirements regarding an entity’s assumptions, models, and methods for estimating the allowance for loan and lease losses. In addition, entities will need to disclose the amortized cost balance for each class of financial asset by credit quality indicator, disaggregated by the year of origination. ASU No. 2016-13 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019; early adoption is permitted for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018. Entities will apply the standard’s provisions as a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the first reporting period in which the guidance is effective (i.e., modified retrospective approach). The Company is continuing its implementation efforts through its Company-wide implementation team. This team has assigned roles and responsibilities, key tasks to complete, and a general timeline to be followed. The implementation team meets periodically to discuss the latest developments and ensure progress is being made. The team also keeps current on the latest news via webcasts, publications, conferences, and peer bank meetings. The Company’s preliminary evaluation indicates the provisions of ASU No. 2016-13 are expected to impact the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements, in particular the level of the reserve for credit losses. However, the Company continues to evaluate the extent of the potential impact.

In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-15, “Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments.” Current GAAP is unclear or does not include specific guidance on how to classify certain transactions in the statement of cash flows. This ASU is intended to reduce diversity in practice in how eight particular transactions are classified in the statement of cash flows. ASU No. 2016-15 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. Early adoption is permitted, provided that all of the amendments are adopted in the same period. Entities will be required to apply the guidance retrospectively. If it is impracticable to apply the guidance retrospectively for an issue, the amendments related to that issue would be applied prospectively. As this guidance only affects the classification within the statement of cash flows, ASU No. 2016-15 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-04, “Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment.” The guidance removes Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test, which requires a hypothetical purchase price allocation. Goodwill impairment will now be the amount by which a reporting unit’s carrying value exceeds its fair value, not to exceed the carrying amount of goodwill. All other goodwill impairment guidance will remain largely unchanged. ASU No. 2017-04 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019, applied prospectively. Early adoption is permitted for any impairment tests performed after January 1, 2017. The Company expects to early adopt upon the next goodwill impairment test in 2017. ASU No. 2017-04 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

In March 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-07, “Improving the Presentation of Net Periodic Pension Cost and Net Periodic Postretirement Benefit Cost.” Under the new guidance, employers will present the service cost component of the net periodic benefit cost in the same income statement line item (e.g., Salaries and Benefits) as other employee compensation costs arising from services rendered during the period. In addition, only the service cost component will be eligible for capitalization in assets. Employers will present the other components separately (e.g., Other Noninterest Expense) from the line item that includes the service cost. ASU No. 2017-07 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. Early adoption is permitted, however, the Company has decided not to early adopt. Employers will apply the guidance on the presentation of the components of net periodic benefit cost in the income statement retrospectively. The guidance limiting the capitalization of net periodic benefit cost in assets to the service cost component will be applied prospectively. The Company expects to utilize the ASU’s practical expedient allowing entities to estimate amounts for comparative periods using the information previously disclosed in their pension and other postretirement benefit plan footnote. ASU No. 2017-07 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

In March 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-08, “Premium Amortization on Purchased Callable Debt Securities.” This ASU shortens the amortization period for the premium on certain purchased callable debt securities to the earliest call date. Today, entities generally amortize the premium over the contractual life of the security. The new guidance does not change the accounting for purchased callable debt securities held at a discount; the discount continues to be amortized to maturity. ASU No. 2017-08 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018; early adoption is permitted. The guidance calls for a modified retrospective transition approach under which a cumulative-effect adjustment will be made to retained earnings as of the beginning of the first reporting period in which the guidance is adopted. The Company is currently evaluating the provisions of ASU No. 2017-08 to determine the potential impact the new standard will have on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

In May 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-09, “Stock Compensation, Scope of Modification Accounting.” This ASU clarifies when changes to the terms of conditions of a share-based payment award must be accounted for as modifications. Companies will apply the modification accounting guidance if the value, vesting conditions or classification of the award changes. The new guidance should reduce diversity in practice and result in fewer changes to the terms of an award being accounted for as modifications, as the guidance will allow companies to make certain non-substantive changes to awards without accounting for them as modifications. It does not change the accounting for modifications. ASU No. 2017-09 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017; early adoption is permitted. ASU No. 2017-09 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements.