Interim Information (Policies)

9 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2015

Organization Consolidation And Presentation Of Financial Statements [Abstract]

Basis of Presentation

(b) Basis of Presentation

The unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) for interim information, and instructions to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and Rule 10-01 of Regulation S-X. In the opinion of management, these unaudited interim financial statements include all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair statement of the results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition for the interim periods presented. Results for interim periods should not be considered indicative of results for the full year or for any other interim period. These unaudited interim financial statements should be read in conjunction with the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements, significant accounting policies, and the other notes to the consolidated financial statements for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2015 included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K, which was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on June 26, 2015. All significant intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated upon consolidation.

Recently Adopted Accounting Standards

(c) Recently Adopted Accounting Standards

Effective April 1, 2015, the Company adopted Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2015-03, Interest—Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs. The amendments require that debt issuance 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 debt discounts. In August 2015, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued ASU 2015-15, Presentation and Subsequent Measurement of Debt Issuance Costs Associated with Line-of-Credit Arrangements. This ASU states that the SEC staff would not object to an entity deferring and presenting debt issuance costs as an asset and subsequently amortizing deferred debt issuance costs ratably over the term of the line-of-credit arrangement, regardless of whether there are outstanding borrowings under the line-of-credit arrangement. The adoption of these ASU’s did not have material impact on the consolidated financial statements.

Recently Issued Accounting Standards

(d) Recently Issued Accounting Standards

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers and created the new Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, and added ASC Subtopic 340-40, Other Assets and Deferred Costs—Contracts with Customers. The guidance in this update supersedes the revenue recognition requirements in ASC Topic 605, Revenue Recognition, and most industry-specific guidance throughout the industry topics of the codification. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-14, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Deferral of the Effective Date, which defers the effective date for the Company from April 1, 2017 to April 1, 2018 while permitting early adoption as of April 1, 2017. The Company is currently assessing the impact the adoption of this guidance will have on the consolidated financial statements.

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 amendments require management to assess an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern by incorporating and expanding upon certain principles that are currently in U.S. auditing standards. The amendments are effective for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2017 and interim periods thereafter. The adoption of this new standard is not expected to have an impact on the consolidated financial statements.

In February 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-02, Consolidation (Topic 810): Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis. Under the amendments in this update, all reporting entities are within the scope of Subtopic 810-10, Consolidation—Overall, including limited partnerships and similar legal entities, unless a scope exception applies. The amendments are effective for the Company beginning on April 1, 2016. The Company is currently assessing the impact on the consolidated financial statements.

In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-01, Financial Instruments—Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities. The amendments in this Update address certain aspects of recognition, measurement, presentation and disclosure of financial instruments. The amendments are effective for the Company beginning April 1, 2018, including interim periods within this fiscal year. The Company is currently assessing the impact on the consolidated financial statements.

Legal Proceedings

Legal Proceedings and Regulatory Matters

The Company establishes accruals for legal claims when payments associated with the claims become probable and the costs can be reasonably estimated. When able, the Company will determine estimates of reasonably possible loss or range of loss, whether in excess of any related accrued liability or where there is no accrued liability. Given the inherent uncertainty associated with legal matters, the actual costs of resolving legal claims and associated costs of defense may be substantially higher or lower than the amounts for which accruals have been established.

The Company is involved, in the ordinary course of business, in various legal proceedings including claims of individual customers and purported class action lawsuits. Certain of these actions are similar to suits filed against other financial institutions and captive finance companies. Most of these proceedings concern customer allegations of wrongful repossession or defamation of credit. The Company is also subject to governmental reviews from time to time. Based on available information and established accruals, management does not believe it is reasonably possible that the results of these proceedings, in the aggregate, will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

On July 14, 2015 (Effective Date), the Company reached a settlement with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ, together with the CFPB, the Agencies) related to the Agencies’ previously disclosed investigation of, and allegations regarding, pricing practices by dealers originating retail installment sale contracts for automobiles purchased by AHFC and entered into a consent order with each of the Agencies to reflect such settlement (collectively, the Consent Orders). Pursuant to the Consent Orders, the Company implemented a new dealer compensation policy on August 11, 2015. In connection with the implementation of such policy, the Company has agreed to maintain general compliance management systems reasonably designed to assure compliance with all relevant federal consumer financial laws. Additionally, the Company has agreed to pay $24 million in consumer remuneration and, pursuant to the Consent Order with the DOJ, the Company has submitted to the Agencies a proposal for the distribution of a $1 million donation by the Company for financial education programs for protected groups. These amounts were recognized in the consolidated financial statements in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2015.

In addition, as previously disclosed, the Company also received a subpoena from the New York Department of Financial Services requesting information relating to its fair lending laws. The Company is cooperating with this request for information. Management cannot predict the outcome of this inquiry.

Allowance for Credit Losses

Allowance for Credit Losses

The allowance for credit losses is management’s estimate of probable losses incurred on finance receivables, which requires significant judgment and assumptions that are inherently uncertain. The allowance is based on management’s evaluation of many factors, including the Company’s historical credit loss experience, the value of the underlying collateral, delinquency trends, and economic conditions.

Consumer finance receivables in the retail loan and direct financing lease portfolio segments are collectively evaluated for impairment. Delinquencies and losses are monitored on an ongoing basis and this historical experience provides the primary basis for estimating the allowance. Management utilizes various methodologies when estimating the allowance for credit losses including models which incorporate vintage loss and delinquency migration analysis. These models take into consideration attributes of the portfolio including loan-to-value ratios, internal and external credit scores, and collateral types. Market and economic factors such as used vehicle prices, unemployment rates, and consumer debt service burdens are also incorporated into these models.

Dealer loans are individually evaluated for impairment when specifically identified as impaired. Dealer loans are considered to be impaired when it is probable that the Company will be unable to collect all amounts due according to the terms of the contract. The Company’s determination of whether dealer loans are impaired is based on evaluations of dealership payment history, financial condition, and ability to perform under the terms of the loan agreements. Dealer loans that have not been specifically identified as impaired are collectively evaluated for impairment.

There were no modifications to dealer loans that constituted troubled debt restructurings during the three and nine months ended December 31, 2015 and 2014.

The Company generally does not grant concessions on consumer finance receivables that are considered to be troubled debt restructurings other than modifications of retail loans in reorganization proceedings pursuant to the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. Retail loans modified under bankruptcy protection were not material to the Company’s consolidated financial statements during the three and nine months ended December 31, 2015 and 2014. The Company does allow payment deferrals on consumer finance receivables. However, these payment deferrals are not considered to be troubled debt restructurings since the deferrals are deemed to be insignificant and interest continues to accrue during the deferral period.

Credit Quality Indicators

Retail Loan and Direct Financing Lease Portfolio Segments

The Company utilizes proprietary credit scoring systems to evaluate the credit risk of applicants for retail loans and leases. The scoring systems assign internal credit scores based on various factors including the applicant’s credit bureau information and contract terms. The internal credit score provides the primary basis for credit decisions when acquiring retail loan and lease contracts. Internal credit scores are determined only at the time of origination and are not reassessed during the life of the contract.

Subsequent to origination, collection experience provides a current indication of the credit quality of consumer finance receivables. The likelihood of accounts charging off becomes significantly higher once an account becomes 60 days delinquent. Accounts that are current or less than 60 days past due are considered to be performing. Accounts that are 60 days or more past due are considered to be nonperforming.

Dealer Loan Portfolio Segment

The Company utilizes an internal risk rating system to evaluate dealer credit risk. Dealerships are assigned an internal risk rating based on an assessment of their financial condition. Factors including liquidity, financial strength, management effectiveness, and operating efficiency are evaluated when assessing their financial condition. Financing limits and interest rates are determined from these risk ratings. Monitoring activities including financial reviews and inventory inspections are performed more frequently for dealerships with weaker risk ratings. The financial conditions of dealerships are reviewed and their risk ratings are updated at least annually.

Derivative Instruments

The fair value of derivative instruments is subject to the fluctuations in market interest rates and foreign currency exchange rates. Since the Company has elected not to apply hedge accounting, the volatility in the changes in fair value of these derivative instruments is recognized in earnings. All settlements of derivative instruments are recognized within cash flows from operating activities in the consolidated statements of cash flows.

These derivative instruments also contain an element of credit risk in the event the counterparties are unable to meet the terms of the agreements. However, the Company minimizes the risk exposure by limiting the counterparties to major financial institutions that meet established credit guidelines. In the event of default, all counterparties are subject to legally enforceable master netting agreements. The Company generally does not require or place collateral for these instruments under credit support agreements.

Securitizations and Variable Interest Entities (VIE)

The trusts utilized for on-balance sheet securitizations are VIEs, which are required to be consolidated by their primary beneficiary. The Company is considered to be the primary beneficiary of these trusts due to (i) the power to direct the activities of the trusts that most significantly impact the trusts’ economic performance through its role as servicer, and (ii) the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive residual returns that could potentially be significant to the trusts through the subordinated certificates and residual interest retained. The debt securities issued by the trusts to third-party investors along with the assets of the trusts are included in the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

Fair Value Measurements

Fair value is defined as 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 prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value into three broad levels. Level 1 inputs are quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the reporting entity has the ability to access at the measurement date. Level 2 inputs are those other than quoted prices included within Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability. Level 3 inputs are unobservable inputs for the asset or liability. The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3). Nonperformance risk is also required to be reflected in the fair value measurement, including an entity’s own credit standing when measuring the fair value of a liability.

Derivative Instruments

The Company’s derivatives are transacted in over-the-counter markets and quoted market prices are not readily available. The Company uses third-party developed valuation models to value derivative instruments. These models estimate fair values using discounted cash flow modeling techniques, which utilize the contractual terms of the derivative instruments and market-based inputs, including interest rates and foreign exchange rates. Discount rates incorporate counterparty and HMC specific credit default spreads to reflect nonperformance risk.

The Company’s derivative instruments are classified as Level 2 since all significant inputs are observable and do not require management judgment. There were no transfers between fair value hierarchy levels during the nine months ended December 31, 2015 and 2014. Refer to Note 5 for additional information on derivative instruments.

Vehicles Held for Disposition

Vehicles held for disposition consist of returned and repossessed vehicles. They are valued at the lower of their carrying value or estimated fair value, less estimated disposition costs. The fair value is based on current average selling prices of like vehicles at wholesale used vehicle auctions.

The following describes the methodologies and assumptions used to estimate the fair value of the Company’s financial instruments not measured at fair value on a recurring basis:

Cash, Cash Equivalents, and Restricted Cash

The carrying values reported on the consolidated balance sheets approximate fair values due to the short-term nature of the assets and negligible credit risk. Restricted cash accounts held by securitization trusts are included in other assets.

Finance Receivables

The fair values of the Company’s retail loans and dealer wholesale loans are based on estimated proceeds of hypothetical whole loan transactions. It is assumed that market participants in whole loan transactions would acquire the loans with the intent of securitizing the loans. Internally developed valuation models are used to estimate the pricing of securitization transactions, which is adjusted for the estimated costs of securitization transactions and required profit margins of market participants. The models incorporate projected cash flows of the underlying receivables, which include prepayment and credit loss assumptions. The models also incorporate current market interest rates and market spreads for the credit and liquidity risk of securities issued in the securitizations. The estimated fair values of the Company’s dealer commercial loans are based on a discounted cash flow model.

Debt

The fair value of the Company’s debt is estimated based on a discounted cash flow analysis. Projected cash flows are discounted using current market interest rates and credit spreads for debt with similar maturities. The Company’s specific nonperformance risk is reflected in the credit spreads on the Company’s unsecured debt.

The above fair value estimates are made at a specific point in time, based on relevant market information and information about the financial instrument. These estimates do not reflect any premium or discount that could result from offering for sale at one time the Company’s entire holdings of a particular financial instrument. Because no active market exists for a portion of the Company’s financial instruments, fair value estimates of such financial instruments are based on judgments regarding future expected loss experience, current economic conditions, risk characteristics, and other factors. These estimates are subjective in nature and involve uncertainties and matters of significant judgment and, therefore, cannot be determined with precision. Changes in assumptions could significantly affect the estimates.

Fair value information presented in the tables above is based on information available at December 31, 2015 and March 31, 2015. Although the Company is not aware of any factors that would significantly affect the estimated fair value amounts, such amounts have not been updated since those dates, and therefore, the current estimates of fair value at dates subsequent to those dates may differ significantly from the amounts presented herein.

Segment Reporting

The Company’s reportable segments are based on the two geographic regions where operating results are measured and evaluated by management: the United States and Canada.

Segment performance is evaluated using an internal measurement basis, which differs from the Company’s consolidated results prepared in accordance with GAAP. Segment performance is evaluated on a pre-tax basis before the effect of valuation adjustments on derivative instruments and revaluations of foreign currency denominated debt. Since the Company does not elect to apply hedge accounting, the impact to earnings resulting from these valuation adjustments as reported under GAAP is not representative of segment performance as evaluated by management. Realized gains and losses on derivative instruments, net of realized gains and losses on foreign currency denominated debt, are included in the measure of net revenues when evaluating segment performance.

No adjustments are made to segment performance to allocate any revenues or expenses. Financing products offered throughout the United States and Canada are substantially similar. Segment revenues from the various financing products are reported on the same basis as GAAP consolidated results.