For cash flow reporting purposes, cash and cash equivalents include cash on hand, amounts due from banks, and money market investments, which include federal funds sold and reverse repurchase agreements. At December 31, 2018 and 2017, the Company’s cash and cash equivalents totaled $1.5 billion and $2.5 billion, respectively. Included in cash and cash equivalents at those dates were $1.3 billion and $2.1 billion, respectively, of interest-bearing deposits in other financial institutions, primarily consisting of balances due from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Also included in cash and cash equivalents at December 31, 2018 and 2017 were federal funds sold of $5.2 million and $3.1 million, respectively. There were no pledged reverse repurchase agreements outstanding at December 31, 2018. The Company had $250.0 million in pledged reverse repurchase agreements outstanding at December 31, 2017.

The securities portfolio primarily consists of mortgage-related securities and, to a lesser extent, debt and equity (together, “other”) securities. Securities that are classified as “available for sale” are carried at their estimated fair value, with any unrealized gains or losses, net of taxes, reported as accumulated other comprehensive income or loss in stockholders’ equity. Securities that the Company has the intent and ability to hold to maturity are classified as “held to maturity” and carried at amortized cost, less the non-credit portion of OTTI recorded in AOCL, net of tax.

The fair values of our securities—and particularly our fixed-rate securities—are affected by changes in market interest rates and credit spreads. In general, as interest rates rise and/or credit spreads widen, the fair value of fixed-rate securities will decline. As interest rates fall and/or credit spreads tighten, the fair value of fixed-rate securities will rise. We regularly conduct a review and evaluation of our securities portfolio to determine if the decline in the fair value of any security below its carrying amount is other than temporary. If we deem any such decline in value to be other than temporary, the security is written down to its current fair value, creating a new cost basis, and the resultant loss (other than the OTTI of debt securities attributable to non-credit factors) is charged against earnings and recorded in “Non-interest income.” Our assessment of a decline in fair value requires judgment as to the financial position and future prospects of the entity that issued the investment security, as well as a review of the security’s underlying collateral. Broad changes in the overall market or interest rate environment generally will not lead to a write-down.

In accordance with OTTI accounting guidance, unless we have the intent to sell, or it is more likely than not that we may be required to sell a security before recovery, OTTI is recognized as a realized loss in earnings to the extent that the decline in fair value is credit-related. If there is a decline in fair value of a security below its carrying amount and we have the intent to sell it, or it is more likely than not that we may be required to sell the security before recovery, the entire amount of the decline in fair value is charged to earnings.

The Company conducts a periodic review and evaluation of its FHLB-NY stock to determine if any impairment exists. The factors considered in this process include, among others, significant deterioration in FHLB-NY earnings performance, credit rating, or asset quality; significant adverse changes in the regulatory or economic environment; and other factors that could raise significant concerns about the creditworthiness and the ability of the FHLB-NY to continue as a going concern.

On June 27, 2017, the Company entered into an agreement to sell its mortgage banking business, which was acquired as part of its 2009 FDIC-assisted acquisition of AmTrust and is reported under the Company’s Residential Mortgage Banking segment, to Freedom Mortgage Corporation (“Freedom”). On September 29, 2017, the sale was completed with proceeds received in the amount of $226.6 million, resulting in a gain of $7.4 million, which is included in “Non-Interest Income” in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. Freedom acquired both the Company’s origination and servicing platforms, as well as its mortgage servicing loan portfolio of $20.5 billion and related MSRs asset of $208.8 million.

Accordingly, all of the loans held for sale that were outstanding at December 31, 2017, were originated by the Bank through its previous mortgage banking operation, and were sold to Freedom. Such loans were carried at fair value, which was primarily based on quoted market prices for securities backed by similar types of loans. The changes in fair value of these assets were largely driven by changes in mortgage interest rates subsequent to loan funding. In addition, loans originated as “held for investment” and subsequently designated as “held for sale” are transferred to held for sale at fair value.

Additionally, the Company received approval from the FDIC to sell assets covered under its LSA, early terminate the LSA, and entered into an agreement to sell the majority of its one-to-four family residential mortgage-related assets, including those covered under the LSA, to an affiliate of Cerberus Capital Management, L.P. (“Cerberus”). On July 28, 2017, the Company completed the sale, resulting in the receipt of proceeds of $1.9 billion from Cerberus and the FDIC and settled the related FDIC loss share receivable, resulting in a gain of $74.6 million which is included in “Non-Interest Income” in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. As a result of this sale the Company had no covered loans at December 31, 2017 or 2018.

Two factors are considered in determining the amount of prepayment income: the prepayment penalty percentage set forth in the loan documents, and the principal balance of the loan at the time of prepayment. The volume of loans prepaying may vary from one period to another, often in connection with actual or perceived changes in the direction of market interest rates. When interest rates are declining, rising precipitously, or perceived to be on the verge of rising, prepayment income may increase as more borrowers opt to refinance and lock in current rates prior to further increases taking place.

A loan generally is classified as a “non-accrual” loan when it is 90 days or more past due or when it is deemed to be impaired because the Company no longer expects to collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms of the loan agreement. When a loan is placed on non-accrual status, management ceases the accrual of interest owed, and previously accrued interest is charged against interest income. A loan is generally returned to accrual status when the loan is current and management has reasonable assurance that the loan will be fully collectible. Interest income on non-accrual loans is recorded when received in cash.

The methodology used for the allocation of the allowance for loan losses at December 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017 was generally comparable, whereby the Bank segregated their loss factors (used for both criticized and non-criticized loans) into a component that was primarily based on historical loss rates and a component that was primarily based on other qualitative factors that are probable to affect loan collectability. In determining the allowance for loan losses, management considers the Bank’s current business strategies and credit processes, including compliance with applicable regulatory guidelines and with guidelines approved by the Board of Directors with regard to credit limitations, loan approvals, underwriting criteria, and loan workout procedures.

Specific valuation allowances are established based on management’s analyses of individual loans that are considered impaired. If a loan is deemed to be impaired, management measures the extent of the impairment and establishes a specific valuation allowance for that amount. A loan is classified as impaired when, based on current information and/or events, it is probable that we will be unable to collect all amounts due under the contractual terms of the loan agreement. We apply this classification as necessary to loans individually evaluated for impairment in our portfolios. Smaller-balance homogenous loans and loans carried at the lower of cost or fair value are evaluated for impairment on a collective, rather than individual, basis. Loans to certain borrowers who have experienced financial difficulty and for which the terms have been modified, resulting in a concession, are considered TDRs and are classified as impaired.

We primarily measure impairment on an individual loan and determine the extent to which a specific valuation allowance is necessary by comparing the loan’s outstanding balance to either the fair value of the collateral, less the estimated cost to sell, or the present value of expected cash flows, discounted at the loan’s effective interest rate. Generally, when the fair value of the collateral, net of the estimated cost to sell, or the present value of the expected cash flows is less than the recorded investment in the loan, any shortfall is promptly charged off.

We also follow a process to assign the general valuation allowance to loan categories. The general valuation allowance is established by applying our loan loss provisioning methodology, and reflect the inherent risk in outstanding held-for-investment loans. This loan loss provisioning methodology considers various factors in determining the appropriate quantified risk factors to use to determine the general valuation allowance.

The factors assessed begin with the historical loan loss experience for each major loan category. We also take into account an estimated historical loss emergence period (which is the period of time between the event that triggers a loss and the confirmation and/or charge-off of that loss) for each loan portfolio segment.

The allocation methodology consists of the following components: First, we determine an allowance for loan losses based on a quantitative loss factor for loans evaluated collectively for impairment. This quantitative loss factor is based primarily on historical loss rates, after considering loan type, historical loss and delinquency experience, and loss emergence periods. The quantitative loss factors applied in the methodology are periodically re-evaluated and adjusted to reflect changes in historical loss levels, loss emergence periods, or other risks. Lastly, we allocate an allowance for loan losses based on qualitative loss factors. These qualitative loss factors are designed to account for losses that may not be provided for by the quantitative loss component due to other factors evaluated by management, which include, but are not limited to:

We charge off loans, or portions of loans, in the period that such loans, or portions thereof, are deemed uncollectible. The collectability of individual loans is determined through an assessment of the financial condition and repayment capacity of the borrower and/or through an estimate of the fair value of any underlying collateral. For non-real estate-related consumer credits, the following past-due time periods determine when charge-offs are typically recorded: (1) Closed-end credits are charged off in the quarter that the loan becomes 120 days past due; (2) Open-end credits are charged off in the quarter that the loan becomes 180 days past due; and (3) Both closed-end and open-end credits are typically charged off in the quarter that the credit is 60 days past the date we received notification that the borrower has filed for bankruptcy.

The level of future additions to the respective loan loss allowance is based on many factors, including certain factors that are beyond management’s control, such as changes in economic and local market conditions, including declines in real estate values, and increases in vacancy rates and unemployment. Management uses the best available information to recognize losses on loans or to make additions to the loan loss allowance; however, the Bank may be required to take certain charge-offs and/or recognize further additions to the loan loss allowance, based on the judgment of regulatory agencies with regard to information provided during their examinations of the Bank.

We have significant intangible assets related to goodwill. In connection with our acquisitions, assets acquired and liabilities assumed are recorded at their estimated fair values. Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price of our acquisitions over the fair value of identifiable net assets acquired, including other identified intangible assets. Our goodwill is evaluated for impairment annually as of year-end or more frequently if conditions exist that indicate that the value may be impaired. We test our goodwill for impairment at the reporting unit level. These impairment evaluations are performed by comparing the carrying value of the goodwill of a reporting unit to its estimated fair value. We allocate goodwill to reporting units based on the reporting unit expected to benefit from the business combination. We had previously identified two reporting units: our Banking Operations reporting unit and our Residential Mortgage Banking reporting unit. On September 29, 2017, the Company sold the Residential Mortgage Banking reporting unit. Our reporting unit is the same as our operating segment and reportable segment. If we change our strategy or if market conditions shift, our judgments may change, which may result in adjustments to the recorded goodwill balance.

For annual goodwill impairment testing, we have the option to first perform a qualitative assessment to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, including goodwill and other intangible assets. If we conclude that this is the case, we must perform the two-step test described below. If we conclude based on the qualitative assessment that it is not more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, we have completed our goodwill impairment test and do not need to perform the two-step test.

Step one requires the fair value of each reporting unit is compared to its carrying value in order to identify potential impairment. If the fair value of a reporting unit exceeds the carrying value of its net assets, goodwill is not considered impaired and no further testing is required. If the carrying value of the net assets exceeds the fair value of a reporting unit, potential impairment is indicated at the reporting unit level and step two of the impairment test is performed.

Step two requires that when potential impairment is indicated in step one, we compare the implied fair value of goodwill with the carrying amount of that goodwill. Determining the implied fair value of goodwill requires a valuation of the reporting unit’s tangible and (non-goodwill) intangible assets and liabilities in a manner similar to the allocation of the purchase price in a business combination. Any excess in the value of a reporting unit over the amounts assigned to its assets and liabilities is referred to as the implied fair value of goodwill. If the carrying amount of the reporting unit goodwill exceeds the implied fair value of that goodwill, an impairment loss is recognized in an amount equal to that excess.

Premises, furniture, fixtures, and equipment are carried at cost, less the accumulated depreciation computed on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful lives of the respective assets (generally 20 years for premises and three to ten years for furniture, fixtures, and equipment). Leasehold improvements are carried at cost less the accumulated amortization computed on a straight-line basis over the shorter of the related lease term or the estimated useful life of the improvement.

The Company has purchased life insurance policies on certain employees. These BOLI policies are recorded in the Consolidated Statements of Condition at their cash surrender value. Income from these policies and changes in the cash surrender value are recorded in “Non-interest income” in the Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. At December 31, 2018 and 2017, the Company’s investment in BOLI was $977.6 million and $967.2 million, respectively. There were no additional purchases of BOLI during the years ended December 31, 2018 or 2017. The Company’s investment in BOLI generated income of $28.3 million, $27.1 million, and $31.0 million, respectively, during the years ended December 31, 2018, 2017, and 2016.

Repossessed assets consist of any property or other assets acquired through, or in lieu of, foreclosure are sold or rented, and are recorded at fair value, less the estimated selling costs, at the date of acquisition. Following foreclosure, management periodically performs a valuation of the asset, and the assets are carried at the lower of the carrying amount or fair value, less the estimated selling costs. Expenses and revenues from operations and changes in valuation, if any, are included in “General and administrative” expense in the Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. At December 31, 2018, the Company had $2.6 million of OREO and $

8.2

million of taxi medallions. At December 31, 2017, the Company had $

8.2

million of OREO and $8.2 million of taxi medallions.

Income tax expense consists of income taxes that are currently payable and deferred income taxes. Deferred income tax expense is determined by recognizing deferred tax assets and liabilities for future tax consequences attributable to temporary differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates that are expected to apply to taxable income in years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The Company assesses the deferred tax assets and establishes a valuation allowance when realization of a deferred asset is not considered to be “more likely than not.” The Company considers its expectation of future taxable income in evaluating the need for a valuation allowance.

The Company estimates income taxes payable based on the amount it expects to owe the various tax authorities (i.e., federal, state, and local). Income taxes represent the net estimated amount due to, or to be received from, such tax authorities. In estimating income taxes, management assesses the relative merits and risks of the appropriate tax treatment of transactions, taking into account statutory, judicial, and regulatory guidance in the context of the Company’s tax position. In this process, management also relies on tax opinions, recent audits, and historical experience. Although the Company uses the best available information to record income taxes, underlying estimates and assumptions can change over time as a result of unanticipated events or circumstances such as changes in tax laws and judicial guidance influencing its overall tax position.

Under the New York Community Bancorp, Inc. 2012 Stock Incentive Plan (the “2012 Stock Incentive Plan”), which was approved by the Company’s shareholders at its Annual Meeting on June 7, 2012, shares are available for grant as restricted stock or other forms of related rights. At December 31, 2018, the Company had 4,951,108 shares available for grant under the 2012 Stock Incentive Plan. Compensation cost related to restricted stock grants is recognized on a straight-line basis over the vesting period. For a more detailed discussion of the Company’s stock-based compensation, see Note 13, “Stock-Related Benefit Plans.”

The Company’s pension benefit obligations and post-retirement health and welfare benefit obligations, and the related costs, are calculated using actuarial concepts in accordance with GAAP. The measurement of such obligations and expenses requires that certain assumptions be made regarding several factors, most notably including the discount rate and the expected rate of return on plan assets. The Company evaluates these assumptions on an annual basis. Other factors considered by the Company in its evaluation include retirement patterns, mortality rates, turnover, and the rate of compensation increase.

Unvested stock-based compensation awards containing non-forfeitable rights to dividends paid on the Company’s common stock are considered participating securities, and therefore are included in the two-class method for calculating EPS. Under the two-class method, all earnings (distributed and undistributed) are allocated to common shares and participating securities based on their respective rights to receive dividends on the common stock. The Company grants restricted stock to certain employees under its stock-based compensation plan. Recipients receive cash dividends during the vesting periods of these awards, including on the unvested portion of such awards. Since these dividends are non-forfeitable, the unvested awards are considered participating securities and therefore have earnings allocated to them.

	Years Ended December 31,
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)	2018			2017			2016
Net income available to common shareholders	$	389,589		$	441,580		$	495,401
Less: Dividends paid on and earnings allocated to participating securities		(4,871	)		(3,554	)		(3,795	)
Earnings applicable to common stock	$	384,718		$	438,026		$	491,606
Weighted average common shares outstanding		487,287,872			487,073,951			485,150,173
Basic earnings per common share	$	0.79		$	0.90		$	1.01
Earnings applicable to common stock	$	384,718		$	438,026		$	491,606
Weighted average common shares outstanding		487,287,872			487,073,951			485,150,173
Potential dilutive common shares		—			—			—
Total shares for diluted earnings per common share computation		487,287,872			487,073,951			485,150,173
Diluted earnings per common share and common share equivalents	$	0.79		$	0.90		$	1.01

The Company adopted ASU No. 2018-02, Income Statement-Reporting Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Reclassification of Certain Tax Effects from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income, effective January 1, 2018. ASU No. 2018-02 addresses a narrow-scope financial reporting issue that arose as a consequence of the enactment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. ASU No. 2018-02 permits an election to reclassify from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) to retained earnings the standard tax effects resulting from the difference between the historical federal corporate income tax rate of 35% and the newly enacted 21% federal corporate income tax rate. Effective January 1, 2018, the Company recorded a reclassification adjustment of $

2.5

million decreasing AOCL and increasing retained earnings. The Company’s only components of AOCL are the fair value adjustment for securities available for sale and the tax effected related pension and post-retirement obligations.

The Company adopted ASU No. 2018-16, Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815)—Inclusion of the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR) Overnight Index Swap (OIS) Rate as a Benchmark Interest Rate for Hedge Accounting Purposes, effective on its issuance date of October 25, 2018. The purpose of ASU 2018-16 is to permit the use of the OIS rate based on SOFR as a U.S. benchmark interest rate for hedge accounting purposes under Topic 815. The amendments in ASU 2018-16 are required to be applied prospectively for qualifying new or redesignated hedging relationships entered into on or after the date of adoption. As

of December 31, 2018,

the Company had no identified accounting hedges in place, and as such,

adoption of ASU No. 2018-16 had no impact on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Condition, results of operations, or cash flows.

The Company adopted ASU No. 2017-12, Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities, effective January 1, 2018. ASU No. 2017-12 changes the recognition and presentation requirements as well as the cost and complexity of applying hedge accounting by easing the requirements for effectiveness testing and hedge documentation. As

of December 31, 2018,

the Company had no identified accounting hedges in place, and as such, adoption of ASU No. 2017-12 had no impact on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Condition, results of operations, or cash flows.

The Company adopted ASU No. 2017-09, Compensation—Stock Compensation (Topic 718) as of January 1, 2018. The ASU’s amendments are applied prospectively to awards modified on or after the effective date. ASU No. 2017-09 clarifies when changes to the terms or conditions of a share-based payment award should be accounted for as a modification. Modification accounting is applied only if the fair value, the vesting conditions, and the classification of the award (as an equity or liability instrument) change as a result of the change in terms or conditions. The adoption of ASU No. 2017-09 did not have an effect on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Condition, results of operations, or cash flows.

The Company adopted ASU No. 2017-07, Improving the Presentation of Net Periodic Pension Cost and Net Periodic Post-retirement Benefit Cost, on January 1, 2018. ASU No. 2017-07 requires companies to present the service cost component of net benefit cost in the income statement line items where they report compensation cost, and all other components of net benefit cost in the income statement separately from the service cost component and outside of operating income, if this subtotal is presented. Additionally, the service cost component is the only component that can be capitalized. The standard required retrospective application for the amendments related to the presentation of the service cost component and other components of net benefit cost, and prospective application for the amendments related to the capitalization requirements for the service cost components of net benefit cost. The adoption of ASU No. 2017-07 did not have a material effect on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Condition, results of operations, or cash flows.

The Company adopted ASU No. 2016-18, Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Restricted Cash, on January 1, 2018, with retrospective application. ASU No. 2016-18 requires that the reconciliation of the beginning-of-period and end-of-period cash and cash equivalent amounts shown on the statement of cash flows include restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents. If restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents are presented separately from cash and cash equivalents on the balance sheet, entities are required to reconcile the amounts presented on the statement of cash flows to the amounts on the balance sheet. Entities are also required to disclose information regarding the nature of the restrictions. The adoption of ASU No. 2016-18 did not have an impact on the Company’s financial position or results of operations, or cash flows.

The Company adopted ASU No. 2016-15, Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments on January 1, 2018 with retrospective application. ASU No. 2016-15 addresses the following cash flow issues: debt prepayment or debt extinguishment costs; settlement of zero-coupon debt instruments or other debt instruments with coupon interest rates that are insignificant in relation to the effective interest rate of the borrowing; contingent consideration payments made after a business combination; proceeds from the settlement of insurance claims; proceeds from the settlement of corporate-owned life insurance policies (including BOLI policies); distributions received from equity method investees; beneficial interests in securitization transactions; and separately identifiable cash flows and application of the predominance principle. The adoption of ASU No. 2016-15 did not have a material effect on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Condition, results of operations, or cash flows.

The Company adopted ASU No. 2016-01, Financial Instruments—Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities by means of a cumulative-effect adjustment as of January 1, 2018. ASU No. 2016-01 provides targeted improvements to GAAP including, amongst other improvements, the requirement for equity investments (except those accounted for under the equity method of accounting or those that result in consolidation of the investee) to be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income, thus eliminating eligibility for the available-for-sale category. FHLB stock, however, is not in the scope of ASU No. 2016-01 and will continue to be presented at historical cost. Upon adoption, an immaterial amount of unrealized losses related to the in-scope equity securities was reclassified from other comprehensive loss to retained earnings and equity investments were reclassified from securities available for sale to other assets with their related market value changes reflected in earnings for the twelve months ended December 31, 2018. In addition, the fair value disclosures for financial instruments in Note 14 are computed using an exit price notion as required by ASU No. 2016-01.

The Company adopted ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers and its amendments which established ASC Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, on January 1, 2018 using the modified retrospective approach. In summary, the core principle of ASC Topic 606 is that an entity recognizes revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. The Company’s revenue streams that are covered by ASC Topic 606 are primarily fees earned in connection with performing services for our customers such as investment advisor fees, wire transfer fees, and bounced check fees. Such fees are either satisfied over time if the service is performed over a period of time (as with investment advisor fees or safe deposit box rental fees), or satisfied at a point in time (as with wire transfer fees and bounced check fees). The Company recognizes fees for services performed over the time period to which the fees relate. The Company recognizes fees earned at a point in time on the day the fee is earned. The modified retrospective approach includes presenting the cumulative effect of initial application, if any, along with supplementary disclosures, if any. The Company did not record a cumulative effect adjustment upon adoption of the standard.

In March 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-08, Receivables—Nonrefundable Fees and Other Costs (Subtopic 310-20): Premium Amortization on Purchased Callable Debt Securities. ASU No. 2017-08 specifies that the premium amortization period ends at the earliest call date, rather than the contractual maturity date, for purchased non-contingently callable debt securities. Shortening the amortization period is generally expected to more closely align the interest income recognition with the expectations incorporated in the market pricing of the underlying securities. The shorter amortization period means that interest income would generally be lower in the periods before the earliest call date and higher thereafter (if the security is not called) compared to current GAAP. Currently, the premium is amortized to the contractual maturity date under GAAP. Because the premium will be amortized to the earliest call date, the holder will not recognize a loss in earnings for the unamortized premium when the call is exercised. ASU No. 2017-08 specifies that the transition approach to the standard be accounted for on a modified retrospective basis with a cumulative effect adjustment through retained earnings as of the beginning of the period of adoption. The Company plans to adopt ASU No. 2017-08 effective January 1, 2019 and the adoption is not expected to have a material effect on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Condition, results of operations, or cash flows.

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-04, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment. ASU No. 2017-04 eliminates the second step of the goodwill impairment test which requires an entity to determine the implied fair value of the reporting unit’s goodwill. Instead, an entity will recognize an impairment loss if the carrying value of the net assets assigned to the reporting unit exceeds the fair value of the reporting unit, with the impairment loss not to exceed the amount of goodwill recorded. ASU No. 2017-04 does not amend the optional qualitative assessment of goodwill impairment. The Company plans to adopt ASU No. 2017-04 prospectively beginning January 1, 2020 and the impact of its adoption on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Condition, results of operations, or cash flows will be dependent upon goodwill impairment determinations made after that date.

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13, Financial Instruments—Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments. ASU No. 2016-13 amends guidance on reporting credit losses for assets held on an amortized cost basis and available-for-sale debt securities. For assets held at amortized cost, ASU No. 2016-13 eliminates the probable initial recognition threshold in current GAAP and, instead, requires an entity to reflect its current estimate of all expected credit losses. Current GAAP requires an “incurred loss” methodology for recognizing credit losses that delays recognition until it is probable a loss has been incurred. The amendments in ASU No. 2016-13 replace the incurred loss impairment methodology in current GAAP with a methodology that reflects the measurement of expected credit losses based on relevant information about past events, including historical loss experience, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts that affect the collectability of the reported amounts. The allowance for credit losses is a valuation account that is deducted from the amortized cost basis of the financial assets to present the net amount expected to be collected. For available-for-sale debt securities, credit losses should be measured in a manner similar to current GAAP; however, ASU No. 2016-13 will require that credit losses be presented as an allowance rather than as a write-down. The amendments affect loans, debt securities, trade receivables, net investments in leases, off-balance sheet credit exposures, reinsurance receivables, and any other financial assets not excluded from the scope that have the contractual right to receive cash.

The Company will adopt ASU No. 2016-13

as of January 1, 2020 on a modified retrospective basis with a

cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of

the adoption date. However, a

prospective

transition approach is required for debt securities for which an OTTI had been recognized before the effective date. The effect of a prospective transition approach is to maintain the same amortized cost basis before and after the effective date of ASU No. 2016-13. Amounts previously recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) as of the date of adoption that relate to improvements in cash flows expected to be collected will continue to be accreted into income over the remaining life of the asset. Recoveries of amounts previously written off relating to improvements in cash flows after the date of adoption will be recorded in earnings when received. Financial assets for which the guidance in Subtopic 310-30, Receivables—Loans and Debt Securities Acquired with Deteriorated Credit Quality (“PCD assets”), has previously been applied, will prospectively apply the guidance in ASU No. 2016-13 for PCD assets. A prospective transition approach will be used for PCD assets where upon adoption, the amortized cost basis will be adjusted to reflect the addition of the allowance for credit losses. This transition relief will avoid the need for a reporting entity to reassess its purchased financial assets that exist as of the date of adoption to determine whether it would have met at acquisition the new criteria of more-than insignificant credit deterioration since origination. The transition relief also will allow an entity to accrete the remaining noncredit discount (based on the revised amortized cost basis) into interest income at the effective interest rate at the adoption date of ASU No. 2016-13. The same transition requirements are be applied to beneficial interests that previously applied Subtopic 310-30 or have a significant difference between contractual cash flows and expected cash flows.

The Company is evaluating ASU No. 2016-13 and has a working group with multiple members from applicable departments to evaluate the requirements of the new standard, plan for loss modeling requirements consistent with lifetime expected loss estimates, and assess the impact it will have on current processes. This evaluation includes a review of existing credit models to identify areas where existing credit models used to comply with other regulatory requirements may be leveraged and areas where new models may be required. The adoption of ASU No. 2016-13 could have a material effect on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Condition and results of operations. The extent of the impact upon adoption will likely depend on the characteristics of the Company’s loan portfolio and economic conditions at that date, as well as forecasted conditions thereafter.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases (“Topic 842”), and subsequently issued four amendments to the ASU: ASU No. 2018-01, Leases (Topic 842): Land Easement Practical Expedient Transition to Topic 842; ASU 2018-10, Codification Improvements to Topic 842, Leases;

ASU 2018-11, Leases (Topic 842): Targeted Improvements; and ASU 2018-20, Narrow-Scope Improvements. The Company will adopt the ASUs as of January 1, 2019 on a modified retrospective basis with a cumulative-effect adjustment through retained earnings as of the date of adoption. Topic 842 is intended to improve financial reporting about leasing transactions and the key provision impacting the Company is the requirement for a lessee to record a right-of-use asset and a liability, which represents the obligation to make lease payments for long-term operating leases. Additionally, ASU 2016-02 includes quantitative and qualitative disclosures required by lessees and lessors to help financial statement users better understand the amount, timing, and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases. Topic 842 includes a number of optional practical expedients that entities may elect to apply. The Company plans to adopt the practical expedients of: not reevaluating whether or not a contract contains a lease; retaining current lease classification; not reassessing initial direct costs for existing leases; and not reassessing existing land easements that were not previously accounted for as leases under current lease accounting rules. The Company will not utilize the practical expedient of hindsight in its lease assessments. The Company’s working group, comprised of associates from disciplines such as Vendor Risk Management, Real Estate, Technology, and Accounting, has completed its review for embedded leases in the Company’s contractual arrangements in an effort to identify the Company’s full lease population. To date, we have found only an immaterial amount of embedded leases in our non-lease contracts. We are presently evaluating all of our leases for compliance with the new lease accounting rules and as a lessor and lessee, we do not anticipate the classification of our leases to change. However, the Company’s assets and liabilities will increase by an immaterial amount based on the present value of remaining lease payments for leases in place at the adoption date.

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-13, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Disclosure Framework – Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement. The purpose of ASU 2018-13 is to improve the effectiveness of disclosures in the notes to financial statements by facilitating clear communication of the information required by GAAP that is most important to users of each entity’s financial statements. The amendments in ASU 2018-13 are effective for the Company as of January 1, 2020. Early adoption is permitted and an entity is permitted to early adopt any removed or modified disclosures upon issuance of the ASU and delay adoption of the additional disclosures until their effective date. The amendments removed the disclosure requirements for transfers between Levels 1 and 2 of the fair value hierarchy, the disclosure of the policy for timing of transfers between levels of the fair value hierarchy, and the disclosure of the valuation processes for Level 3 fair value measurements. Additionally, the amendments modified the disclosure requirements for investments in certain entities that calculate net asset value and measurement uncertainty. Finally, the amendments added disclosure requirements for the changes in unrealized gains and losses included in other comprehensive income for recurring Level 3 fair value measurements and the range and weighted average of significant unobservable inputs used to develop Level 3 measurements. The amendments on changes in unrealized gains and losses, the range and weighted average of significant unobservable inputs used to develop Level 3 fair value measurements and the narrative description of measurement uncertainty should be applied prospectively for only the most recent interim or annual period presented in the initial fiscal year of adoption. All other amendments should be applied retrospectively to all periods presented upon their effective date. The adoption of ASU 2018-13 is not expected to have a material effect on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Condition, results of operations, or cash flows.

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-15, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other – Internal Use Software (Subtopic 350-40): Customer’s Accounting for Implementation Costs Incurred in a Cloud Computing Arrangement that is a Service Contract. ASU 2018-15 aligns the requirements for capitalizing implementation costs incurred in a hosting arrangement that is a service contract with the requirements for capitalizing implementation costs incurred to develop or obtain internal-use software (and hosting arrangements that include an internal-use software license). The accounting for the service element of a hosting arrangement that is a service contract is not affected by the amendment.

ASU No. 2018-15 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 31, 2019. The Company plans to early adopt ASU 2018-15 as of January 1, 2019. The adoption of ASU 2018-15 is not expected to have a material effect on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Conditions, results of operations, or cash flows.