Significant New Authoritative Accounting Guidance	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2018
New Accounting Pronouncements and Changes in Accounting Principles [Abstract]
Significant New Authoritative Accounting Guidance	SIGNIFICANT NEW AUTHORITATIVE ACCOUNTING GUIDANCE Recently Adopted In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers: Topic 606. This ASU revised guidance for the recognition, measurement, and disclosure of revenue from contracts with customers. The guidance is applicable to all entities and replaces significant portions of existing industry and transaction-specific revenue recognition rules with a more principles-based recognition model. Since the guidance does not apply to revenue associated with financial instruments, including loans and securities that are accounted for under other GAAP, the new guidance did not have a material impact on revenue most closely associated with financial instruments, including interest income and expense. We completed our overall assessment of revenue streams and review of related contracts potentially affected by the ASU, including service fees on deposit accounts, bank card revenue, trust and wealth management fees, insurance commissions and gains and losses on sales of foreclosed properties. Based on this assessment, we concluded that ASU 2014-09 did not materially change the method in which we currently recognize revenue for these revenue streams. We also completed our evaluation of certain costs related to these revenue streams to determine whether such costs should be presented as expenses or contra-revenue (i.e., gross vs. net). Based on our evaluation, we determined that any classification changes are immaterial to both revenue and expense. We adopted ASU 2014-09 and its related amendments on its required effective date of January 1, 2018 utilizing the modified retrospective approach. Since there was no net income impact upon adoption of the new guidance, a cumulative effect adjustment to opening retained earnings was not deemed necessary. ASU 2016-01, Financial Instruments – Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities, among other things, (i) requires equity investments, with certain exceptions, to be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income, (ii) simplifies the impairment assessment of equity investments without readily determinable fair values by requiring a qualitative assessment to identify impairment, (iii) eliminates the requirement for public business entities to disclose the methods 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, (iv) requires public business entities to use the exit price notion when measuring the fair value of financial instruments for disclosure purposes, (v) requires 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, (vi) requires separate presentation of financial assets and financial liabilities by measurement category and form of financial asset on the balance sheet or the accompanying notes to the financial statements and (viii) clarifies that an entity should evaluate the need for a valuation allowance on a deferred tax asset related to available-for-sale. ASU 2016-01 was effective for us on January 1, 2018 and did not have a significant impact on our financial statements. In accordance with (iv) above, we measured the fair value of our loan portfolio as of March 31, 2018 using exit price notion (see Note 3. Fair Vale Measurements). Pending Adoption In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842). Among other things, in the amendments in ASU 2016-02, lessees will be required to recognize the following for all leases (with the exception of short-term leases) at the commencement date: (1) A lease liability, which is a lessee‘s obligation to make lease payments arising from a lease, measured on a discounted basis; 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. Under the new guidance, lessor accounting is largely unchanged. Certain targeted improvements were made to align, where necessary, lessor accounting with the lessee accounting model and Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. The amendments in this ASU are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early application is permitted upon issuance. Lessees (for capital and operating leases) and lessors (for sales-type, direct financing and operating leases) must apply a modified retrospective transition approach for leases existing at, or entered into after, the beginning of the earliest comparative period presented in the financial statements. The modified retrospective approach would not require any transition accounting for leases that expired before the earliest comparative period presented. Lessees and lessors may not apply a full retrospective transition approach. While we are currently assessing the impact of the adoption of this pronouncement, we expect the primary impact to our consolidated financial position upon adoption will be the recognition, on a discounted basis, of our minimum commitments under non-cancellable operating leases on our consolidated balance sheets resulting in the recording of right of use assets and lease obligations. Our current minimum commitments under long-term operating leases are disclosed in Note 12, Commitments and Contingencies. During June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326) - Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments. The amendments in this ASU, among other things, require the measurement of all expected credit losses for financial assets held at the reporting date based on historical experience, current conditions and reasonable and supportable forecasts. Financial institutions and other organizations will now use forward-looking information to better inform their credit loss estimates. Many of the loss estimation techniques applied today will still be permitted, although the inputs to those techniques will change to reflect the full amount of expected credit losses. In addition, the ASU amends the accounting for credit losses on available-for-sale debt securities and purchased financial assets with credit deterioration. The amendments in this ASU are effective for SEC filers for fiscal years and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2019. We will adopt the guidance by the first quarter of 2020 with a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the year of adoption. In this regard, we have thus far formed a cross-functional implementation team comprised of personnel from risk management, operations and information technology, loan administration and finance and engaged a third-party to assist us. The implementation team has developed a project plan and is staying informed about the broader industry's perspectives and insights, and is identifying and researching key decision points. We will soon prepare a readiness assessment and gap analysis relative to required data which will serve to direct our areas of focus. We will continue to evaluate the impact the new standard will have on our consolidated financial statements as the final impact will be dependent, among other items, upon the loan portfolio composition and credit quality at the adoption date, as well as economic conditions, financial models used and forecasts at that time. In March of 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-08, Receivables-Nonrefundable Fees and Other Costs (Subtopic 310-20): Premium Amortization on Purchased Callable Debt Securities. This guidance shortens the amortization period for premiums on certain callable debt securities to the earliest call date (with an explicit, noncontingent call feature that is callable at a fixed price and on a preset date), rather than contractual maturity date as currently required under GAAP. The ASU does not impact instruments without preset call dates such as mortgage-backed securities. For instruments with contingent call features, once the contingency is resolved and the security is callable at a fixed price and preset date, the security is within the scope of the ASU. ASU 2017-08 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim periods within those fiscal years, and early adoption is permitted. The adoption of the new pronouncement will not have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements. In August 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-12, Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities which will make more financial and nonfinancial hedging strategies eligible for hedge accounting. It also amends the presentation and disclosure requirements and changes how companies assess effectiveness. It is intended to more closely align hedge accounting with companies’ risk management strategies, simplify the application of hedge accounting, and increase transparency as to the scope and results of hedging programs. The guidance is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2018. Early adoption is permitted, including adoption in an interim period. We are assessing the impact of ASU 2017-12 and do not expect it to have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

SIGNIFICANT NEW AUTHORITATIVE ACCOUNTING GUIDANCE

Recently Adopted

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers: Topic 606. This ASU revised guidance for the recognition, measurement, and disclosure of revenue from contracts with customers. The guidance is applicable to all entities and replaces significant portions of existing industry and transaction-specific revenue recognition rules with a more principles-based recognition model. Since the guidance does not apply to revenue associated with financial instruments, including loans and securities that are accounted for under other GAAP, the new guidance did not have a material impact on revenue most closely associated with financial instruments, including interest income and expense. We completed our overall assessment of revenue streams and review of related contracts potentially affected by the ASU, including service fees on deposit accounts, bank card revenue, trust and wealth management fees, insurance commissions and gains and losses on sales of foreclosed properties. Based on this assessment, we concluded that ASU 2014-09 did not materially change the method in which we currently recognize revenue for these revenue streams. We also completed our evaluation of certain costs related to these revenue streams to determine whether such costs should be presented as expenses or contra-revenue (i.e., gross vs. net). Based on our evaluation, we determined that any classification changes are immaterial to both revenue and expense. We adopted ASU 2014-09 and its related amendments on its required effective date of January 1, 2018 utilizing the modified retrospective approach. Since there was no net income impact upon adoption of the new guidance, a cumulative effect adjustment to opening retained earnings was not deemed necessary.

ASU 2016-01, Financial Instruments – Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities, among other things, (i) requires equity investments, with certain exceptions, to be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income, (ii) simplifies the impairment assessment of equity investments without readily determinable fair values by requiring a qualitative assessment to identify impairment, (iii) eliminates the requirement for public business entities to disclose the methods 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, (iv) requires public business entities to use the exit price notion when measuring the fair value of financial instruments for disclosure purposes, (v) requires 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, (vi) requires separate presentation of financial assets and financial liabilities by measurement category and form of financial asset on the balance sheet or the accompanying notes to the financial statements and (viii) clarifies that an entity should evaluate the need for a valuation allowance on a deferred tax asset related to available-for-sale. ASU 2016-01 was effective for us on January 1, 2018 and did not have a significant impact on our financial statements. In accordance with (iv) above, we measured the fair value of our loan portfolio as of March 31, 2018 using exit price notion (see Note 3. Fair Vale Measurements).

Pending Adoption

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842). Among other things, in the amendments in ASU 2016-02, lessees will be required to recognize the following for all leases (with the exception of short-term leases) at the commencement date: (1) A lease liability, which is a lessee‘s obligation to make lease payments arising from a lease, measured on a discounted basis; 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. Under the new guidance, lessor accounting is largely unchanged. Certain targeted improvements were made to align, where necessary, lessor accounting with the lessee accounting model and Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. The amendments in this ASU are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early application is permitted upon issuance. Lessees (for capital and operating leases) and lessors (for sales-type, direct financing and operating leases) must apply a modified retrospective transition approach for leases existing at, or entered into after, the beginning of the earliest comparative period presented in the financial statements. The modified retrospective approach would not require any transition accounting for leases that expired before the earliest comparative period presented. Lessees and lessors may not apply a full retrospective transition approach. While we are currently assessing the impact of the adoption of this pronouncement, we expect the primary impact to our consolidated financial position upon adoption will be the recognition, on a discounted basis, of our minimum commitments under non-cancellable operating leases on our consolidated balance sheets resulting in the recording of right of use assets and lease obligations. Our current minimum commitments under long-term operating leases are disclosed in Note 12, Commitments and Contingencies.

During June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326) - Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments. The amendments in this ASU, among other things, require the measurement of all expected credit losses for financial assets held at the reporting date based on historical experience, current conditions and reasonable and supportable forecasts. Financial institutions and other organizations will now use forward-looking information to better inform their credit loss estimates. Many of the loss estimation techniques applied today will still be permitted, although the inputs to those techniques will change to reflect the full amount of expected credit losses. In addition, the ASU amends the accounting for credit losses on available-for-sale debt securities and purchased financial assets with credit deterioration. The amendments in this ASU are effective for SEC filers for fiscal years and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2019. We will adopt the guidance by the first quarter of 2020 with a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the year of adoption. In this regard, we have thus far formed a cross-functional implementation team comprised of personnel from risk management, operations and information technology, loan administration and finance and engaged a third-party to assist us. The implementation team has developed a project plan and is staying informed about the broader industry's perspectives and insights, and is identifying and researching key decision points. We will soon prepare a readiness assessment and gap analysis relative to required data which will serve to direct our areas of focus. We will continue to evaluate the impact the new standard will have on our consolidated financial statements as the final impact will be dependent, among other items, upon the loan portfolio composition and credit quality at the adoption date, as well as economic conditions, financial models used and forecasts at that time.

In March of 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-08, Receivables-Nonrefundable Fees and Other Costs (Subtopic 310-20): Premium Amortization on Purchased Callable Debt Securities. This guidance shortens the amortization period for premiums on certain callable debt securities to the earliest call date (with an explicit, noncontingent call feature that is callable at a fixed price and on a preset date), rather than contractual maturity date as currently required under GAAP. The ASU does not impact instruments without preset call dates such as mortgage-backed securities. For instruments with contingent call features, once the contingency is resolved and the security is callable at a fixed price and preset date, the security is within the scope of the ASU. ASU 2017-08 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim periods within those fiscal years, and early adoption is permitted. The adoption of the new pronouncement will not have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In August 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-12, Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities which will make more financial and nonfinancial hedging strategies eligible for hedge accounting. It also amends the presentation and disclosure requirements and changes how companies assess effectiveness. It is intended to more closely align hedge accounting with companies’ risk management strategies, simplify the application of hedge accounting, and increase transparency as to the scope and results of hedging programs. The guidance is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2018. Early adoption is permitted, including adoption in an interim period. We are assessing the impact of ASU 2017-12 and do not expect it to have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.