Note 3.

Significant Accounting Policies

The firm’s significant accounting policies include when and how to measure the fair value of assets and liabilities, accounting for goodwill and identifiable intangible assets, and when to consolidate an entity. See Notes 5 through 8 for policies on fair value measurements, Note 13 for policies on goodwill and identifiable intangible assets, and below and Note 12 for policies on consolidation accounting. All other significant accounting policies are either described below or included in the following footnotes:



Financial Instruments Owned, at Fair Value and Financial Instruments Sold, But Not Yet Purchased, at Fair Value			Note 4

Fair Value Measurements			Note 5

Cash Instruments			Note 6

Derivatives and Hedging Activities			Note 7

Fair Value Option			Note 8

Loans Receivable			Note 9

Collateralized Agreements and Financings			Note 10

Securitization Activities			Note 11

Variable Interest Entities			Note 12

Other Assets			Note 13

Deposits			Note 14

Short-Term Borrowings			Note 15

Long-Term Borrowings			Note 16

Other Liabilities and Accrued Expenses			Note 17

Commitments, Contingencies and Guarantees			Note 18

Shareholders’ Equity			Note 19

Regulation and Capital Adequacy			Note 20

Earnings Per Common Share			Note 21

Transactions with Affiliated Funds			Note 22

Interest Income and Interest Expense			Note 23

Income Taxes			Note 24

Business Segments			Note 25

Credit Concentrations			Note 26

Legal Proceedings			Note 27

Consolidation

The firm consolidates entities in which the firm has a controlling financial interest. The firm determines whether it has a controlling financial interest in an entity by first evaluating whether the entity is a voting interest entity or a variable interest entity (VIE).

Voting Interest Entities. Voting interest entities are entities in which (i) the total equity investment at risk is sufficient to enable the entity to finance its activities independently and (ii) the equity holders have the power to direct the activities of the entity that most significantly impact its economic performance, the obligation to absorb the losses of the entity and the right to receive the residual returns of the entity. The usual condition for a controlling financial interest in a voting interest entity is ownership of a majority voting interest. If the firm has a controlling majority voting interest in a voting interest entity, the entity is consolidated.

Variable Interest Entities. A VIE is an entity that lacks one or more of the characteristics of a voting interest entity. The firm has a controlling financial interest in a VIE when the firm has a variable interest or interests that provide it with (i) the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance and (ii) the obligation to absorb losses of the VIE or the right to receive benefits from the VIE that could potentially be significant to the VIE. See Note 12 for further information about VIEs.

Equity-Method Investments. When the firm does not have a controlling financial interest in an entity but can exert significant influence over the entity’s operating and financial policies, the investment is accounted for either (i) under the equity method of accounting or (ii) at fair value by electing the fair value option available under U.S. GAAP. Significant influence generally exists when the firm owns 20% to 50% of the entity’s common stock or in-substance common stock.

In general, the firm accounts for investments acquired after the fair value option became available, at fair value. In certain cases, the firm applies the equity method of accounting to new investments that are strategic in nature or closely related to the firm’s principal business activities, when the firm has a significant degree of involvement in the cash flows or operations of the investee or when cost-benefit considerations are less significant. See Note 13 for further information about equity-method investments.

Investment Funds. The firm has formed numerous investment funds with third-party investors. These funds are typically organized as limited partnerships or limited liability companies for which the firm acts as general partner or manager. Generally, the firm does not hold a majority of the economic interests in these funds. These funds are usually voting interest entities and generally are not consolidated because third-party investors typically have rights to terminate the funds or to remove the firm as general partner or manager. Investments in these funds are generally measured at net asset value (NAV) and are included in “Financial instruments owned, at fair value.” See Notes 6, 18 and 22 for further information about investments in funds.

Use of Estimates

Preparation of these condensed consolidated financial statements requires management to make certain estimates and assumptions, the most important of which relate to fair value measurements, accounting for goodwill and identifiable intangible assets, discretionary compensation accruals, the provisions for losses that may arise from litigation, regulatory proceedings (including governmental investigations) and tax audits, and the allowance for losses on loans receivable and lending commitments held for investment. These estimates and assumptions are based on the best available information but actual results could be materially different.

Revenue Recognition

Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities at Fair Value. Financial instruments owned, at fair value and Financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair value are recorded at fair value either under the fair value option or in accordance with other U.S. GAAP. In addition, the firm has elected to account for certain of its other financial assets and financial liabilities at fair value by electing the fair value option. The fair value of a financial instrument is the amount 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. Financial assets are marked to bid prices and financial liabilities are marked to offer prices. Fair value measurements do not include transaction costs. Fair value gains or losses are generally included in “Market making” for positions in Institutional Client Services and “Other principal transactions” for positions in Investing & Lending. See Notes 5 through 8 for further information about fair value measurements.

Investment Banking. Fees from financial advisory assignments and underwriting revenues are recognized in earnings when the services related to the underlying transaction are completed under the terms of the assignment. Expenses associated with such transactions are deferred until the related revenue is recognized or the assignment is otherwise concluded. Expenses associated with financial advisory assignments are recorded as non-compensation expenses, net of client reimbursements. Underwriting revenues are presented net of related expenses.

Investment Management. The firm earns management fees and incentive fees for investment management services. Management fees for mutual funds are calculated as a percentage of daily net asset value and are received monthly. Management fees for hedge funds and separately managed accounts are calculated as a percentage of month-end net asset value and are generally received quarterly. Management fees for private equity funds are calculated as a percentage of monthly invested capital or commitments and are received quarterly, semi-annually or annually, depending on the fund. All management fees are recognized over the period that the related service is provided. Incentive fees are calculated as a percentage of a fund’s or separately managed account’s return, or excess return above a specified benchmark or other performance target. Incentive fees are generally based on investment performance over a 12-month period or over the life of a fund. Fees that are based on performance over a 12-month period are subject to adjustment prior to the end of the measurement period. For fees that are based on investment performance over the life of the fund, future investment underperformance may require fees previously distributed to the firm to be returned to the fund. Incentive fees are recognized only when all material contingencies have been resolved. Management and incentive fee revenues are included in “Investment management” revenues.

The firm makes payments to brokers and advisors related to the placement of the firm’s investment funds. These payments are calculated based on either a percentage of the management fee or the investment fund’s net asset value. Where the firm is principal to the arrangement, such costs are recorded on a gross basis and included in “Brokerage, clearing, exchange and distribution fees,” and where the firm is agent to the arrangement, such costs are recorded on a net basis in “Investment management” revenues.

Commissions and Fees. The firm earns “Commissions and fees” from executing and clearing client transactions on stock, options and futures markets, as well as over-the-counter (OTC) transactions. Commissions and fees are recognized on the day the trade is executed.

Transfers of Financial Assets

Transfers of financial assets are accounted for as sales when the firm has relinquished control over the assets transferred. For transfers of financial assets accounted for as sales, any gains or losses are recognized in net revenues. Assets or liabilities that arise from the firm’s continuing involvement with transferred financial assets are initially recognized at fair value. For transfers of financial assets that are not accounted for as sales, the assets generally remain in “Financial instruments owned, at fair value” and the transfer is accounted for as a collateralized financing, with the related interest expense recognized over the life of the transaction. See Note 10 for further information about transfers of financial assets accounted for as collateralized financings and Note 11 for further information about transfers of financial assets accounted for as sales.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

The firm defines cash equivalents as highly liquid overnight deposits held in the ordinary course of business. As of March 2017 and December 2016, “Cash and cash equivalents” included $14.27 billion and $11.15 billion, respectively, of cash and due from banks, and $108.77 billion and $110.56 billion, respectively, of interest-bearing deposits with banks. The firm segregates cash for regulatory and other purposes related to client activity. As of March 2017 and December 2016, $15.18 billion and $14.65 billion, respectively, of “Cash and cash equivalents” were segregated for regulatory and other purposes. See “Recent Accounting Developments” for further information.

In addition, the firm segregates securities for regulatory and other purposes related to client activity. See Note 10 for further information about segregated securities.

Receivables from and Payables to Brokers, Dealers and Clearing Organizations

Receivables from and payables to brokers, dealers and clearing organizations are accounted for at cost plus accrued interest, which generally approximates fair value. While these receivables and payables are carried at amounts that approximate fair value, they are not accounted for at fair value under the fair value option or at fair value in accordance with other U.S. GAAP and therefore are not included in the firm’s fair value hierarchy in Notes 6 through 8. Had these receivables and payables been included in the firm’s fair value hierarchy, substantially all would have been classified in level 2 as of March 2017 and December 2016.

Receivables from Customers and Counterparties Receivables from customers and counterparties generally relate to collateralized transactions. Such receivables are primarily comprised of customer margin loans, certain transfers of assets accounted for as secured loans rather than purchases at fair value and collateral posted in connection with certain derivative transactions. Substantially all of these receivables are accounted for at amortized cost net of estimated uncollectible amounts. Certain of the firm’s receivables from customers and counterparties are accounted for at fair value under the fair value option, with changes in fair value generally included in “Market making” revenues. See Note 8 for further information about receivables from customers and counterparties accounted for at fair value under the fair value option. In addition, as of March 2017 and December 2016, the firm’s receivables from customers and counterparties included $2.91 billion and $2.60 billion, respectively, of loans held for sale, accounted for at the lower of cost or fair value. See Note 5 for an overview of the firm’s fair value measurement policies.

As of March 2017 and December 2016, the carrying value of receivables not accounted for at fair value generally approximated fair value. While these receivables are carried at amounts that approximate fair value, they are not accounted for at fair value under the fair value option or at fair value in accordance with other U.S. GAAP and therefore are not included in the firm’s fair value hierarchy in Notes 6 through 8. Had these receivables been included in the firm’s fair value hierarchy, substantially all would have been classified in level 2 as of March 2017 and December 2016. Interest on receivables from customers and counterparties is recognized over the life of the transaction and included in “Interest income.”

Payables to Customers and Counterparties

Payables to customers and counterparties primarily consist of customer credit balances related to the firm’s prime brokerage activities. Payables to customers and counterparties are accounted for at cost plus accrued interest, which generally approximates fair value. While these payables are carried at amounts that approximate fair value, they are not accounted for at fair value under the fair value option or at fair value in accordance with other U.S. GAAP and therefore are not included in the firm’s fair value hierarchy in Notes 6 through 8. Had these payables been included in the firm’s fair value hierarchy, substantially all would have been classified in level 2 as of March 2017 and December 2016. Interest on payables to customers and counterparties is recognized over the life of the transaction and included in “Interest expense.”

Offsetting Assets and Liabilities

To reduce credit exposures on derivatives and securities financing transactions, the firm may enter into master netting agreements or similar arrangements (collectively, netting agreements) with counterparties that permit it to offset receivables and payables with such counterparties. A netting agreement is a contract with a counterparty that permits net settlement of multiple transactions with that counterparty, including upon the exercise of termination rights by a non-defaulting party. Upon exercise of such termination rights, all transactions governed by the netting agreement are terminated and a net settlement amount is calculated. In addition, the firm receives and posts cash and securities collateral with respect to its derivatives and securities financing transactions, subject to the terms of the related credit support agreements or similar arrangements (collectively, credit support agreements). An enforceable credit support agreement grants the non-defaulting party exercising termination rights the right to liquidate the collateral and apply the proceeds to any amounts owed. In order to assess enforceability of the firm’s right of setoff under netting and credit support agreements, the firm evaluates various factors including applicable bankruptcy laws, local statutes and regulatory provisions in the jurisdiction of the parties to the agreement.

Derivatives are reported on a net-by-counterparty basis (i.e., the net payable or receivable for derivative assets and liabilities for a given counterparty) in the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition when a legal right of setoff exists under an enforceable netting agreement. Resale and repurchase agreements and securities borrowed and loaned transactions with the same term and currency are presented on a net-by-counterparty basis in the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition when such transactions meet certain settlement criteria and are subject to netting agreements.

In the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition, derivatives are reported net of cash collateral received and posted under enforceable credit support agreements, when transacted under an enforceable netting agreement. In the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition, resale and repurchase agreements, and securities borrowed and loaned, are not reported net of the related cash and securities received or posted as collateral. See Note 10 for further information about collateral received and pledged, including rights to deliver or repledge collateral. See Notes 7 and 10 for further information about offsetting.

Share-based Compensation

The cost of employee services received in exchange for a share-based award is generally measured based on the grant-date fair value of the award. Share-based awards that do not require future service (i.e., vested awards, including awards granted to retirement-eligible employees) are expensed immediately. Share-based awards that require future service are amortized over the relevant service period. Effective January 2017, forfeitures are recorded when they occur. Prior to January 2017, expected forfeitures were estimated and recorded over the vesting period. See “Recent Accounting Developments — Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting (ASC 718)” for additional information.

The firm pays cash dividend equivalents on outstanding restricted stock units (RSUs), which are charged to retained earnings. If RSUs that require future service are forfeited, the related dividend equivalents originally charged to retained earnings are reclassified to compensation expense in the period in which forfeiture occurs.

The firm generally issues new shares of common stock upon delivery of share-based awards. In certain cases, primarily related to conflicted employment (as outlined in the applicable award agreements), the firm may cash settle share-based compensation awards accounted for as equity instruments. For these awards, whose terms allow for cash settlement, additional paid-in capital is adjusted to the extent of the difference between the value of the award at the time of cash settlement and the grant-date value of the award.

Foreign Currency Translation

Assets and liabilities denominated in non-U.S. currencies are translated at rates of exchange prevailing on the date of the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition and revenues and expenses are translated at average rates of exchange for the period. Foreign currency remeasurement gains or losses on transactions in nonfunctional currencies are recognized in earnings. Gains or losses on translation of the financial statements of a non-U.S. operation, when the functional currency is other than the U.S. dollar, are included, net of hedges and taxes, in the condensed consolidated statements of comprehensive income.

Recent Accounting Developments

Revenue from Contracts with Customers (ASC 606). In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606).” This ASU, as amended, provides comprehensive guidance on the recognition of revenue from customers arising from the transfer of goods and services, guidance on accounting for certain contract costs, and new disclosures.

The ASU is effective for the firm in January 2018 under a modified retrospective approach or retrospectively to all periods presented. The firm’s implementation efforts include identifying revenues and costs within the scope of the ASU, reviewing contracts, and analyzing any changes to its existing revenue recognition policies. As a result of adopting this ASU, the firm may, among other things, be required to recognize incentive fees earlier than under the firm’s current revenue recognition policy, which defers recognition until all contingencies are resolved. The firm may also be required to change the current presentation of certain costs from a net presentation within net revenues to a gross basis, or vice versa. Based on implementation work to date, the firm does not currently expect that the ASU will have a material impact on its financial condition, results of operations or cash flows on the date of adoption.

Measuring the Financial Assets and the Financial Liabilities of a Consolidated Collateralized Financing Entity (ASC 810). In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-13, “Consolidation (Topic 810) — Measuring the Financial Assets and the Financial Liabilities of a Consolidated Collateralized Financing Entity (CFE).” This ASU provides an alternative to reflect changes in the fair value of the financial assets and the financial liabilities of the CFE by measuring either the fair value of the assets or liabilities, whichever is more observable, and provides new disclosure requirements for those electing this approach.

The firm adopted the ASU in January 2016. Adoption of the ASU did not materially affect the firm’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis (ASC 810). In February 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-02, “Consolidation (Topic 810) — Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis.” This ASU eliminates the deferral of the requirements of ASU No. 2009-17, “Consolidations (Topic 810) — Improvements to Financial Reporting by Enterprises Involved with Variable Interest Entities” for certain interests in investment funds and provides a scope exception for certain investments in money market funds. It also makes several modifications to the consolidation guidance for VIEs and general partners’ investments in limited partnerships, as well as modifications to the evaluation of whether limited partnerships are VIEs or voting interest entities.

The firm adopted the ASU in January 2016, using a modified retrospective approach. The impact of adoption was a net reduction to both total assets and total liabilities of approximately $200 million, substantially all included in “Financial instruments owned, at fair value” and in “Other liabilities and accrued expenses,” respectively. Adoption of this ASU did not have an impact on the firm’s results of operations. See Note 12 for further information about the adoption.

Simplifying the Accounting for Measurement-Period Adjustments (ASC 805). In September 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-16, “Business Combinations (Topic 805) — Simplifying the Accounting for Measurement-Period Adjustments.” This ASU eliminates the requirement for an acquirer in a business combination to account for measurement-period adjustments retrospectively.

The firm adopted the ASU in January 2016. Adoption of the ASU did not materially affect the firm’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities (ASC 825). In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01, “Financial Instruments (Topic 825) — Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities.” This ASU amends certain aspects of recognition, measurement, presentation and disclosure of financial instruments. It includes a requirement to present separately in other comprehensive income changes in fair value attributable to a firm’s own credit spreads (debt valuation adjustment or DVA), net of tax, on financial liabilities for which the fair value option was elected.

The ASU is effective for the firm in January 2018. Early adoption is permitted under a modified retrospective approach for the requirements related to DVA. In January 2016, the firm early adopted this ASU for the requirements related to DVA and reclassified the cumulative DVA, a gain of $305 million (net of tax), from retained earnings to accumulated other comprehensive loss. The firm does not expect the adoption of the remaining provisions of the ASU to have a material impact on its financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Leases (ASC 842). In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, “Leases (Topic 842).” This ASU requires that, for leases longer than one year, a lessee recognize in the statements of financial condition a right-of-use asset, representing the right to use the underlying asset for the lease term, and a lease liability, representing the liability to make lease payments. It also requires that for finance leases, a lessee recognize interest expense on the lease liability, separately from the amortization of the right-of-use asset in the statements of earnings, while for operating leases, such amounts should be recognized as a combined expense. In addition, this ASU requires expanded disclosures about the nature and terms of lease agreements.

The ASU is effective for the firm in January 2019 under a modified retrospective approach. Early adoption is permitted. The firm’s implementation efforts include reviewing existing leases and service contracts, which may include embedded leases. The firm expects a gross up on its consolidated statements of financial condition upon recognition of the right-of-use assets and lease liabilities and does not expect the amount of the gross up to have a material impact on its financial condition.

Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting (ASC 718). In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09, “Compensation — Stock Compensation (Topic 718) — Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting.” This ASU includes a requirement that the tax effect related to the settlement of share-based awards be recorded in income tax benefit or expense in the statements of earnings rather than directly to additional paid-in capital. This change has no impact on total shareholders’ equity and is required to be adopted prospectively. The ASU also allows for forfeitures to be recorded when they occur rather than estimated over the vesting period. This change is required to be applied on a modified retrospective basis.

The firm adopted the ASU in January 2017 and the impact of the RSU deliveries and option exercises in the first quarter of 2017 was a reduction to the provision for taxes of $475 million, which was recognized in the condensed consolidated statements of earnings. The impact will vary in future periods depending upon, among other things, the number of RSUs delivered and their change in value since grant. Prior to the adoption of this ASU, this amount would have been recorded directly to additional paid-in capital. The firm also elected to account for forfeitures as they occur, rather than to estimate forfeitures over the vesting period, and the cumulative effect of this election upon adoption was an increase of $35 million to “Share-based awards” and a decrease of $24 million (net of tax of $11 million) to “Retained earnings” within the condensed consolidated statements of changes in shareholders’ equity.

In addition, the ASU modifies the classification of certain share-based payment activities within the statements of cash flows. As a result, the firm reclassified, on a retrospective basis, a cash outflow of $888 million related to the settlement of share-based awards in satisfaction of withholding tax requirements from operating activities to financing activities and a cash inflow of $54 million of excess tax benefits related to share-based awards from financing activities to operating activities within the condensed consolidated statements of cash flows for the three months ended March 2016.

Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments (ASC 326). In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13, “Financial Instruments — Credit Losses (Topic 326) — Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments.” This ASU amends several aspects of the measurement of credit losses on financial instruments, including replacing the existing incurred credit loss model and other models with the Current Expected Credit Losses (CECL) model and amending certain aspects of accounting for purchased financial assets with deterioration in credit quality since origination.

Under CECL, the allowance for losses for financial assets that are measured at amortized cost should reflect management’s estimate of credit losses over the remaining expected life of the financial assets. Expected credit losses for newly recognized financial assets, as well as changes to expected credit losses during the period, would be recognized in earnings. For certain purchased financial assets with deterioration in credit quality since origination, an initial allowance would be recorded for expected credit losses and recognized as an increase to the purchase price rather than as an expense. Expected credit losses, including losses on off-balance-sheet exposures such as lending commitments, will be measured based on historical experience, current conditions and forecasts that affect the collectability of the reported amount.

The ASU is effective for the firm in January 2020 under a modified retrospective approach. Early adoption is permitted in January 2019. Adoption of the ASU will result in earlier recognition of credit losses and an increase in the recorded allowance for certain purchased loans with deterioration in credit quality since origination with a corresponding increase to their gross carrying value. The impact of adoption of this ASU on the firm’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flows will depend on, among other things, the economic environment and the type of financial assets held by the firm on the date of adoption.

Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments (ASC 230). In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-15, “Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230) — Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments.” This ASU provides guidance on the disclosure and classification of certain items within the statements of cash flows.

The ASU is effective for the firm in January 2018 under a retrospective approach. Early adoption is permitted. Since the ASU only impacts classification in the statements of cash flows, adoption will not affect the firm’s cash and cash equivalents.

Restricted Cash (ASC 230). In November 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-18, “Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230) — Restricted Cash.” This ASU requires that cash segregated for regulatory and other purposes be included in cash and cash equivalents disclosed in the statements of cash flows and is required to be applied retrospectively.

The firm early adopted the ASU in December 2016 and reclassified cash segregated for regulatory and other purposes into “Cash and cash equivalents” disclosed in the consolidated statements of cash flows. The impact of adoption was an increase of $448 million for the three months ended March 2016 to “Net cash used for operating activities.” In addition, in December 2016, to be consistent with the presentation of segregated cash in the consolidated statements of cash flows under the ASU, the firm reclassified amounts previously included in “Cash and securities segregated for regulatory and other purposes” into “Cash and cash equivalents,” “Securities purchased under agreements to resell and federal funds sold,” “Securities borrowed” and “Financial instruments owned, at fair value,” in the consolidated statements of financial condition. Previously reported amounts in the condensed consolidated statements of cash flows and notes to the condensed consolidated financial statements have been conformed to the current presentation.

Clarifying the Definition of a Business (ASC 805). In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-01, “Business Combinations (Topic 805) — Clarifying the Definition of a Business.” The ASU amends the definition of a business and provides a threshold which must be considered to determine whether a transaction is an acquisition (or disposal) of an asset or a business. The ASU is effective for the firm in January 2018 under a prospective approach. Early adoption is permitted. The impact of this ASU will depend on the nature of the firm’s activities after adoption, although the firm expects that fewer transactions will be treated as acquisitions (or disposals) of businesses.

Clarifying the Scope of Asset Derecognition Guidance and Accounting for Partial Sales of Nonfinancial Assets (ASC 610-20). In February 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-05, “Other Income — Gains and Losses from the Derecognition of Nonfinancial Assets (Subtopic 610-20) — Clarifying the Scope of Asset Derecognition Guidance and Accounting for Partial Sales of Nonfinancial Assets.” The ASU clarifies the scope of guidance applicable to sales of nonfinancial assets and also provides guidance on accounting for partial sales of such assets.

The ASU is effective for the firm in January 2018 under a retrospective or modified retrospective approach. The firm is still evaluating the effect of the ASU on its financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.