XML 41 R25.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.21.2

Goodwill | 6 Months Ended
--- | ---
Jun. 30, 2021
Goodwill and Intangible Assets Disclosure [Abstract] |
Goodwill | Goodwill The excess purchase price over the fair value of the assets acquired and the liabilities assumed by PNMR for its 2005 acquisition of TNP was recorded as goodwill and was pushed down to the businesses acquired. In 2007, the TNMP assets that were included in its New Mexico operations, including goodwill, were transferred to PNM. PNMR’s reporting units that currently have goodwill are PNM and TNMP. The Company evaluates its goodwill for impairment annually at the reporting unit level or more frequently if circumstances indicate that the goodwill may be impaired. Application of the impairment test requires judgment, including the identification of reporting units, assignment of assets and liabilities to reporting units, and determination of the fair value of each reporting unit. In certain circumstances an entity may perform a qualitative analysis to conclude that the goodwill of a reporting unit is not impaired. Under a qualitative assessment an entity considers macroeconomic conditions, industry and market considerations, cost factors, overall financial performance, other relevant entity-specific events affecting a reporting unit, as well as whether a sustained decrease (both absolute and relative to its peers) in share price has occurred. An entity considers the extent to which each of the adverse events and circumstances identified could affect the comparison of a reporting unit’s fair value with its carrying amount. An entity places more weight on the events and circumstances that most affect a reporting unit’s fair value or the carrying amount of its net assets. An entity also considers positive and mitigating events and circumstances that may affect its determination of whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. An entity evaluates, on the basis of the weight of evidence, the significance of all identified events and circumstances in the context of determining whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. A quantitative analysis is not required if, after assessing events and circumstances, an entity determines that it is not more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. In other circumstances, an entity may perform a quantitative analysis to reach the conclusion regarding impairment with respect to a reporting unit. An entity may choose to perform a quantitative analysis without performing a qualitative analysis and may perform a qualitative analysis for certain reporting units, but a quantitative analysis for others. The first step of the quantitative impairment test requires an entity to compare the fair value of the reporting unit with its carrying value, including goodwill. If, as a result of this analysis, the entity concludes there is an indication of impairment in a reporting unit having goodwill, the entity is required to perform the second step of the impairment analysis, determining the amount of goodwill impairment to be recorded. The amount is calculated by comparing the implied fair value of the goodwill to its carrying amount. This exercise would require the entity to allocate the fair value determined in step one to the individual assets and liabilities of the reporting unit. Any remaining fair value would be the implied fair value of goodwill on the testing date. To the extent the recorded amount of goodwill of a reporting unit exceeds the implied fair value determined in step two, an impairment loss would be reflected in results of operations. PNMR periodically updates its quantitative analysis for both PNM and TNMP. The use of a quantitative approach in a given period is not necessarily an indication that a potential impairment has been identified under a qualitative approach. When PNMR performs a quantitative analysis for PNM or TNMP, a discounted cash flow methodology is primarily used to estimate the fair value of the reporting unit. This analysis requires significant judgments, including estimations of future cash flows, which is dependent on internal forecasts, estimations of long-term growth rates for the business, and determination of appropriate weighted average cost of capital for the reporting unit. Changes in these estimates and assumptions could materially affect the determination of fair value and the conclusion of impairment. When PNMR performs a qualitative or quantitative analysis for PNM or TNMP, PNMR considers market and macroeconomic factors including changes in growth rates, changes in the WACC, and changes in discount rates. PNMR also evaluates its stock price relative to historical performance, industry peers, and to major market indices, including an evaluation of PNMR’s market capitalization relative to the carrying value of its reporting units. For its annual evaluations performed as of April 1, 2020, PNMR performed a qualitative analysis for the PNM reporting unit and a quantitative analysis for the TNMP reporting unit. In addition to the typical considerations discussed above, the qualitative analysis considered changes in PNM’s expectations of future financial performance since the April 1, 2018 quantitative analysis performed for PNM, as well as the previous qualitative analyses through April 1, 2019. The April 1, 2018 quantitative evaluations indicated the fair value of the PNM reporting unit, which has goodwill of $51.6 million, exceeded its carrying value by approximately 19%. Based on an evaluation of these and other factors, the Company determined it was not more likely than not that the April 1, 2020 carrying value of PNM exceeded its fair value. Using the methods and considerations discussed above, the 2020 quantitative analysis indicated the fair value of the TNMP reporting unit, which has goodwill of $226.7 million, exceeded its carrying value by approximately 38%. Based on an evaluation of these and other factors, the Company determined it was not more likely than not that the April 1, 2020 carrying value of TNMP exceeded its fair value. For its annual evaluations performed as of April 1, 2021, PNMR performed a qualitative analysis for both the PNM and TNMP reporting units. In addition to the typical considerations discussed above, the qualitative analysis considered changes in the Company's expectations of future financial performance since the April 1, 2020 qualitative analysis for PNM and the quantitative analysis for TNMP. This analysis considered Company specific events such as the Merger, potential impacts of legal and regulatory matters discussed in Note 11 and Note 12, including potential outcomes in PNM’s Four Corners Abandonment Application, and other potential impacts of changes in PNM’s resource needs based on PNM’s 2020 IRP. Based on an evaluation of these and other factors, the Company determined it was not more likely than not that the April 1, 2021 carrying values of PNM and TNMP exceeded their fair value. Since the April 1, 2021 annual evaluation, there have been no events, including the Merger (Note 18), or indications that the fair values of the reporting units with recorded goodwill have decreased below their carrying values.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_GoodwillAndIntangibleAssetsDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for goodwill. + References Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 350 -SubTopic 20 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/subtopic&trid=2144439 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_GoodwillDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration