Recent Accounting Developments

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2012

Recent Accounting Developments [Abstract]

Recent Accounting Developments

Note 2.  Recent Accounting Developments

In April 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2011-03, “Reconsideration of Effective Control for Repurchase Agreements,” amending the criteria under Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 860 for determining whether the transferor under a repurchase agreement involving a financial asset has retained effective control over the financial asset and therefore must account for the transaction as a secured borrowing rather than a sale.  The guidance removes from the effective control criteria the consideration of whether the transferor has the ability to repurchase or redeem the financial asset on substantially the agreed terms.  The guidance applies prospectively and is effective for new transactions and for existing transactions that are modified as of the beginning of the first interim or annual period beginning on or after December 15, 2011.  Adoption of ASU 2011-03 did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-04, “Fair Value Measurement:  Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in US GAAP and IFRSs,” amending ASC Topic 820.  Although ASU 2011-04 deals primarily with development of a single fair value framework for US GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards, the ASU also contains additional guidance on fair value measurements.  Among other things, ASU 2011-04: clarifies how a principal market is determined; addresses the fair value measurement or counterparty credit risks and the concept of valuation premise and highest and best use of nonfinancial assets; prescribes a model for measuring the fair value of an instrument classified in shareholders’ equity; limits the use of premiums or discounts based on the size of a holding; and requires certain new disclosures, including disclosures of all transfers between Levels 1 and 2 of the fair value hierarchy, whether or not significant, and additional disclosures regarding unobservable inputs and valuation processes for Level 3 measurements.  The guidance in ASU 2011-04 is to be applied prospectively, and is effective for the Company for interim and annual periods beginning on or after December 15, 2011.  Adoption of ASU 2011-04 did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In June 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-05, “Presentation of Comprehensive Income,” amending Topic 220.  The amendments provide that an entity has the option to present the total of comprehensive income, the components of net income, and the components of other comprehensive income either in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements.  The Company has chosen the latter option.  This ASU eliminates the option to present the components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in stockholders’ equity.  The ASU does not change the items that must be reported in other comprehensive income or when an item of other comprehensive income must be reclassified to net income, nor does it require any transition disclosures.  The amendments in this ASU are to be applied retrospectively, and are effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2011.  Early adoption is permitted.  In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-12, “Deferral of the Effective Date for Amendments to the Presentation of Reclassifications of Items Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income in Accounting Standards Update No. 2011-05”, which defers the effective date of a requirement in ASU 2011-05 related to reclassifications of items out of accumulated other comprehensive income.  The deferral of the effective date was made to allow the FASB time to consider whether to require presentation on the face of the financial statements of the effects of reclassifications out of accumulated other comprehensive income on the components of net income and other comprehensive income for all periods presented.  Adoption of ASU 2011-05 did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-08, “Testing Goodwill for Impairment,” amending Topic 350.  The guidance changes the manner of testing of goodwill for impairment by providing an entity with the option of first assessing qualitative factors to determine whether the existence of events or circumstances leads to a determination that it is more likely than not (more than 50%) that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. Such qualitative factors may include the following: macroeconomic conditions; industry and market considerations; cost factors; overall financial performance; and other relevant entity-specific events.  If an entity elects to perform a qualitative assessment and determines that an impairment is more likely than not, the entity is then required to perform the existing two-step quantitative impairment test; otherwise, no further analysis is required.  An entity also may elect not to perform the qualitative assessment and instead go directly to the two-step quantitative impairment test.  These changes are effective for fiscal years beginning on or after December 15, 2011, although early adoption is permitted.  The Company does not expect that adoption of the ASU will have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-11, “Balance Sheet (Topic 210):  Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities,” amending Topic 210.  The amendments require an entity to disclose both gross and net information about both instruments and transactions that are eligible for offset on the balance sheet and instruments and transactions that are subject to an agreement similar to a master netting arrangement.  This guidance is effective for annual periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013 and interim periods within those annual periods, with retrospective disclosure for all comparative periods presented.  The Company is evaluating the impact of ASU 2011-11 but does not expect that adoption of the ASU will have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.