Recent Accounting Pronouncements

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2022

New Accounting Pronouncements And Changes In Accounting Principles [Abstract]

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

(14) Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Accounting Standards Adopted in 2021

ASU 2018-14:  The FASB issued ASU 2018-14, Compensation – Retirement Benefits – Defined Benefit Plans – General (Subtopic 715-20): Disclosure Framework – Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Defined Benefit Plans

This ASU, issued as part of the FASB’s disclosure framework project to improve the effectiveness of disclosures in financial statements, amends the disclosure requirements related to defined benefit pension and other postretirement plans by removing and adding certain disclosures.  

The ASU was effective for public business entities for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2020 and Mid Penn adopted this standard effective January 1, 2021 on a prospective basis.

As a result of this ASU, several disclosures were removed from Topic 715, including: (i) disclosures of the amounts in accumulated comprehensive income expected to be recognized as components of net periodic benefit cost over the next fiscal year, and (ii) the effects of a one-percentage point change in the assumed health care cost trend rates on the aggregate of service and interest cost components of net periodic postretirement health care benefit costs.  However, some additional disclosures will be required as a result of this ASU, including the requirement to disclose an explanation for significant gains and losses related to changes in the benefit obligation for the period.  Mid Penn discloses condensed information related to its defined benefit plans in interim periods, therefore, the prospective adoption of this ASU will result in disclosure changes only to Mid Penn’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021 when expanded disclosures are made. The adoption of this standard did not impact Mid Penn’s overall financial condition.

ASU 2019-12:  The FASB issued ASU 2019-12, Income Taxes (Topic 740)

This ASU simplifies the accounting for income taxes by eliminating certain exceptions to the guidance in ASC 740 related to (i) the approach for intra-period tax allocation, (ii) the methodology for calculating income taxes in an interim period, and (iii) the recognition of deferred tax liabilities for outside basis differences. The new guidance also simplifies aspects of the accounting for franchise taxes and enacted changes in tax laws or rates and clarifies the accounting for transactions that result in a step-up in the tax basis of goodwill. Finally, it clarifies that single-member limited liability companies and similar disregarded entities that are not subject to income tax are not required to recognize an allocation of consolidated income tax expense in their separate financial statements, but they could elect to do so. ASU 2019-12 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2020. ASU 2019-12 did not have a material impact on Mid Penn’s overall financial condition.

Accounting Standards Pending Adoption

ASU No. 2022-02: The FASB issued ASU 2022-02, Financial Instruments—Credit Losses (Topic 326): Troubled Debt Restructurings and Vintage Disclosures.

This ASU eliminates the TDR recognition and measurement guidance and, instead, requires that an entity evaluate (consistent with the accounting for other loan modifications) whether a modification represents a new loan or a continuation of an existing loan. In addition, this ASU enhances existing disclosure requirements and introduces new requirements related to certain modifications of receivables made to borrowers experiencing financial difficulty.

For public business entities, this ASU requires that an entity disclose current-period gross write-offs by year of origination for financing receivables and net investment in leases within the scope of Subtopic 326-20. Gross write-off information must be included in the vintage disclosures required for public business entities in accordance with paragraph 326-20-50-6, which requires that an entity disclose the amortized cost basis of financing receivables by credit quality indicator and class of financing receivable by year of origination.

For entities that have adopted the amendments in update 2016-13, the amendments in this update are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2022, including interim periods within those fiscal years. For entities that have not yet adopted the amendments in update 2016-13, the effective dates for the amendments in this update are the same as the effective dates in Update 2016-13. The Company has not yet adopted this accounting standard as ASU 2016-13 has not been adopted. Management continues to evaluate the impact of its future adoption of this guidance on the Company’s financial statements.

ASU 2016-13:  The FASB issued ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments, as further amended.

The ASU requires credit losses on most financial assets measured at amortized cost and certain other instruments to be measured using an expected credit loss model (referred to as the current expected credit loss (“CECL”) model).  Under this model, entities will estimate credit losses over the entire contractual term of the instrument (considering estimated prepayments, but not expected extensions or modifications unless reasonable expectation of a troubled debt restructuring exists) from the date of initial recognition of that instrument.

The ASU also replaces the current accounting model for purchased credit impaired loans and debt securities.  The allowance for purchased financial assets with a more-than insignificant amount of credit deterioration since origination (“PCD assets”) should be determined in a similar manner to other financial assets measured on an amortized cost basis.  However, upon initial recognition, the allowance is added to the purchase price (“gross up approach”) to determine the initial amortized cost basis.  The subsequent accounting for PCD financial assets is the same expected loss model described above.

Further, the ASU made certain targeted amendments to the existing impairment model for available-for-sale debt securities.  For an AFS debt security for which there is neither the intent nor a more-likely-than-not requirement to sell, an entity will record credit losses as an allowance rather than a write-down of the amortized cost basis.  Certain incremental disclosures are required.

Subsequently, the FASB issued ASU 2018-19, ASU 2019-04, ASU 2019-05, ASU 2019-10, ASU 2019-11, and ASU 2020-02 to clarify, improve, or defer the adoption of ASU 2016-13.

In October 2019, the FASB issued ASU 2019-10 which deferred the implementation date of ASU 2016-13 for smaller reporting companies (SRCs) until January 1, 2023.  The effective date for larger SEC filers would remain unchanged at January 1, 2020.  Mid Penn qualifies as an SRC as of the most recent measurement date of September 30, 2019; therefore, Mid Penn has chosen to delay the adoption of ASU 2016-13.  

Mid Penn is currently evaluating the details of this ASU and the impact the guidance will have on Mid Penn’s consolidated financial statements.  Mid Penn expects that it is possible that the ASU may result in an increase in the allowance for credit losses resulting from the change to expected losses for the estimated life of the financial asset, including an allowance for debt securities.  The amount of the change in the allowance for credit losses, if any, resulting from the new guidance will be impacted by the portfolio composition and asset quality at the adoption date, as well as economic conditions and forecasts at the time of adoption.  Mid Penn will continue to collect the required data elements needed implement the CECL model in advance of the January 1, 2023 adoption date.