XML 159 R28.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT

Significant Accounting Policies (Policies)

12 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2019

Organization Consolidation And Presentation Of Financial Statements [Abstract]

Principles of consolidation and basis of presentation

On September 20, 2016, Ashland was reincorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware through a tax-free reorganization under a new holding company structure (the Reorganization). As a result of the Reorganization, Ashland Global Holdings Inc. replaced Ashland Inc. as the publicly held corporation and, through its subsidiaries, now conducts all of the operations that historically were conducted by Ashland Inc. Pursuant to the terms of the Reorganization, each outstanding share of Ashland common stock was automatically converted into one share of Ashland Global Holdings Inc. common stock. Following consummation of the Reorganization, (i) Ashland Inc. was converted into Ashland LLC, an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of Ashland Global Holdings Inc., and (ii) Ashland Global Holdings Inc., as the new holding company, through its subsidiaries, conducts all of the operations conducted by Ashland Inc. immediately prior to the Reorganization. The Consolidated Financial Statements include the accounts of Ashland Global Holdings Inc. and its majority owned subsidiaries and, when applicable, entities for which Ashland has a controlling financial interest or is the primary beneficiary (Ashland). For entities for which Ashland has a controlling financial interest but owns less than 100%, the outside stockholders’ interests are shown as noncontrolling interests. Investments in joint ventures and 20% to 50% owned affiliates where Ashland has the ability to exert significant influence are accounted for under the equity method.

The accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (U.S. GAAP) and U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulations. All intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated. Additionally, certain prior period data, primarily related to discontinued operations, have been reclassified in the Consolidated Financial Statements and accompanying notes to conform to the current period presentation, as further described in this section.

On May 12, 2017, Ashland completed the distribution of its remaining 170 million shares of common stock of Valvoline Inc. which represented approximately 83% of the total outstanding shares of Valvoline Inc.'s common stock. This distribution of Valvoline represented a strategic shift in Ashland's business and, in accordance with U.S. GAAP, qualified as a discontinued operation. Accordingly, Valvoline's assets, liabilities, operating results and cash flows for all periods presented have been classified as discontinued operations within the Consolidated Financial Statements. See Note B for additional information on the separation of Valvoline Inc. The term Valvoline as used herein, depending on context, refers to either Valvoline Inc. or Valvoline as a previous reportable segment of Ashland.

On August 30, 2019, Ashland completed the sale of its Composites business (excluding Ashland’s maleic anhydride business (Maleic business)) and its butanediol facility in Marl, Germany (Marl facility). This disposal group represented a strategic shift in Ashland’s business and in accordance with U.S. GAAP, qualified as a discontinued operation. Accordingly, Composites (including the Maleic business) and the Marl facility assets, liabilities, operating results and cash flows for all periods presented have been classified as discontinued operations within the Consolidated Financial Statements. See Note D for additional information on the Composites business and Marl facility.

Subsequent to completing the separation from Valvoline Inc. and the Composites business (including the Maleic business) and Marl facility sale, Ashland's operations are managed within the following two reportable segments: Specialty Ingredients and Intermediates and Solvents.

During the periods presented in the Consolidated Financial Statements, Ashland sold certain assets in its portfolio of businesses which, in accordance with U.S. GAAP, were not reflected as discontinued operations. See Notes D and S for additional information on these transactions as well as Ashland’s current reportable segment results.

Use of estimates, risks and uncertainties

The preparation of Ashland’s Consolidated Financial Statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and the disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities. Significant items that are subject to such estimates and assumptions include, but are not limited to, environmental remediation, asbestos litigation, long-lived assets (including goodwill and other intangible

assets) and income taxes. Although management bases its estimates on historical experience and various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, actual results could differ significantly from the estimates under different assumptions or conditions.

Ashland’s results are affected by domestic and international economic, political, legislative, regulatory and legal actions. Economic conditions, such as recessionary trends, inflation, interest and monetary exchange rates, government fiscal policies and changes in the prices of certain key raw materials, can have a significant effect on operations. While Ashland maintains reserves for anticipated liabilities and carries various levels of insurance, Ashland could be affected by civil, criminal, regulatory or administrative actions, claims or proceedings relating to asbestos, environmental remediation or other matters.

Cash and cash equivalents

Cash and cash equivalents include cash on hand and highly liquid investments maturing within three months after purchase.

Allowance for doubtful accounts

Ashland records an allowance for doubtful accounts as a best estimate of the amount of probable credit losses for accounts receivable. Ashland reviews this allowance and considers factors such as customer credit, past transaction history with the customer and changes in customer payment terms when determining whether the collection of a receivable is reasonably assured. Past due balances over 90 days and over a specified amount are reviewed individually for collectibility. The allowance for doubtful accounts is adjusted when it becomes probable a receivable will not be recovered.

Inventories

Inventories are carried at the lower of cost or net realizable value. Inventories are primarily stated at cost using the weighted-average cost method. In addition, certain chemicals with a replacement cost of $66 million at September 30, 2019 and $70 million at September 30, 2018 are valued at cost using the last-in, first-out (LIFO) method.

Property, Plant and Equipment

Property, plant and equipment

The cost of property, plant and equipment is depreciated by the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets. Buildings are depreciated principally over 12 to 35 years and machinery and equipment principally over 2 to 25 years. Such costs are periodically reviewed for recoverability when impairment indicators are present. Such indicators include, among other factors, operating losses, unused capacity, market value declines and technological obsolescence. Recorded values of asset groups of property, plant and equipment that are not expected to be recovered through undiscounted future net cash flows are written down to current fair value, which generally is determined from estimated discounted future net cash flows (assets held for use) or net realizable value (assets held for sale).

Goodwill and other intangibles

Ashland tests goodwill and other indefinite-lived intangible assets for impairment annually as of July 1 and when events and circumstances indicate an impairment may have occurred. Ashland reviews goodwill for impairment based on its identified reporting units, which are defined as operating segments or groupings of businesses one level below the operating segment level. Ashland tests goodwill for impairment by comparing the carrying value to the estimated fair value of its reporting units.

In the current year, Ashland performed a quantitative goodwill impairment test and determined the fair value of its reporting units using a combination of discounted cash flow models and valuations based on earnings multiples for guideline public companies in each reporting unit’s industry peer group, when externally quoted market prices are not readily available. If this comparison indicates that a reporting unit’s estimated fair value is less than its carrying value, it is adjusted to its calculated fair value and the adjustment represents the impairment charge.

In the prior year for its July 1, 2018 goodwill impairment test, Ashland performed an extensive qualitative analysis in order to determine whether it was necessary to perform a quantitative goodwill impairment test. In performing this analysis, Ashland considered relevant events and circumstances such as macroeconomic conditions, industry and market considerations, overall financial performance and changes in management and business strategy, changes in carrying value, among others. Ashland considered how these relevant events and circumstances have changed since its most recent quantitative goodwill impairment test performed in the prior year as of July 1, 2017. After weighting the significance of these factors, Ashland determined that it was more likely than not that the fair value of its reporting units exceeds the carrying value and that a quantitative impairment test was not necessary to perform.

Ashland tests at least annually its indefinite-lived intangible assets, principally trademarks and trade names. If the carrying value of an individual indefinite-lived intangible asset exceeds its fair value, such individual indefinite-lived intangible asset is written down by an amount equal to such excess. Similar to goodwill, Ashland first performs a qualitative analysis in order to determine whether it is necessary to perform a quantitative goodwill impairment test for the trademarks and trade names. If a quantitative analysis is deemed necessary, trademarks and trade names are valued using a “relief-from-royalty” valuation method compared to the carrying value. Significant assumptions inherent in the valuation methodologies include, but are not limited to, such estimates as future projected business results, growth rates, the weighted-average cost of capital for a market participant, and royalty and discount rates.

Finite-lived intangible assets principally consist of certain trademarks and trade names, intellectual property, and customer lists. These intangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives. The cost of trademarks and trade names is amortized principally over 3 to 25 years, intellectual property over 5 to 25 years and customer and supplier relationships over 3 to 24 years. Ashland reviews finite-lived intangible assets for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. Ashland monitors these changes and events on at least a quarterly basis. For further information on goodwill and other intangible assets, see Note I.

Derivative instruments

Ashland regularly uses derivative instruments to manage its exposure to fluctuations in foreign currencies and certain commodities. All derivative instruments are recognized as either assets or liabilities on the balance sheet and are measured at fair value. Changes in the fair value of all derivatives are recognized immediately in the Statements of Consolidated Comprehensive Income (Loss) unless the derivative qualifies as a hedge of future cash flows or a hedge of a net investment in a foreign operation. Gains and losses related to an instrument that qualifies for hedge accounting are either recognized in the Statements of Consolidated Comprehensive Income (Loss) immediately to offset the gain or loss on the hedged item, or deferred and recorded in the stockholders’ equity section of the Consolidated Balance Sheets as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income and subsequently recognized in the Statements of Consolidated Comprehensive Income (Loss) when the hedged item affects net income. The ineffective portion of the change in fair value of a hedge is recognized in income immediately. For additional information on derivative instruments, see Note G.

Restricted investments

On January 13, 2015, Ashland and Hercules LLC (formerly Hercules Incorporated), an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Ashland that was acquired in 2009, entered into a comprehensive settlement agreement related to certain insurance coverage for asbestos bodily injury claims with Underwriters at Lloyd’s, certain London companies and Chartis (AIG) member companies, along with National Indemnity Company and Resolute Management, Inc., under which Ashland and Hercules received a total of $398 million (the January 2015 asbestos insurance settlement). During 2015, Ashland placed $335 million of the settlement funds into a renewable annual trust that Ashland determined is restricted for the purpose of paying ongoing and future litigation defense and claim settlement costs incurred in conjunction with asbestos claims. These funds are presented primarily as noncurrent assets, with $24 million and $30 million classified within other current assets in the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of September 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively.

As of September 30, 2019 and 2018, the funds within the trust had a balance of $334 million and $342 million, respectively, and were primarily invested in equity, U.S. government bond and corporate bond investments with a portion maintained in demand deposits. The funds within the trust are classified as investment securities reported at fair value. Interest income and gains and losses on the investment securities are reported in the net interest and other expense caption in the Statements of Consolidated Comprehensive Income (Loss). See Note G for additional information regarding the fair value of these investments within the trust.

Revenue recognition

In May 2014, the FASB issued accounting guidance outlining a single comprehensive five step model for entities to use in accounting for revenue arising from contracts with customers (ASC 606 Revenue from Contracts with Customers). The new guidance and subsequent amendments to it superseded most current revenue recognition guidance, in an effort to converge the revenue recognition principles within U.S. GAAP. This new guidance required entities to disclose certain quantitative and qualitative information regarding the nature, amount, timing and uncertainty of qualifying revenue and cash flows arising from contracts with customers. Entities had the option of using a full retrospective or a modified retrospective approach to adopt the new guidance. This guidance became effective for Ashland on October 1, 2018. Ashland elected to adopt this standard using the modified retrospective approach and determined that the overall impact was not material to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Ashland’s revenue is measured as the amount of consideration it expects to receive in exchange for transferring goods or providing services and is recognized when performance obligations are satisfied under the terms of contracts with customers. Ashland generally utilizes standardized language for the terms of contracts, unless a separate agreement has been entered into with a customer that supersedes the standard language.

For additional information on revenues see Note R.

Expense recognition

Cost of sales include material and production costs, as well as the costs of inbound and outbound freight, purchasing and receiving, inspection, warehousing, internal transfers and all other distribution network costs. Selling, general and administrative expense includes sales and marketing costs, advertising, customer support, environmental remediation, corporate and divisional administrative and other costs. Advertising costs ($4 million in 2019, $4 million in 2018 and $5 million 2017) and research and development costs ($66 million in 2019, $73 million in 2018 and $73 million in 2017) are expensed as incurred.

Income taxes

Ashland is subject to income taxes in the United States and numerous foreign jurisdictions. Significant judgment in the forecasting of taxable income using historical and projected future operating results is required in determining Ashland’s provision for income taxes and the related assets and liabilities. The provision for income taxes includes income taxes paid, currently payable or receivable, and deferred taxes. Ashland recognizes the income tax benefit from an uncertain tax position only if it is more likely than not that the tax position will be sustained on examination by taxing authorities, based on the technical merits of the position. Ashland evaluates and adjusts these accruals based on changing facts and circumstances. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on differences between financial reporting and tax basis of assets and liabilities, and are measured using enacted tax rates and laws that are expected to be in effect when the differences reverse. Deferred tax assets are also recognized for the estimated future effects of tax loss and credit carryforwards. The effect on deferred taxes of changes in tax rates is recognized in the period in which the enactment date occurs. Valuation allowances are established when necessary on a jurisdictional basis to reduce deferred tax assets to the amounts expected to be realized. In the event that the actual outcome of future tax consequences differs from Ashland’s estimates and assumptions due to changes or future events such as tax legislation, geographic mix of earnings, completion of tax audits or earnings repatriation plans, the resulting change to the provision for income taxes could have a material effect on the Statements of Consolidated Comprehensive Income (Loss) and Consolidated Balance Sheets. For additional information on income taxes, see Note M.

Asbestos-related litigation

Ashland is subject to liabilities from claims alleging personal injury caused by exposure to asbestos. Such claims result from indemnification obligations undertaken in 1990 in connection with the sale of Riley Stoker Corporation (Riley) and the acquisition of Hercules in November 2008. Although Riley, a former subsidiary, was neither a producer nor a manufacturer of asbestos, its industrial boilers contained some asbestos-containing components provided by other companies. Hercules, an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Ashland, has liabilities from claims alleging personal injury caused by exposure to asbestos. Such claims typically arise from alleged exposure to asbestos fibers from resin encapsulated pipe and tank products sold by one of Hercules’ former subsidiaries to a limited industrial market.

Prior to 2018, Ashland retained Hamilton, Rabinovitz & Associates, Inc. (HR&A) to assist in developing and annually updating independent reserve estimates for future asbestos claims and related costs given various assumptions. During 2018, Ashland transitioned these responsibilities to Nathan Associates, Inc. (Nathan). The processes and methodologies used by Nathan are consistent with the ones historically employed by HR&A. The methodology used to project future asbestos costs is

based largely on Ashland’s recent experience, including claim-filing and settlement rates, disease mix, enacted legislation, open claims, and litigation defense. Ashland’s claim experience is compared to the results of previously conducted epidemiological studies estimating the number of people likely to develop asbestos-related diseases. Those studies were undertaken in connection with national analyses of the population expected to have been exposed to asbestos. Using that information, Nathan estimates a range of the number of future claims that may be filed, as well as the related costs that may be incurred in resolving those claims. From the range of estimates, Ashland records the amount it believes to be the best estimate of future payments for litigation defense and claim settlement costs. For additional information on asbestos-related litigation, see Note O.

Ashland and Hercules have liabilities from claims alleging personal injury caused by exposure to asbestos. To assist in developing and annually updating independent reserve estimates for future asbestos claims and related costs given various assumptions, Ashland retained third party actuarial experts. Prior to 2018, Ashland retained Hamilton, Rabinovitz & Associates, Inc. (HR&A). During 2018, Ashland transitioned these responsibilities to Nathan Associates, Inc. (Nathan). The processes and methodologies used by Nathan are consistent with the ones historically employed by HR&A. The methodology used by Nathan to project future asbestos costs is based largely on recent experience, including claim-filing and settlement rates, disease mix, enacted legislation, open claims and litigation defense. The claim experience of Ashland and Hercules are separately compared to the results of previously conducted third party epidemiological studies estimating the number of people likely to develop asbestos-related diseases. Those studies were undertaken in connection with national analyses of the population expected to have been exposed to asbestos. Using that information, Nathan estimates a range of the number of future claims that may be filed, as well as the related costs that may be incurred in resolving those claims. Changes in asbestos-related liabilities and receivables are recorded on an after-tax basis within the discontinued operations caption in the Statements of Consolidated Comprehensive Income (Loss).

Environmental remediation

Accruals for environmental remediation are recognized when it is probable a liability has been incurred and the amount of that liability can be reasonably estimated. Such costs are charged to expense if they relate to the remediation of conditions caused by past operations or are not expected to mitigate or prevent contamination from future operations. Liabilities are recorded at estimated cost values based on experience, assessments and current technology, without regard to any third-party recoveries and are regularly adjusted as environmental assessments and remediation efforts continue. For additional information on environmental remediation, see Note O.

The total reserves for environmental remediation reflect Ashland’s estimates of the most likely costs that will be incurred over an extended period to remediate identified conditions for which the costs are reasonably estimable, without regard to any third-party recoveries. Engineering studies, probability techniques, historical experience and other factors are used to identify and evaluate remediation alternatives and their related costs in determining the estimated reserves for environmental remediation. Ashland continues to discount certain environmental sites and regularly adjusts its reserves as environmental remediation continues. Ashland has estimated the value of its probable insurance recoveries associated with its environmental reserve based on management’s interpretations and estimates surrounding the available or applicable insurance coverage.

Pension and other postretirement benefits

The funded status of Ashland’s pension and other postretirement benefit plans is recognized in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The funded status is measured as the difference between the fair value of plan assets and the benefit obligation at September 30, the measurement date. For defined benefit pension plans, the benefit obligation is the projected benefit obligation (PBO) and for the other postretirement benefit plans, the benefit obligation is the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation (APBO). The PBO represents the actuarial present value of benefits expected to be paid upon retirement based on estimated future compensation levels. The APBO represents the actuarial present value of postretirement benefits attributed to employee services already rendered. The measurement of the benefit obligation is based on Ashland’s estimates and actuarial valuations. These valuations reflect the terms of the plans and use participant-specific information such as compensation, age and years of service, as well as certain key assumptions that require significant judgment, including, but not limited to, estimates of discount rates, expected return on plan assets, rate of compensation increases, interest rates and mortality rates. The fair value of plan assets represents the current market value of assets held by an irrevocable trust fund for the sole benefit of participants. For additional information regarding plan assumptions and the current financial position of the pension and other postretirement plans, see Note N.

Ashland recognizes the change in the fair value of plan assets and net actuarial gains and losses annually in the fourth quarter of each fiscal year and whenever a plan is determined to qualify for a remeasurement. The remaining components of pension and other postretirement benefits expense are recorded ratably on a quarterly basis. Pension and other postretirement benefits adjustments charged directly to cost of sales that are applicable to inactive participants are excluded from inventoriable costs. The service cost component of pension and other postretirement benefits costs is allocated to each reportable segment on a ratable basis; while the remaining components of pension and other postretirement benefits costs are recorded within the other net periodic benefit income (costs) caption on the Statements of Consolidated Comprehensive Income (Loss).

Foreign currency translation

Operations outside the United States are measured primarily using the local currency as the functional currency. Upon consolidation, the results of operations of the subsidiaries and affiliates whose functional currency is other than the U.S. dollar are translated into U.S. dollars at the average exchange rates for the year while assets and liabilities are translated at year-end exchange rates. Consistent with U.S. GAAP standards, adjustments to translate assets and liabilities into U.S. dollars are recorded in the stockholders’ equity section of the Consolidated Balance Sheets as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income and are included in net earnings only upon sale or substantial liquidation of the underlying foreign subsidiary or affiliated company.

Stock incentive plans

Ashland recognizes compensation expense for stock incentive plans awarded to key employees and directors, primarily in the form of stock appreciation rights (SARs), restricted stock and restricted stock units, performance shares and other non-vested stock awards, that are generally based upon the grant-date fair value over the appropriate vesting period. Ashland utilizes several industry accepted valuation models to determine the fair value. For further information concerning stock incentive plans, see Note Q.

Ashland has stock incentive plans under which key employees or directors are granted stock appreciation rights (SARs), performance share awards or nonvested stock awards. Each program is typically a long-term incentive plan designed to link employee compensation with increased shareholder value or reward superior performance and encourage continued employment with Ashland. Ashland recognizes compensation expense for the grant date fair value of stock-based awards over the applicable vesting period and accounts for forfeitures when they occur across all stock-based awards.

Earnings per share

The following is the computation of basic and diluted earnings per share (EPS) from continuing operations attributable to Ashland. Earnings per share are reported under the treasury stock method. Stock options and SARs for each reported year whose grant price was greater than the market price of Ashland Common Stock at the end of each fiscal year were not included in the computation of loss from continuing operations per diluted share because the effect of these instruments would be antidilutive. The total number of these shares outstanding was 1.0 million for 2019, 0.7 million for 2018 and 1.1 million for 2017.

New accounting pronouncements

Revenue recognition

In May 2014, the FASB issued accounting guidance outlining a single comprehensive five step model for entities to use in accounting for revenue arising from contracts with customers (ASC 606 Revenue from Contracts with Customers). The new guidance and subsequent amendments to it supersedes most current revenue recognition guidance, in an effort to converge the revenue recognition principles within U.S. GAAP. This new guidance also requires entities to disclose certain quantitative and qualitative information regarding the nature, amount, timing and uncertainty of qualifying revenue and cash flows arising from contracts with customers. Entities have the option of using a full retrospective or a modified retrospective approach to adopt the new guidance. This guidance became effective for Ashland on October 1, 2018.

Ashland formed an implementation team that evaluated the impact of the new standard on the Consolidated Financial Statements and the adoption method options available as well as the overall impact the new guidance will have on the organization. The assessment process consisted of categorizing Ashland’s revenue streams and reviewing the current internal accounting policies and practices to determine potential differences that would result from applying the requirements of the new standard to revenue contracts. Additional discussions and meetings with each revenue stream team occurred to solicit input, identify potential impacts and appropriate changes to Ashland’s business processes, systems and controls to support the revenue recognition and disclosure requirements under the new standard. Based on various assessments conducted, Ashland identified agreements with customers that contained elements of material rights and/or variable consideration. Ashland determined that these elements do not result in a material change to how revenue would be recognized for these agreements.

Ashland has elected to adopt this standard using the modified retrospective approach. Ashland has finalized its assessment of the standard and determined that the overall impact was not material to the Consolidated Financial Statements. As a result, no cumulative-effect adjustment was made to retained earnings in the Consolidated Balance Sheet. Additionally, Ashland had no significant change to its internal controls or the manner and timing of recognizing revenue. However, there are significant additional disclosures within the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements moving forward. For additional information on revenues see Note R.

Upon adoption, Ashland utilized the following applicable practical expedients, as permitted by ASC 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers:

•

Sales and other similar taxes collected from customers on behalf of third parties are excluded from the contract price;

•

Costs for shipping and handling activities, whether performed before or after the customer obtains control of the goods, are accounted for as fulfillment costs when not reimbursed; and

•

Costs incurred to obtain contracts with customers are expensed immediately when the amortization period is one year or less.

Leases

In February 2016, the FASB issued new accounting guidance related to lease transactions. The main objective of this guidance is to increase transparency and comparability among organizations by requiring lessees to recognize assets and liabilities on the balance sheet for the right to use assets and obligations created by leases and to disclose key information about leasing arrangements. The presentation of the Statements of Consolidated Comprehensive Income (Loss) and the Statements of Consolidated Cash Flows is largely unchanged under this guidance. This guidance retains a distinction between finance leases and operating leases, and the classification criteria for distinguishing between finance leases and operating leases are substantially similar to the classification criteria for distinguishing between capital leases and operating leases in the current accounting literature.

In July 2018, the FASB amended this guidance to give entities the option to apply the standard at the adoption date and recognize a cumulative-effect adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings in the period of adoption. Ashland will utilize this transition method upon adopting the guidance. Ashland will also elect the practical expedient package related to the identification, classification and accounting for initial direct costs whereby prior conclusions do not have to be reassessed for leases that commenced before the effective date. As Ashland will not reassess such conclusions, Ashland does not plan to adopt the practical expedient to use hindsight to determine the likelihood of whether a lease will be extended, terminated or whether a purchase option will be exercised.

While Ashland is still finalizing the evaluation of the impact that this guidance will have within its Consolidated Financial Statements, Ashland expects the adoption of this guidance will result in the recognition of operating lease liabilities in the range of $140 million to $180 million based on the present value of the remaining minimum lease commitments. See Note L for additional information on lease commitments. Ashland anticipates recognizing a corresponding right-of-use asset based on the operating lease liabilities adjusted for prepaid and deferred rent and unamortized other accrued costs. Ashland does not currently believe that the guidance will have a material impact on the results from operations, liquidity or debt covenants compliance under Ashland’s current debt agreements. The majority of Ashland’s lease spend related to certain real estate with the remaining lease spend primarily related to equipment.

Ashland’s implementation team is continuing to finalize policy elections, implement changes to business processes and controls, and the impact that this guidance will have within its Consolidated Financial Statements.

This guidance will become effective for Ashland on October 1, 2019.

Other pronouncements

In February 2018, the FASB issued guidance which permits entities to reclassify tax effects stranded in accumulated other comprehensive income (AOCI) as a result of U.S. tax reform legislation to retained earnings. Additionally, this guidance requires entities to disclose whether they made an election to reclassify the tax effects and to disclose their accounting policy for releasing income tax effects from AOCI. This guidance becomes effective for Ashland on October 1, 2019. Ashland is currently evaluating the impact this guidance may have on Ashland’s Consolidated Financial Statements, however this is not anticipated to have a significant impact.

In August 2017, the FASB issued accounting guidance amending the existing hedge accounting model to simplify various hedge documentation requirements while also expanding hedging abilities for certain nonfinancial and financial risk components. This guidance will become effective for Ashland on October 1, 2019. Ashland is currently evaluating the impact this guidance may have on Ashland's Consolidated Financial Statements, however this is not anticipated to have a significant impact.

In March 2017, the FASB issued accounting guidance that changes how employers who sponsor defined benefit pension and/or postretirement benefit plans present the net periodic benefit cost in the Statement of Consolidated Comprehensive Income. This guidance requires employers to present the service cost component of net periodic benefit cost in the same caption within the Statement of Consolidated Comprehensive Income (Loss) as other employee compensation costs from services rendered during the period. All other components of the net periodic benefit cost will be presented separately outside of the operating income caption. This guidance must be applied retrospectively. Ashland elected to early adopt this guidance on October 1, 2017, which resulted in a reclassification of $4 million from the selling, general and administrative expense and cost of sales captions to the other net periodic benefit income (costs) caption in the Statement of Consolidated Comprehensive Income (Loss) for 2017. The components of net periodic benefit income (costs) reclassified primarily relate to interest cost, expected return on assets, curtailments, settlements and actuarial gains and losses. Ashland did not have to adjust the classification of service cost since it previously was recorded within the caption required by the new guidance. See Note K for additional information on net periodic benefit income (costs).

In October 2016, the FASB issued new accounting guidance which requires entities to recognize income tax effects of intercompany transfers of assets other than inventory when the transfer occurs. This guidance eliminates the exception under previous U.S. GAAP that the income tax effects of all intercompany transfers of assets other than inventory be deferred until the assets are sold to a third party or otherwise recovered through use. This guidance became effective for Ashland on October 1, 2018 and was applied using a modified retrospective approach. Consequently, Ashland recorded a cumulative-effect adjustment to reclassify less than $1 million from other current assets and deferred taxes to retained earnings.

In June 2016, the FASB issued amended accounting guidance related to the measurement of credit losses on financial instruments. The amended accounting guidance changes the impairment model for most financial assets to require measurement and recognition of expected credit losses for financial assets held. The amended accounting guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Ashland is in the process of evaluating the effect this amended accounting guidance will have on our consolidated financial position and results of operations; however, we do not expect the amended accounting guidance to have a material impact on our ongoing financial reporting.

In March 2016, the FASB issued new accounting guidance for certain aspects of share-based payments to employees. This guidance requires all excess tax benefits and tax deficiencies related to share-based payments to be recognized as income tax expense in the Statements of Consolidated Comprehensive Income (Loss) instead of additional paid in capital and changes the classification of excess tax benefits from a financing activity to an operating activity within the statement of cash flows. This guidance also allows entities to make an accounting policy election to either estimate the number of awards that are expected to vest or account for forfeitures when they occur. In addition, this guidance increases the amount an employer can withhold to cover income taxes on awards and still qualify for equity classification and requires that cash paid by an employer when directly withholding shares for tax-withholding purposes be classified as a financing activity within Statements of Consolidated Cash Flows. The guidance became effective for Ashland and was adopted on October 1, 2017. The guidance specifically related to the Statements of Consolidated Comprehensive Income (Loss) was adopted prospectively while the guidance related to the Statements of Consolidated Cash Flows was adopted retrospectively, as required by the guidance. Additionally, Ashland made a

policy election to account for forfeitures when they occur across all share-based awards. Upon adoption, the overall impact on Ashland's Consolidated Financial Statements was not significant.

In January 2016, the FASB issued accounting guidance related to the recognition and measurement as well as the presentation and disclosures for certain financial instruments. Most notably, the guidance requires entities to measure equity investments as fair value and to recognize any changes in fair value in net income rather than accumulated other comprehensive income (AOCI). The guidance became effective for Ashland on October 1, 2018 and resulted in Ashland recording a cumulative-effect adjustment to reclassify net after-tax unrealized gains of $34 million on its equity securities from AOCI to retained earnings. In the current period, the adoption of this guidance resulted in a significant impact to net income as Ashland recognized investment gains of $7 million in 2019 within the net interest and other expense caption on the Statement of Consolidated Comprehensive Income (Loss). The impact of this guidance could continue to have a material impact on Ashland’s Statements of Consolidated Comprehensive Income (Loss) in prospective periods depending on the fluctuations of unrealized gains and losses within the investment securities portfolio. For current and future periods, the changes in fair value of the equity securities will no longer be classified within other comprehensive income under the new guidance. For further information on Ashland’s equity securities, see Note G.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments Policy

As required by U.S. GAAP, Ashland uses applicable guidance for defining fair value, the initial recording and periodic remeasurement of certain assets and liabilities measured at fair value and related disclosures for instruments measured at fair value. Fair value accounting guidance establishes a fair value hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value into three broad levels. The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3). An instrument’s categorization within the fair value hierarchy is based upon the lowest level of input that is significant to the instrument’s fair value measurement. The three levels within the fair value hierarchy are described as follows.

Level 1 – Observable inputs such as unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.

Level 2 – Inputs other than quoted prices included within Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. These include quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets and quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active.

Level 3 – Unobservable inputs for the asset or liability for which there is little, if any, market activity at the measurement date. Unobservable inputs reflect Ashland’s own assumptions about what market participants would use to price the asset or liability. The inputs are developed based on the best information available in the circumstances, which might include Ashland’s own financial data such as internally developed pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies, as well as instruments for which the fair value determination requires significant management judgment.

For assets that are measured using quoted prices in active markets (Level 1), the total fair value is the published market price per unit multiplied by the number of units held without consideration of transaction costs. Assets and liabilities that are measured using significant other observable inputs (Level 2) are primarily valued by reference to quoted prices of similar assets or liabilities in active markets, adjusted for any terms specific to that asset or liability. For all other assets and liabilities for which unobservable inputs are used (Level 3), fair value is derived through the use of fair value models, such as a discounted cash flow model or other standard pricing models that Ashland deems reasonable.

Finite-Lived Intangible Asset

Intangible assets classified as definite-lived are amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives. Useful lives range from 3 to 25 years for trademarks and trade names; 5 to 25 years for intellectual property; and 3 to 24 years for customer and supplier relationships.

Goodwill and Intangible Assets, Goodwill

Ashland reviews goodwill for impairment annually or when events and circumstances indicate an impairment may have occurred. This annual assessment is performed as of July 1 and consists of Ashland determining each reporting unit’s current fair value compared to its current carrying value. Ashland tests goodwill either quantitatively or qualitatively for impairment.

For the qualitative approach, Ashland considers relevant events and circumstances such as macroeconomic conditions, industry and market considerations, overall financial performance and changes in management and business strategy, changes in carrying value, among others. Ashland considers how these relevant events and circumstances change between quantitative goodwill impairment tests. Ashland decides whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of its reporting units exceeds the carrying values. If not, a quantitative assessment must be performed.

For the quantitative approach, Ashland makes various estimates and assumptions in determining the estimated fair value of each reporting unit using a combination of discounted cash flow models and valuations based on earnings multiples for guideline public companies in each reporting unit’s industry peer group, when externally quoted market prices are not readily available. Discounted cash flow models are highly reliant on various assumptions, including projected business results and future industry direction, long-term growth factors and weighted-average cost of capital. Significant management judgement is involved in estimating these variables, and they include inherent uncertainties since they are forecasting future events. Ashland performs sensitivity analyses by using a range of inputs to confirm reasonableness of these estimates. Additionally, Ashland compares the indicated equity value to Ashland’s market capitalization, and implied control premium/discount, to determine if the estimated enterprise value is reasonable compared to external market indicators. If this comparison indicates that a reporting unit’s estimated fair value is less than its carrying value, it is adjusted to its calculated fair value and the adjustment represents the impairment charge.

Ashland performed its annual goodwill impairment test using the quantitative approach as of July 1, 2019 and concluded that the reporting unit fair values far exceeded their carrying values. No impairment existed as of that date.

Goodwill and Intangible Assets, Intangible Assets, Indefinite-Lived

Ashland reviews these intangible assets for possible impairment annually or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that carrying amounts may not be recoverable. If the carrying value of an individual indefinite-lived intangible asset exceeds its fair value, the asset is written down to its fair value and the amount of the write-down is the impairment charge. Similar to its annual assessment for goodwill, Ashland performs either a qualitative or quantitative test for impairment.

If a quantitative analysis is performed, Ashland tests these assets using a “relief-from-royalty” valuation method to determine the fair value. Significant assumptions inherent in the valuation methodologies include, but are not limited to, future projected business results, growth rates, the weighted-average cost of capital for a market participant, and royalty and discount rates. In conjunction with the July 1 annual assessment of indefinite-lived intangible assets, Ashland’s models did not indicate any impairment, as each indefinite-lived intangible asset’s fair value exceeded their carrying values.

Ashland performed its annual other intangibles impairment test using the quantitative approach as of July 1, 2019 and concluded that the assets fair values far exceeded their carrying values. No impairment existed as of that date.

Ashland’s assessment of an impairment on any of these assets classified currently as having indefinite lives, including goodwill, could change in future periods if significant events happen and/or circumstances change that effect the previously mentioned assumptions such as: a significant change in projected business result, a divestiture decision, increase in Ashland’s weighted-average cost of capital rates, decrease in growth rates or assumptions, economic deterioration that is more severe or of a longer duration than anticipated, or another significant economic event.

Segment Reporting

Ashland determines its reportable segments based on how operations are managed internally for the products and services sold to customers, including how the results are reviewed by the chief operating decision maker, which includes determining resource allocation methodologies used for reportable segments. Operating income is the primary measure on the Statements of Consolidated Comprehensive Income (Loss) that is reviewed by the chief operating decision maker in assessing each reportable segment's financial performance. Ashland does not aggregate operating segments to arrive at these reportable segments.