Accounting Policies

Accounting policies refer to specific accounting principles and the methods of applying those principles to fairly present our financial position and results of operations in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. The policies discussed below include those that management has determined to be the most appropriate in preparing our financial statements.

Principles of Consolidation

The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of YRC Worldwide and its majority owned subsidiaries. All significant intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. We report on a calendar year basis. The quarters of the Regional Transportation companies (with the exception of New Penn) consist of thirteen weeks that end on a Saturday either before or after the end of March, June and September, whereas all other operating segment quarters end on the natural calendar quarter end. Our investment in the non-majority owned affiliate in which we do not have control, where the entity is either not a variable interest entity, or YRC Worldwide is not the primary beneficiary, is accounted for on the equity method.

Use of Estimates

Management makes estimates and assumptions when preparing the financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles which affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from those estimates. Significant items subject to such estimates and assumptions include the useful lives of fixed assets and revenue-related reserves; the valuation of deferred tax assets/liabilities and non-union pension plan liability and fair value of plan assets; and workers’ compensation and property damage and liability claims, and income tax uncertainties.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

Cash and cash equivalents include demand deposits and highly liquid investments purchased with maturities of three months or less. Under the Company’s cash management system, checks issued but not presented to banks frequently result in book overdraft balances for accounting purposes which are classified within accounts payable in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. The change in book overdrafts are reported as a component of operating cash flows for accounts payable as they do not represent bank overdrafts.

Concentration of Credit Risks and Other

We sell services and extend credit based on an evaluation of the customer’s financial condition, without requiring collateral. Exposure to losses on receivables is principally dependent on each customer’s financial condition. We monitor our exposure for credit losses and maintain allowances for anticipated losses.

At December 31, 2015, approximately 78% of our labor force is subject to collective bargaining agreements. As part of the 2014 Financing Transactions (which is described more fully in the “Debt and Financing” footnote to our consolidated financial statements), the primary labor agreement was modified to, among other things, extend the expiration date of our previous agreement from March 31, 2015 to March 31, 2019. This extension also extended the contribution rates under our multi-employer pension plan. The modification provided for lump sum payments in lieu of wage increases in 2014 and 2015, but provided for wage increases in 2016 through 2019. We amortized these lump sum payments over the period in which the wages were not increased beginning on April 1, 2014. Finally, the modification provided for certain changes to work rules and our use of purchased transportation in certain situations.

Revenue Recognition and Revenue-related Reserves

For shipments in transit, we record revenue based on the percentage of service completed as of the period end and accrue delivery costs as incurred. The percentage of service completed for each shipment is based on how far along in the shipment cycle each shipment is in relation to standard transit days. Standard transit days are defined as our published service days between origin zip code and destination zip code. Based on historical cost and engineering studies, certain percentages of revenue are determined to be earned during each stage of the shipment cycle, such as initial pick up, long distance transportation, intermediate transfer and customer delivery. Using standard transit times, we analyze each shipment in transit at a particular period end to determine what stage the shipment is in. We apply that stage’s percentage of revenue earned factor to the rated revenue for that shipment to determine the revenue dollars earned by that shipment in the current period. The total revenue earned is accumulated for all shipments in transit at a particular period end and recorded as operating revenue.

In addition, we recognize revenue on a gross basis because we are the primary obligors even when we use other transportation service providers who act on our behalf. We remain responsible to our customers for complete and proper shipment, including the risk of physical loss or damage of the goods and cargo claims issues. We assign pricing to bills of lading at the time of shipment based primarily on the weight, general classification of the product, the shipping destination and individual customer discounts. This process is referred to as rating. At various points throughout our process, incorrect ratings could be identified based on many factors, including weight verifications or updated customer discounts. Although the majority of rerating occurs in the same month as the original rating, a portion occurs during the following periods. We accrue a reserve for rerating based primarily on historical trends. At December 31, 2015 and 2014, our financial statements included a rerate reserve as a reduction to “Accounts Receivable” of $8.1 million and $12.2 million, respectively.

We record an allowance for doubtful accounts primarily based on historical uncollectible amounts. We also take into account known factors surrounding specific customers and overall collection trends. Our process involves performing ongoing credit evaluations of customers, including the market in which they operate and the overall economic conditions. We continually review historical trends and customer specific factors and make adjustments to the allowance for doubtful accounts as appropriate. Our allowance for doubtful accounts totaled $7.4 million and $10.0 million as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively.

Foreign Currency

Our functional currency is the U.S. dollar, whereas, our foreign operations utilize the local currency as their functional currency. Accordingly, for purposes of translating foreign subsidiary financial statements to the U.S. dollar reporting currency, assets and liabilities of our foreign operations are translated at the fiscal year end exchange rates and income and expenses are translated monthly, at the average exchange rates for each respective month, with changes recognized in other comprehensive loss. Foreign currency gains and losses resulting from foreign currency transactions resulted in net gains of $9.3 million, $5.7 million and $3.7 million during 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively, and are included in “Other nonoperating (income) expense” in the accompanying statements of consolidated operations.

Claims and Insurance Accruals

Claims and insurance accruals, both current and long-term, reflect the estimated settlement cost of claims for workers’ compensation, property damage and liability claims, and cargo loss and damage that insurance does not cover. We establish and modify reserve estimates for workers’ compensation and property damage and liability claims primarily upon actuarial analyses prepared by independent actuaries. These reserves are discounted to present value using a risk-free rate based on the year of occurrence. The risk-free rate is the U.S. Treasury rate for maturities that match the expected payout of such claims and was 1.0%, 0.9% and 0.5% for workers’ compensation claims incurred as of December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. The rate was 0.7%, 0.4% and 0.3% for property damage and liability claims incurred as of December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. The process of determining reserve requirements utilizes historical trends and involves an evaluation of accident frequency and severity, claims management, changes in health care costs and certain future administrative costs. The effect of future inflation for costs is considered in the actuarial analysis. Adjustments to previously established reserves are included in operating results in the year of adjustment. As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, we had $392.7 million and $406.6 million, respectively, accrued for claims and insurance.

Expected aggregate undiscounted amounts and material changes to these amounts as of December 31 are presented below:



(in millions)	Workers’ Compensation			Property Damage and Liability Claims			Total
Undiscounted amount at December 31, 2013	$	347.0		$	68.8		$	415.8
Estimated settlement cost for 2014 claims	94.3			39.0			133.3
Claim payments, net of recoveries	(114.5		)	(40.8		)	(155.3		)
Change in estimated settlement cost for older claim years	12.3			8.0			20.3
Undiscounted amount at December 31, 2014	$	339.1		$	75.0		$	414.1
Estimated settlement cost for 2015 claims	92.8			37.0			129.8
Claim payments, net of recoveries	(115.0		)	(41.0		)	(156.0		)
Change in estimated settlement cost for older claim years	(1.4		)	13.9			12.5
Undiscounted settlement cost estimate at December 31, 2015	$	315.5		$	84.9		$	400.4
Discounted settlement cost estimate at December 31, 2015	$	291.6		$	84.1		$	375.7

In addition to the amounts above, settlement cost amounts for cargo claims and other insurance related amounts, none of which are discounted, totaled $17.0 million and $20.8 million at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively.

Estimated cash payments to settle claims which were incurred on or before December 31, 2015, for the next five years and thereafter are as follows:



(in millions)	Workers’ Compensation		Property Damage and Liability Claims		Total
2016	$	80.6	$	30.1	$	110.7
2017	54.3		23.8		78.1
2018	37.0		16.0		53.0
2019	26.2		8.1		34.3
2020	19.6		4.0		23.6
Thereafter	97.8		2.9		100.7
Total	$	315.5	$	84.9	$	400.4

Stock Compensation Plans

We have various stock-based employee compensation plans, which are described more fully in the “Stock Compensation Plans” footnote to our consolidated financial statements. We recognize compensation costs for non-vested shares and compensation cost for all share-based payments (i.e., options) based on the grant date fair value. For our share-based payments granted, with no performance requirement, we recognize compensation cost on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period (generally three to four years) based on the grant-date fair value. For our performance-based awards, the Company expenses the grant date fair value of the awards which are probable of being earned in the performance period over the respective service period.

Property and Equipment

The following is a summary of the components of our property and equipment at cost as of December 31:



(in millions)	2015		2014
Land	$	254.4	$	257.5
Structures	789.3		784.3
Revenue equipment	1,430.1		1,431.9
Technology equipment and software	146.4		148.2
Other	202.6		197.7
Total cost	$	2,822.8	$	2,819.6

We carry property and equipment at cost less accumulated depreciation. We compute depreciation using the straight-line method based on the following service lives:



	Years
Structures	10 - 30
Revenue equipment	10 - 20
Technology equipment and software	3 - 7
Other	3 - 10

We charge maintenance and repairs to expense as incurred and betterments are capitalized. Leasehold improvements are capitalized and amortized over the shorter of their useful lives or the remaining lease term.

Our investment in technology equipment and software consists primarily of freight movement, automation, dimensioning, sales equipment and related software.

For the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, depreciation expense was $145.5 million, $145.1 million and $153.8 million, respectively.

The cost of replacement tires are expensed at the time those tires are placed into service, as is the case with other repair and maintenance costs. The cost of tires on newly acquired revenue equipment is capitalized and depreciated over the estimated useful life of the related equipment. In addition to purchasing new revenue equipment, we will also rebuild the engines of our tractors (at certain time or mile intervals). Because rebuilding an engine increases its useful life, we capitalize these costs and depreciate over the remaining useful life of the unit. The cost of engines on newly acquired revenue equipment is capitalized and depreciated over the estimated useful life of the related equipment.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

If facts and circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of held-and-used identifiable amortizable intangibles and property, plant and equipment may be impaired, we perform an evaluation of recoverability in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 360. Our evaluation compares the estimated future undiscounted cash flows associated with the asset or asset group to its carrying amount to determine if a reduction to the carrying amount is required. The carrying amount of an impaired asset would be reduced to fair value if the estimated undiscounted cash flows are insufficient to recover the carrying value of the asset group. We performed impairment reviews for held-and-used long-lived assets during the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 in connection with an update of our internal business forecasts that considered current economic conditions and results of operations.

Assets Held for Sale

When we plan to dispose of property or equipment by sale, the asset is carried in the financial statements at the lower of the carrying amount or estimated fair value, less cost to sell, and is reclassified to assets held for sale. Additionally, after such reclassification, there is no further depreciation taken on the asset. For an asset to be classified as held for sale, management must approve and commit to a formal plan, the sale should be anticipated during the ensuing year and the asset must be actively marketed, be available for immediate sale, and meet certain other specified criteria. We use level 3 inputs to determine the fair value of each property that is considered as held for sale.

At December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, the net book value of assets held for sale was approximately $12.0 million and $15.3 million, respectively. This amount is included in “Property and Equipment” in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. We recorded charges of $6.2 million, $6.2 million and $3.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively, to reduce properties held for sale to estimated fair value, less cost to sell. These charges are included in “Gains on property disposals, net” in the accompanying statements of consolidated operations.

Equity Method Investments

On October 23, 2015, the Company entered into an equity interest sale and purchase agreement to sell its fifty percent interest in its Chinese joint venture, JHJ, for a purchase price of $16.3 million, which we expect, upon sale, will result in an insignificant gain in the accompanying statement of consolidated operations due to the cumulative translation adjustment. The investment is classified as held for sale and is included in “Other assets” in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets.

We account for the ownership of our joint venture under the equity method and accordingly, recognize our share of the respective joint ventures earnings in “Other nonoperating (income) expense” in the accompanying statements of operations.

The following reflects the components of these results for the years ended December 31:



(in millions)	2015		2014		2013
Net equity method earnings	$	2.3	$	2.1	$	2.1

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

We determined fair value measurements used in our consolidated financial statements based upon 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. The fair value hierarchy distinguishes between (1) market participant assumptions developed based on market data obtained from independent sources (observable inputs) and (2) an entity’s own assumptions about market participant assumptions developed based on the best information available in circumstances (unobservable inputs). The fair value hierarchy consists of three broad levels, which gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3). The three levels of the fair value hierarchy are described below:


•	Level 1: Valuations based on quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the entity has the ability to access.


•	Level 2: Valuations based on quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities, quoted prices in markets that are not active, or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities.


•	Level 3: Valuations based on inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and that are significant to the fair value of the assets or liabilities.

The asset’s or liability’s fair value measurement level with the fair value hierarchy is based on the lowest level of any input that is significant to the fair value measurement. Valuation techniques used maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs.

The valuation methodologies described above may produce a fair value calculation that may not be indicative of net realizable value or reflective of future fair values. We believe that our valuation methods are appropriate and consistent with other market participants. The use of different methodologies or assumptions to determine the fair value of certain financial assets could result in a different fair value measurement at the reporting date. There have been no changes in the methodologies used at December 31, 2015 and 2014.

The following tables summarize the fair value hierarchy of our financial assets held at fair value on a recurring basis, which consists of our restricted cash held in escrow:



			Fair Value Measurement at December 31, 2015
(in millions)	Total Carrying Value		Quoted prices in active market (Level 1)		Significant other observable inputs (Level 2)		Significant unobservable inputs (Level 3)
Restricted amounts held in escrow-current	$	58.8	$	58.8	$	—	$	—
Restricted amounts held in escrow-long term	63.4		63.4		—		—
Total assets at fair value	$	122.2	$	122.2	$	—	$	—



			Fair Value Measurement at December 31, 2014
(in millions)	Total Carrying Value		Quoted prices in active market (Level 1)		Significant other observable inputs (Level 2)		Significant unobservable inputs (Level 3)
Restricted amounts held in escrow-current	$	28.9	$	28.9	$	—	$	—
Restricted amounts held in escrow-long term	60.2		60.2		—		—
Total assets at fair value	$	89.1	$	89.1	$	—	$	—

Restricted amounts held in escrow are invested in money market accounts and are recorded at fair value on quoted market prices. The carrying value of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable and accounts payable approximates their fair value due to the short-term nature of these instruments.

Reclassifications Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, we reclassified the amortization of our net pension gain (loss), net of tax, totaling $14.1 million and $12.7 million, respectively, from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) to net income (loss). This reclassification is a component of net periodic pension cost and is discussed in the “Employee Benefits” footnote.

Impact of Recently Issued Accounting Standards

In November 2015, Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2015-17, Balance Sheet Classification of Deferred Taxes, which requires entities with a classified balance sheet to present all deferred tax assets and liabilities as noncurrent. The new standard will be effective for the Company for its annual reporting period beginning January 1, 2017, including interim periods within that reporting period. Early application is permitted at the beginning of an interim or annual period. The ASU allows entities to choose either prospective or retrospective transition. The Company does not believe the adoption of this standard will have a material impact on its balance sheet.

In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-14, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, Deferral of the Effective date, which defers the effective date of ASU 2014-9, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. The new standard will supersede much of the previous requirements in ASU-605, Revenue Recognition and most industry specific guidance and introduces a five-step model to determine when and how revenue is recognized. The premise of the new model is that an entity recognizes revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. The new standard will be effective for the Company for its annual reporting period beginning January 1, 2018, including interim periods within that reporting period. Early application is permitted for annual periods beginning January 1, 2017. Entities are allowed to transition to the new standard by either recasting prior periods or recognizing the cumulative effect. The Company continues to assess the method of application and impact, if any, on our consolidated balance sheets, results of operations and related disclosures.

In May 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-07, Disclosures for Investments in Certain Entities that Calculate Net Asset Value per Share (or Its Equivalent), which eliminates the requirement to categorize investments in the fair value hierarchy if their fair value is measured at net asset value (NAV) per share (or its equivalent) using the practical expedient in accordance with the standard for fair value measurement. The standard, which requires retrospective application, is effective for the Company beginning January 1, 2016. The Company does not believe the adoption of this standard will have a material impact on its disclosure.

In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-03, Interest - Imputation of Interest, which requires debt issue costs related to a recognized debt liability be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of that debt liability, consistent with the accounting treatment for debt discounts. The recognition and measurement guidance of debt issuance costs are not affected by this update. The standard, which requires retrospective application, is effective for the Company beginning January 1, 2016. As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company had $20.2 million and $26.5 million, respectively, of unamortized debt issuance costs related to its Term Loan, Second A&R CDA, ABL Facility and lease financing obligations. The Company will reclassify these costs from other assets to long-term debt in the March 31, 2016 consolidated balance sheets.

In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-15, Presentation of Financial Statements - Going Concern (Subtopic 205-40): Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern. The new standard provides guidance around management’s responsibility to evaluate whether there is substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern and to provide related footnote disclosures. The new standard is effective for our fiscal year ending December 31, 2016 and interim periods thereafter. The Company does not believe the adoption of this standard will have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements and related footnote disclosures.