Recent Accounting Pronouncements

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2011

Recent Accounting Pronouncements [Abstract]

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

15. Recent Accounting Pronouncements

          In June 2011, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2011-05, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Presentation of Comprehensive Income. Under the amendments to this Update, an entity has the option to present the total of comprehensive income, the components of net income, and the components of other comprehensive income either in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements. In both choices, an entity is required to present each component of net income along with total net income, each component of other comprehensive income along with a total for other comprehensive income, and a total amount for comprehensive income. This Update eliminates the option to present the components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in stockholders’ equity. The amendments in this Update do not change the items that must be reported in other comprehensive income or when an item of other comprehensive income must be reclassified to net income. For the Company, this guidance is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2011. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently assessing its implementation of this new guidance.

          In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-04, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (Topic 820): Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs. The amendments in this Update result in common fair value measurement and disclosure requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs. Consequently, the amendments change the wording used to describe many of the requirements in U.S. GAAP for measuring fair value and for disclosing information about fair value measurements. For many of the requirements, the Board does not intend for the amendments in this Update to result in a change in the application of the requirements in Topic 820. Some of the amendments clarify the Board’s intent about the application of existing fair value measurement requirements. Other amendments change a particular principle or requirement for measuring fair value or for disclosing information about fair value measurements. For the Company, this guidance is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2011. Early adoption is not permitted. The Company is currently assessing its implementation of this new guidance, but does not expect a material impact on the consolidated financial statements.

          In December 2010, the FASB issued ASU No. 2010-28, Intangibles-Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): When to Perform Step 2 of the Goodwill Impairment Test for Reporting Units with Zero or Negative Carrying Amounts (a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force). The amendments in this ASU modify Step 1 of the goodwill impairment test for reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts. For those reporting units, an entity is required to perform Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test if it is more likely than not that a goodwill impairment exists. In determining whether it is more likely than not that a goodwill impairment exists, an entity should consider whether there are any adverse qualitative factors indicating that an impairment may exist. The qualitative factors are consistent with the existing guidance which requires that goodwill of a reporting unit be tested for impairment between annual tests if an event occurs or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying amount. For the Company, this guidance is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2010. Early adoption is not permitted. The Company has adopted ASU No. 2010-28 and its adoption has not had an impact on its consolidated results of operations and financial condition.

          In October 2009, the FASB issued ASU No. 2009-14, Software (Topic 985): Certain Revenue Arrangements That Include Software Elements (a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force). This new guidance amends the scope of existing software revenue recognition accounting. Tangible products containing software components and non-software components that function together to deliver the product’s essential functionality would be scoped out of the accounting guidance on software and accounted for based on other appropriate revenue recognition guidance. For the Company, this guidance is effective for all new or materially modified arrangements entered into on or after January 1, 2011 with earlier application permitted as of the beginning of a fiscal year. Full retrospective application of the new guidance is optional. This guidance must be adopted in the same period that the company adopts the amended accounting for arrangements with multiple deliverables described in the next paragraph. The Company has adopted ASU No. 2009-14 and its adoption has not had an impact on its consolidated results of operations and financial condition.

          In October 2009, the FASB issued ASU No. 2009-13, Revenue Recognition (Topic 605): Multiple-Deliverable Revenue Arrangements. ASU No. 2009-13 amends revenue recognition guidance for arrangements with multiple deliverables. The new guidance eliminates the residual method of revenue recognition and allows the use of management’s best estimate of selling price for individual elements of an arrangement when vendor specific objective evidence (“VSOE”), vendor objective evidence (“VOE”) or third-party evidence (“TPE”) is unavailable. For the Company, this guidance is effective for all new or materially modified arrangements entered into on or after January 1, 2011 with earlier application permitted as of the beginning of a fiscal year. Full retrospective application of the new guidance is optional. The Company has adopted ASU No. 2009-13 this period and its adoption has not had an impact on its consolidated results of operations and financial condition.