Adoption of Accounting Pronouncements

In October 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued Accounting Standards Update ("ASU") 2010-26, Financial Services-Insurance (Topic 944): Accounting for Costs Associated with Acquiring or Renewing Insurance Contracts (“ASU 2010-26”). ASU 2010-26 requires that only costs that are incremental or directly related to the successful acquisition of new or renewal insurance contracts are to be capitalized as a deferred acquisition cost. This includes, among other items, sales commissions paid to our distribution partners, premium taxes, and the portion of employee salaries and benefits directly related to time spent on acquired contracts. We adopted this guidance on January 1, 2012, with retrospective application.

In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-04, Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRS (“ASU 2011-04”). This guidance changes the wording used to describe the requirements in U.S. GAAP for measuring fair value and disclosing information about fair value measurements to improve consistency in the application and description of fair value between GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards. ASU 2011-04 clarifies that the concepts of highest and best use and valuation premise in a fair value measurement are relevant only when measuring the fair value of nonfinancial assets, and are not relevant when measuring the fair value of financial assets or liabilities. In addition, ASU 2011-04 expands the disclosures for unobservable inputs for Level 3 fair value measurements, requiring quantitative and qualitative information to be disclosed related to: (i) the valuation processes used; (ii) the sensitivity of the fair value measurement to changes in unobservable inputs and the interrelationships between those unobservable inputs; and (iii) the use of a nonfinancial asset in a way that differs from the asset’s highest and best use. ASU 2011-04 was effective prospectively for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011. We have included the disclosures required by this guidance in our notes to the Financial Statements, where appropriate.

In June 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-05, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Presentation of Comprehensive Income

(“ASU 2011-05”). ASU 2011-05 requires that all non-owner changes in stockholders’ equity be presented either in a single

continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements. This standard eliminates the

option to report OCI and its components in the statement of stockholders’ equity. ASU 2011-05 was effective, on a retrospective basis, for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011. Based on an amendment issued in December 2011, companies were not required to present separate line items on the income statement for reclassification adjustments out of AOCI into net income, as would have been required under the initial ASU. This guidance, which is ASU 2011-12, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Deferral of the Effective Date for Amendments to the Presentation of Reclassifications of Items Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income in Accounting Standards Update No. 2011-05, was effective concurrently with ASU 2011-05. We have included a Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Income as part of the Financial Statements to comply with the presentation required under this accounting guidance.

In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-08, Intangibles-Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Testing Goodwill for Impairment ("ASU 2011-08"), which simplifies the requirements to test goodwill for impairment. ASU 2011-08 permits an entity to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. If, after assessing events and circumstances, an entity determines that it is not more likely than not that the fair value of the reporting unit is less than the carrying amount, then performing the two-step impairment test is unnecessary. However, if the entity concludes otherwise, then it is required to perform the quantitative impairment test. ASU 2011-08 was effective for annual and interim goodwill impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011, and early adoption was permitted. The adoption of this guidance did not impact our financial condition or results of operation.

In July 2012, the FASB issued ASU 2012-02, Intangibles-Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Testing Indefinite-Lived Intangible Assets for Impairment ("ASU 2012-02"), which reduces the cost and complexity of performing an impairment test for indefinite-lived intangible assets. This guidance permits an entity to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that an indefinite-lived intangible asset is impaired as a basis for determining whether it is necessary to perform a quantitative impairment test. ASU 2012-02 was effective for annual and interim intangible impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning on, or after, September 15, 2012, and early adoption was permitted. The adoption of this guidance did not impact our financial condition or results of operation.

In February 2013, the FASB issued ASU 2013-02, Reporting of Amounts Reclassified Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income ("ASU 2013-02"), which adds new disclosure requirements for items reclassified out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income ("AOCI"). ASU 2013-02 requires entities to disclose additional information about reclassification adjustments, including: (i) changes in AOCI balances by component; and (ii) significant items reclassified out of AOCI. Prospective application of ASU 2013-02 was effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2012. We have included the disclosures required by ASU 2013-02 in the notes to our Financial Statements, as appropriate.

In July 2013, the FASB issued ASU No. 2013-11, Income Taxes, Presentation of an Unrecognized Tax Benefit When a Net Operating Loss Carryforward, a Similar Tax Loss, or a Tax Credit Carryforward Exists (a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force) ("ASU 2013-11"). ASU 2013-11 applies to all entities with unrecognized tax benefits that also have tax loss or tax credit carryforwards in the same tax jurisdiction as of the reporting date. An unrecognized tax benefit is the difference between a tax position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return and the benefit that is more likely than not sustainable under examination. Under ASU 2013-11, an entity must net an unrecognized tax benefit, or a portion of an unrecognized tax benefit, against deferred tax assets for a net operating loss ("NOL") carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward except when:


•	An NOL carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryfoward is not available as of the reporting date under the governing tax law to settle taxes that would result from the disallowance of the tax position; or


•	The entity does not intend to use the deferred tax asset for this purpose.

If either of these conditions exist, an entity should present an unrecognized tax benefit in the financial statements as a liability and should not net the unrecognized tax benefit with a deferred tax asset. ASU 2013-11 was effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2013. The adoption of this guidance did not impact our financial condition or results of operation.

In January 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-01, Accounting for Investments in Qualified Affordable Housing Projects ("ASU 2014-01"). ASU 2014-01 applies to all reporting entities that invest in flow-through limited liability entities that manage or invest in affordable housing projects that qualify for a low-income housing tax credit. ASU 2014-01 permits reporting entities to make an accounting policy election to account for their investments in qualified affordable housing projects using a newly defined "proportional amortization method" if certain conditions are met. This policy election is required to be applied consistently to all qualifying investments, rather than a decision to be applied to individual investments. Under the proportional amortization method, an entity amortizes the initial cost of the investment in proportion to the tax credits and other tax benefits received, and recognizes the net investment performance in the income statement as components of income tax expense (benefit). When a company does not make a policy election to account for investments in qualified affordable housing projects using the proportional amortization method, these investments are required to be accounted for as an equity method investment or a cost method investment. ASU 2014-01 is effective for public business entities for annual periods and interim periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2014, with early adoption being permitted. During the third quarter of 2014, we adopted this guidance and have made a policy election to use the proportional amortization method. The adoption of this guidance did not materially impact our financial condition or results of operation.

Pronouncements to be effective in the future

In June 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-12, Accounting for Share-Based Payments When the Terms of an Award Provide That a Performance Target Could Be Achieved after the Requisite Service Period (“ASU 2014-12”). ASU 2014-12 applies to all reporting entities that grant their employees share-based payments in which the terms of the award provide that a performance target that affects vesting could be achieved after the requisite service period. That is the case when an employee is eligible to retire or otherwise terminate employment before the end of the period in which a performance target could be achieved and still be eligible to vest in the award if and when the performance target is achieved. ASU 2014-12 is intended to resolve the diverse accounting treatment of these types of awards in practice. Many reporting entities were accounting for these types of performance targets as non-vesting conditions that affect the grant-date fair value of the award while other entities treated these performance targets as performance conditions that do not affect the grant-date fair value of the award. ASU 2014-12 clarifies that these types of performance targets should be treated as performance conditions that do not impact the grant-date fair value of the award. This guidance is effective for annual periods and interim periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2015. The implementation of ASU 2014-12 will not affect us, as we are currently recording expense consistent with the requirements of this accounting update.

In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-15, Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern (“ASU 2014-15”). ASU 2014-15 provides guidance about management’s responsibility to evaluate whether there is substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern and to provide related footnote disclosures. Currently U.S. auditing standards and federal securities law require that an auditor evaluate whether there is substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern for a reasonable period of time not to exceed one year beyond the date of the financial statements being audited. Due to lack of guidance about management’s responsibility and the differing views about when there is substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern, there is diversity in whether, when, and how an entity discloses the relevant conditions and events in its footnotes. In connection with preparing financial statements for each annual and interim reporting period, an entity's management should evaluate whether there are conditions or events, considered in the aggregate, that raise considerable doubt about the entity's ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the date that the financial statements are issued (or within one year after the date that the financial statements are to be issued when applicable). The amendments in ASU 2014-15 clarify the timing and content of footnote disclosures. ASU 2014-15 is effective for annual periods ending after December 15, 2016, and interim periods beginning in 2017. Early application is permitted. The adoption of this ASU is not expected to impact the Company.