Recent Accounting and Regulatory Pronouncements	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2016
Recent Accounting and Regulatory Pronouncements
Recent Accounting and Regulatory Pronouncements	Note 3 — Recent Accounting and Regulatory Pronouncements In August 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2016-15, Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments: (“ASU 2016-15”). ASU 2016-15 addresses eight classification issues related to the statement of cash flows: Debt prepayment or debt extinguishment costs; Settlement of zero-coupon bonds; Contingent consideration payments made after a business combination; Proceeds from the settlement of insurance claims; Proceeds from the settlement of corporate-owned life insurance policies, including bank-owned life insurance policies; Distributions received from equity method investees; Beneficial interests in securitization transactions; and Separately identifiable cash flows and application of the predominance principle. The updated guidance is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. Entities will apply the standard's provisions using a retrospective transition method to each period presented. The Company does not believe that this guidance will have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements. In June 2016, the FASB ASU No. 2016-13, Financial Instruments-Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments: (“ASU 2016-13”). ASU 2016-13 requires an entity to utilize a new impairment model known as the current expected credit loss ("CECL") model to estimate its lifetime "expected credit loss" and record an allowance that, when deducted from the amortized cost basis of the financial asset, presents the net amount expected to be collected on the financial asset. The CECL model is expected to result in earlier recognition of credit losses. ASU 2016-13 also requires new disclosures for financial assets measured at amortized cost, loans and available-for-sale debt securities. The updated guidance is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. 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 adopted. The Company is currently assessing the impact of the new guidance on the Company’s consolidated financial statements. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09, Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Employee Share –Based Payment Accounting; (“ASU 2016-09”). ASU 2016-09 introduces targeted amendments intended to simplify the accounting for stock compensation. Specifically, ASU 2016-09 requires all excess tax benefits and tax deficiencies (including tax benefits of dividends on share-based payment awards) to be recognized as income tax expense or benefit in the income statement. The tax effects of exercised or vested awards should be treated as discrete items in the reporting period in which they occur. An entity also should recognize excess tax benefits, and assess the need for a valuation allowance, regardless of whether the benefit reduces taxes payable in the current period. That is, off balance sheet accounting for net operating losses stemming from excess tax benefits would no longer be required and instead such net operating losses would be recognized when they arise. Existing net operating losses that are currently tracked off balance sheet would be recognized, net of a valuation allowance if required, through an adjustment to opening retained earnings in the period of adoption. Entities will no longer need to maintain and track an “APIC pool.” For public business entities, ASU 2016-09 is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016. The Company is currently evaluating the provisions of ASU 2016-09 to determine the potential impact the new standard will have to the Company’s consolidated financial statements. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-08, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Principal versus Agent considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net); (“ASU 2016-08”). ASU 2016-08 updates the new revenue standard by clarifying the principal versus agent implementation guidance, but does not change the core principle of the new standard. The updates to the principal versus agent guidance: (i) require an entity to determine whether it is a principal or an agent for each distinct good or service (or a distinct bundle of goods or services) to be provided to the customer; (ii) illustrate how an entity that is a principal might apply the control principle to goods, services, or rights to services, when another party is involved in providing goods or services to a customer and (iii) Clarify that the purpose of certain specific control indicators is to support or assist in the assessment of whether an entity controls a good or service before it is transferred to the customer, provide more specific guidance on how the indicators should be considered, and clarify that their relevance will vary depending on the facts and circumstances. For public business entities, the effective date and transition requirements for these amendments are the same as the effective date and transition requirements of ASU 2014-09 which is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017. The amendments can be applied retrospectively to each prior reporting period or retrospectively with the cumulative effect of initially applying this new guidance recognized at the date of initial application. The Company is currently evaluating the provisions of ASU 2016-08 in connection with the provisions of ASU 2014-09 to determine the potential impact the new standard will have to the Company’s consolidated financial statements. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-07, Investments – Equity Method and Joint Ventures (Topic 323): Simplifying the Transition to the Equity Method of Accounting; (“ASU 2016-07”). ASU 2016-07 requires an investor to initially apply the equity method of accounting from the date it qualifies for that method, i.e., the date the investor obtains significant influence over the operating and financial policies of an investee. The ASU eliminates the previous requirement to retroactively adjust the investment and record a cumulative catch up for the periods that the investment had been held, but did not qualify for the equity method of accounting. For public business entities, the amendments in ASU 2016-05 are effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016. The amendments should be applied prospectively upon their effective date to increases in the level of ownership interest or degree of influence that result in the adoption of the equity method. The Company is currently evaluating the provisions of ASU 2016-07 to determine the potential impact the new standard will have to the Company’s consolidated financial statements. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-05, Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Effect of Derivative Contract Novations on Existing Hedge Accounting Relationships (“ASU 2016-05”). ASU 2016-05 requires an entity to discontinue a designated hedging relationship in certain circumstances, including termination of the derivative hedging instrument or if the entity wishes to change any of the critical terms of the hedging relationship. ASU 2016-05 amends Topic 815 to clarify that novation of a derivative (replacing one of the parties to a derivative instrument with a new party) designated as the hedging instrument would not, in and of itself, be considered a termination of the derivative instrument or a change in critical terms requiring discontinuation of the designated hedging relationship. For public business entities, the amendments in ASU 2016-05 are effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016. An entity has an option to apply the amendments in ASU 2016-05 on either a prospective basis or a modified retrospective basis. The Company has determined that this guidance will not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements. In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842) (“ASU 2016-02”). ASU 2016-02 applies a right-of-use (ROU) model that requires a lessee to record, for all leases with a lease term of more than 12 months, an asset representing its right to use the underlying asset and a liability to make lease payments. For leases with a term of 12 months or less, a practical expedient is available whereby a lessee may elect, by class of underlying asset, not to recognize an ROU asset or lease liability. At inception, lessees must classify all leases as either finance or operating based on five criteria. Balance sheet recognition of finance and operating leases is similar, but the pattern of expense recognition in the income statement, as well as the effect on the statement of cash flows, differs depending on the lease classification. For public business entities, the amendments in ASU 2016-02 are effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2018. In transition, lessees and lessors are required to recognize and measure leases at the beginning of the earliest period presented using a modified retrospective approach which includes a number of optional practical expedients that entities may elect to apply. The Company is currently evaluating the provisions of ASU 2016-02 to determine the potential impact the new standard will have to the Company’s consolidated financial statements. In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01, Financial Instruments – Overall (Subtopic 825-10); Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities (“ASU 2016-01”). This update is intended to improve the recognition and measurement of financial instruments and it requires an entity to: (i) measure equity investments at fair value through net income, with certain exceptions; (ii) present in OCI the changes in instrument-specific credit risk for financial liabilities measured using the fair value option; (iii) present financial assets and financial liabilities by measurement category and form of financial asset; (iv) calculate the fair value of financial instruments for disclosure purposes based on an exit price and; (v) assess a valuation allowance on deferred tax assets related to unrealized losses of AFS debt securities in combination with other deferred tax assets. ASU 2016-01 also provides an election to subsequently measure certain nonmarketable equity investments at cost less any impairment and adjusted for certain observable price changes and requires a qualitative impairment assessment of such equity investments and amends certain fair value disclosure requirements. For public business entities, the amendments in ASU 2016-01 are effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017. An entity should apply the amendments by means of a cumulative-effect adjustment to the balance sheet as of the beginning of the fiscal year of adoption. The amendments related to equity securities without readily determinable fair values (including disclosure requirements) should be applied prospectively to equity investments that exist as of the date of adoption of the ASU 2016-01. The Company is currently evaluating the provisions of ASU 2016-01 to determine the potential impact the new standard will have to the Company’s consolidated financial statements. In September 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-16, Business Combinations (Topic 805): Simplifying the Accounting for Measurement Period Adjustments (“ASU 2015-16”). The update simplifies the accounting for adjustments made to provisional amounts recognized in a business combination by eliminating the requirement to retrospectively account for those adjustments. For public companies, this update became effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015, and is to be applied prospectively. ASU 2015-16 became effective for the Company on January 1, 2016 and did not have a significant impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements. In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-03, Interest—Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs (“ASU 2015-03”). The update simplifies the presentation of debt issuance costs by requiring that debt issuance costs be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of debt liability, consistent with debt discounts or premiums. The recognition and measurement guidance for debt issuance costs are not affected by the amendments in this update. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-15, Interest—Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Presentation and Subsequent Measurement of Debt Issuance Costs Associated with Line-of-Credit Arrangements, expanding the guidance provided in ASU 2015-03 by permitting the presentation of costs associated with securing a revolving line of credit as an asset, regardless of whether or not the line of credit is funded. For public companies, both updates will be effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015, and are to be applied retrospectively. ASU 2015-03 became effective for the Company on January 1, 2016 and did not have a significant impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements. In February 2015, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update ASU 2015-02, Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis (“ASU 2015-02”). This ASU affects reporting entities that are required to evaluate whether they should consolidate certain legal entities. Specifically, the amendments: (i) modify the evaluation of whether limited partnerships and similar legal entities are variable interest entities (“VIEs”) or voting interest entities; (ii) eliminate the presumption that a general partner should consolidate a limited partnership; (iii) affect the consolidation analysis of reporting entities that are involved with VIEs, particularly those that have fee arrangements and related party relationships; and (iv) provide a scope exception from consolidation guidance for reporting entities with interests in legal entities that are required to comply with or operate in accordance with requirements that are similar to those in Rule 2a-7 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 for registered money market funds. ASU No. 2015-02 became effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2015. ASU 2015-02 became effective for the Company on January 1, 2016 and did not have a significant impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements. In November 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-16, Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Determining Whether the Host Contract in a Hybrid Financial Instrument Issued in the Form of a Share Is More Akin to Debt or to Equity, a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force (“ASU 2014-16”). This ASU clarifies how current U.S. GAAP should be interpreted in subjectively evaluating the economic characteristics and risks of a host contract in a hybrid financial instrument that is issued in the form of a share. ASU 2014-16 is effective for public business entities for annual periods and interim periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2015. ASU 2014-16 became effective for the Company on January 1, 2016 and did not have a significant impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements. In June 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-12, Compensation—Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Accounting for Share-Based Payments When the Terms of an Award Provide That a Performance Target Could Be Achieved after the Requisite Service Period, a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force (“ASU 2014-12”). ASU 2014-12 requires that a performance target that affects vesting and that could be achieved after the requisite service period be treated as a performance condition. ASU 2014-12 is effective for annual periods and interim periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2015. An entity may apply the standards (i) prospectively to all share-based payment awards that are granted or modified on or after the effective date, or (ii) retrospectively to all awards with performance targets that are outstanding as of the beginning of the earliest annual period presented in the financial statements and to all new or modified awards thereafter. Earlier application is permitted. ASU 2014-12 became effective for the Company on January 1, 2016 and did not have a significant impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements. In June 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-11, Transfers and Servicing (Topic 860): Repurchase-to-Maturity Transactions, Repurchase Financings, and Disclosures (“ASU 2014-11”). ASU 2014-11 aligns the accounting for repurchase to maturity transactions and repurchase agreements executed as a repurchase financing with the accounting for other typical repurchase agreements. Going forward, these transactions would all be accounted for as secured borrowings. ASU 2014-11 became effective for the Company on January 1, 2015 and did not have a significant impact on the Company’s financial statements. See Note 21–Repurchase Agreements for the disclosure required under the provisions of ASU 2014-11. In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, Topic 606 (“ASU 2014-09”). The new 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 will need to use more judgment and make more estimates than under existing 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. In August of 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-14, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, Topic 606: Deferral of the Effective Date, deferring the effective date of ASU 2014-09 until annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within that reporting period. The amendments can be applied retrospectively to each prior reporting period or retrospectively with the cumulative effect of initially applying this new guidance recognized at the date of initial application. The Company is currently evaluating the provisions of ASU 2014-09 to determine the potential impact the new standard will have to the Company’s financial statements.

Note 3 — Recent Accounting and Regulatory Pronouncements

In August 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2016-15, Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments: (“ASU 2016-15”). ASU 2016-15 addresses eight classification issues related to the statement of cash flows: Debt prepayment or debt extinguishment costs; Settlement of zero-coupon bonds; Contingent consideration payments made after a business combination; Proceeds from the settlement of insurance claims; Proceeds from the settlement of corporate-owned life insurance policies, including bank-owned life insurance policies; Distributions received from equity method investees; Beneficial interests in securitization transactions; and Separately identifiable cash flows and application of the predominance principle. The updated guidance is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. Entities will apply the standard's provisions using a retrospective transition method to each period presented. The Company does not believe that this guidance will have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In June 2016, the FASB ASU No. 2016-13, Financial Instruments-Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments: (“ASU 2016-13”). ASU 2016-13 requires an entity to utilize a new impairment model known as the current expected credit loss ("CECL") model to estimate its lifetime "expected credit loss" and record an allowance that, when deducted from the amortized cost basis of the financial asset, presents the net amount expected to be collected on the financial asset. The CECL model is expected to result in earlier recognition of credit losses. ASU 2016-13 also requires new disclosures for financial assets measured at amortized cost, loans and available-for-sale debt securities. The updated guidance is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. 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 adopted. The Company is currently assessing the impact of the new guidance on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09, Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Employee Share –Based Payment Accounting; (“ASU 2016-09”). ASU 2016-09 introduces targeted amendments intended to simplify the accounting for stock compensation. Specifically, ASU 2016-09 requires all excess tax benefits and tax deficiencies (including tax benefits of dividends on share-based payment awards) to be recognized as income tax expense or benefit in the income statement. The tax effects of exercised or vested awards should be treated as discrete items in the reporting period in which they occur. An entity also should recognize excess tax benefits, and assess the need for a valuation allowance, regardless of whether the benefit reduces taxes payable in the current period. That is, off balance sheet accounting for net operating losses stemming from excess tax benefits would no longer be required and instead such net operating losses would be recognized when they arise. Existing net operating losses that are currently tracked off balance sheet would be recognized, net of a valuation allowance if required, through an adjustment to opening retained earnings in the period of adoption. Entities will no longer need to maintain and track an “APIC pool.” For public business entities, ASU 2016-09 is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016. The Company is currently evaluating the provisions of ASU 2016-09 to determine the potential impact the new standard will have to the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-08, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Principal versus Agent considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net); (“ASU 2016-08”). ASU 2016-08 updates the new revenue standard by clarifying the principal versus agent implementation guidance, but does not change the core principle of the new standard. The updates to the principal versus agent guidance: (i) require an entity to determine whether it is a principal or an agent for each distinct good or service (or a distinct bundle of goods or services) to be provided to the customer; (ii) illustrate how an entity that is a principal might apply the control principle to goods, services, or rights to services, when another party is involved in providing goods or services to a customer and (iii) Clarify that the purpose of certain specific control indicators is to support or assist in the assessment of whether an entity controls a good or service before it is transferred to the customer, provide more specific guidance on how the indicators should be considered, and clarify that their relevance will vary depending on the facts and circumstances. For public business entities, the effective date and transition requirements for these amendments are the same as the effective date and transition requirements of ASU 2014-09 which is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017. The amendments can be applied retrospectively to each prior reporting period or retrospectively with the cumulative effect of initially applying this new guidance recognized at the date of initial application. The Company is currently evaluating the provisions of ASU 2016-08 in connection with the provisions of ASU 2014-09 to determine the potential impact the new standard will have to the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-07, Investments – Equity Method and Joint Ventures (Topic 323): Simplifying the Transition to the Equity Method of Accounting; (“ASU 2016-07”). ASU 2016-07 requires an investor to initially apply the equity method of accounting from the date it qualifies for that method, i.e., the date the investor obtains significant influence over the operating and financial policies of an investee. The ASU eliminates the previous requirement to retroactively adjust the investment and record a cumulative catch up for the periods that the investment had been held, but did not qualify for the equity method of accounting. For public business entities, the amendments in ASU 2016-05 are effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016. The amendments should be applied prospectively upon their effective date to increases in the level of ownership interest or degree of influence that result in the adoption of the equity method. The Company is currently evaluating the provisions of ASU 2016-07 to determine the potential impact the new standard will have to the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-05, Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Effect of Derivative Contract Novations on Existing Hedge Accounting Relationships (“ASU 2016-05”). ASU 2016-05 requires an entity to discontinue a designated hedging relationship in certain circumstances, including termination of the derivative hedging instrument or if the entity wishes to change any of the critical terms of the hedging relationship. ASU 2016-05 amends Topic 815 to clarify that novation of a derivative (replacing one of the parties to a derivative instrument with a new party) designated as the hedging instrument would not, in and of itself, be considered a termination of the derivative instrument or a change in critical terms requiring discontinuation of the designated hedging relationship. For public business entities, the amendments in ASU 2016-05 are effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016. An entity has an option to apply the amendments in ASU 2016-05 on either a prospective basis or a modified retrospective basis. The Company has determined that this guidance will not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842) (“ASU 2016-02”). ASU 2016-02 applies a right-of-use (ROU) model that requires a lessee to record, for all leases with a lease term of more than 12 months, an asset representing its right to use the underlying asset and a liability to make lease payments. For leases with a term of 12 months or less, a practical expedient is available whereby a lessee may elect, by class of underlying asset, not to recognize an ROU asset or lease liability. At inception, lessees must classify all leases as either finance or operating based on five criteria. Balance sheet recognition of finance and operating leases is similar, but the pattern of expense recognition in the income statement, as well as the effect on the statement of cash flows, differs depending on the lease classification. For public business entities, the amendments in ASU 2016-02 are effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2018. In transition, lessees and lessors are required to recognize and measure leases at the beginning of the earliest period presented using a modified retrospective approach which includes a number of optional practical expedients that entities may elect to apply. The Company is currently evaluating the provisions of ASU 2016-02 to determine the potential impact the new standard will have to the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01, Financial Instruments – Overall (Subtopic 825-10); Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities (“ASU 2016-01”). This update is intended to improve the recognition and measurement of financial instruments and it requires an entity to: (i) measure equity investments at fair value through net income, with certain exceptions; (ii) present in OCI the changes in instrument-specific credit risk for financial liabilities measured using the fair value option; (iii) present financial assets and financial liabilities by measurement category and form of financial asset; (iv) calculate the fair value of financial instruments for disclosure purposes based on an exit price and; (v) assess a valuation allowance on deferred tax assets related to unrealized losses of AFS debt securities in combination with other deferred tax assets. ASU 2016-01 also provides an election to subsequently measure certain nonmarketable equity investments at cost less any impairment and adjusted for certain observable price changes and requires a qualitative impairment assessment of such equity investments and amends certain fair value disclosure requirements. For public business entities, the amendments in ASU 2016-01 are effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017. An entity should apply the amendments by means of a cumulative-effect adjustment to the balance sheet as of the beginning of the fiscal year of adoption. The amendments related to equity securities without readily determinable fair values (including disclosure requirements) should be applied prospectively to equity investments that exist as of the date of adoption of the ASU 2016-01. The Company is currently evaluating the provisions of ASU 2016-01 to determine the potential impact the new standard will have to the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In September 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-16, Business Combinations (Topic 805): Simplifying the Accounting for Measurement Period Adjustments (“ASU 2015-16”). The update simplifies the accounting for adjustments made to provisional amounts recognized in a business combination by eliminating the requirement to retrospectively account for those adjustments. For public companies, this update became effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015, and is to be applied prospectively. ASU 2015-16 became effective for the Company on January 1, 2016 and did not have a significant impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-03, Interest—Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs (“ASU 2015-03”). The update simplifies the presentation of debt issuance costs by requiring that debt issuance costs be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of debt liability, consistent with debt discounts or premiums. The recognition and measurement guidance for debt issuance costs are not affected by the amendments in this update. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-15, Interest—Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Presentation and Subsequent Measurement of Debt Issuance Costs Associated with Line-of-Credit Arrangements, expanding the guidance provided in ASU 2015-03 by permitting the presentation of costs associated with securing a revolving line of credit as an asset, regardless of whether or not the line of credit is funded. For public companies, both updates will be effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015, and are to be applied retrospectively. ASU 2015-03 became effective for the Company on January 1, 2016 and did not have a significant impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In February 2015, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update ASU 2015-02, Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis (“ASU 2015-02”). This ASU affects reporting entities that are required to evaluate whether they should consolidate certain legal entities. Specifically, the amendments: (i) modify the evaluation of whether limited partnerships and similar legal entities are variable interest entities (“VIEs”) or voting interest entities; (ii) eliminate the presumption that a general partner should consolidate a limited partnership; (iii) affect the consolidation analysis of reporting entities that are involved with VIEs, particularly those that have fee arrangements and related party relationships; and (iv) provide a scope exception from consolidation guidance for reporting entities with interests in legal entities that are required to comply with or operate in accordance with requirements that are similar to those in Rule 2a-7 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 for registered money market funds. ASU No. 2015-02 became effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2015. ASU 2015-02 became effective for the Company on January 1, 2016 and did not have a significant impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In November 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-16, Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Determining Whether the Host Contract in a Hybrid Financial Instrument Issued in the Form of a Share Is More Akin to Debt or to Equity, a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force (“ASU 2014-16”). This ASU clarifies how current U.S. GAAP should be interpreted in subjectively evaluating the economic characteristics and risks of a host contract in a hybrid financial instrument that is issued in the form of a share. ASU 2014-16 is effective for public business entities for annual periods and interim periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2015. ASU 2014-16 became effective for the Company on January 1, 2016 and did not have a significant impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In June 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-12, Compensation—Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Accounting for Share-Based Payments When the Terms of an Award Provide That a Performance Target Could Be Achieved after the Requisite Service Period, a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force (“ASU 2014-12”). ASU 2014-12 requires that a performance target that affects vesting and that could be achieved after the requisite service period be treated as a performance condition. ASU 2014-12 is effective for annual periods and interim periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2015. An entity may apply the standards (i) prospectively to all share-based payment awards that are granted or modified on or after the effective date, or (ii) retrospectively to all awards with performance targets that are outstanding as of the beginning of the earliest annual period presented in the financial statements and to all new or modified awards thereafter. Earlier application is permitted. ASU 2014-12 became effective for the Company on January 1, 2016 and did not have a significant impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In June 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-11, Transfers and Servicing (Topic 860): Repurchase-to-Maturity Transactions, Repurchase Financings, and Disclosures (“ASU 2014-11”). ASU 2014-11 aligns the accounting for repurchase to maturity transactions and repurchase agreements executed as a repurchase financing with the accounting for other typical repurchase agreements. Going forward, these transactions would all be accounted for as secured borrowings. ASU 2014-11 became effective for the Company on January 1, 2015 and did not have a significant impact on the Company’s financial statements. See Note 21–Repurchase Agreements for the disclosure required under the provisions of ASU 2014-11.

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, Topic 606 (“ASU 2014-09”). The new 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 will need to use more judgment and make more estimates than under existing 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. In August of 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-14, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, Topic 606: Deferral of the Effective Date, deferring the effective date of ASU 2014-09 until annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within that reporting period. The amendments can be applied retrospectively to each prior reporting period or retrospectively with the cumulative effect of initially applying this new guidance recognized at the date of initial application. The Company is currently evaluating the provisions of ASU 2014-09 to determine the potential impact the new standard will have to the Company’s financial statements.