BASIS OF PRESENTATION

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2019

Organization, Consolidation and Presentation of Financial Statements [Abstract]

The Consolidated Financial Statements (the “financial statements”) of Berkshire Hills Bancorp, Inc. and its subsidiaries (the “Company” or “Berkshire”) have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”). The Company is a Delaware corporation, headquartered in Boston, Massachusetts, and the holding company for Berkshire Bank (the “Bank”), a Massachusetts-chartered trust company headquartered in Pittsfield, Massachusetts, and Berkshire Insurance Group, Inc. These financial statements include the accounts of the Company, its wholly-owned subsidiaries and the Bank’s consolidated subsidiaries. In consolidation, all significant intercompany accounts and transactions are eliminated. The results of operations of companies or assets acquired are included only from the dates of acquisition. All material wholly-owned and majority-owned subsidiaries are consolidated unless GAAP requires otherwise.

The Company has evaluated subsequent events for potential recognition and/or disclosure through the date these consolidated financial statements were issued.

These interim financial statements have been prepared in accordance with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X, and accordingly, certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared according to GAAP have been omitted.

The results for any interim period are not necessarily indicative of results for the full year. These consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited financial statements and note disclosures Berkshire Hills Bancorp, Inc. previously filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018. In management’s opinion, all adjustment’s necessary for a fair statement are reflected in the interim periods presented.

Reclassifications

Certain items in prior financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the current presentation.

Recently Adopted Accounting Principles

Effective January 1, 2019, the following new accounting guidance was adopted by the Company:


•	ASU No. 2017-12, Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities;


•	ASU No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842)(additional information is disclosed in Note 11 - Leases of the Consolidated Financial Statements)

In August 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-12, “Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities.” The purpose of this updated guidance is to better align a company’s financial reporting for hedging activities with the economic objectives of those activities. ASU No. 2017-12 is effective for public business entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, with early adoption, including adoption in an interim period, permitted. ASU 2017-12 requires a modified retrospective transition method in which the Company will recognize the cumulative effect of the change on the opening balance of each affected component of equity in the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of the date of adoption. In April 2019, the FASB issued ASU No. 2019-04 to clarify certain aspects of accounting for hedging activities addressed by ASU No. 2017-12, among other things (ASU No. 2019-04 amendments and pending adoption to FASB ASC Topics 326 and 825 are described in the section below). ASU No. 2017-12 became effective for the Company on January 1, 2019. The adoption was not material to the financial statements.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, “Leases (Topic 842)”. The pronouncement affects all entities that are participants to leasing agreements. From a lessee accounting perspective, the ASU requires a lessee to recognize assets and liabilities on the balance sheet for operating leases and changes many key definitions, including the definition of a lease. The ASU includes a short-term lease exception for leases with a term of twelve months or less, in which a lessee can make an accounting policy election not to recognize lease assets and lease liabilities. Lessees will continue to differentiate between finance leases (previously referred to as capital leases) and

operating leases, using classification criteria that are substantially similar to the previous guidance. For lessees, the recognition, measurement, and presentation of expenses and cash flows arising from a lease have not significantly changed from previous GAAP. From a lessor accounting perspective, the guidance is largely unchanged, except for targeted improvements to align with new terminology under lessee accounting and with the updated revenue recognition guidance in Topic 606. For sale-leaseback transactions, for a sale to occur the transfer must meet the sale criteria under the new revenue standard, Topic 606. Entities will not be required to reassess transactions previously accounted under then existing guidance.

The ASU includes additional quantitative and qualitative disclosures required by lessees and lessors to help users better understand the amount, timing, and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases. ASU No. 2016-02 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 31, 2018, and interim periods within those fiscal years. Lessees and lessors are required to recognize and measure leases at the beginning of the earliest period presented using a modified retrospective approach. In July 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-11, “Leases (Topic 842) - Targeted Improvements” to provide entities with relief from the costs of implementing certain aspects of the new leasing standard. Specifically, under the amendments in ASU No. 2018-11 entities may elect not to recast the comparative periods presented when transitioning to the new leasing standard, and lessors may elect not to separate lease and non-lease components when certain conditions are met. As the Company elected the transition option provided in ASU No. 2018-11, the modified retrospective approach was applied on January 1, 2019 (as opposed to January 1, 2017). The Company also elected certain practical expedients provided under ASU No. 2016-02 whereby we will not reassess (i) whether any expired or existing contracts are or contain leases, (ii) the lease classification for any expired or existing leases and (iii) initial direct costs for any existing leases. In December 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-20, “Leases (Topic 842): Narrow-Scope Improvements for Lessors,” which provides targeted improvements and clarification to guidance with FASB ASC Topic 842 specific to lessors. The amendments of ASU No. 2018-20 have the same effective date as ASU 2016-02 and may be applied either retrospectively or prospectively to all new and existing leases. The Company obtained a third-party software application which provides lease accounting under the guidelines of FASB ASC Topic 842. The amendments of ASU No. 2016-02 and subsequently issued ASUs, which provided additional guidance and clarifications to various aspects of FASB ASC Topic 842, became effective for the Company on January 1, 2019. The Company recognized right-of-use lease assets and related lease liabilities totaling $79.6 million and $82.8 million respectively as of January 1, 2019. The right-of-use lease assets and related lease liabilities recognized at January 1, 2019 include right-of-use lease assets and lease liabilities classified as discontinued operations. See Note 11 - Leases for more information.

Future Application of Accounting Pronouncements

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13 "Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments.” This ASU improves financial reporting by requiring timelier recording of credit losses on loans and other financial instruments. The ASU requires companies to measure all expected credit losses for financial assets held at the reporting date based on historical experience, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts. Forward-looking information will now be used in credit loss estimates. The ASU requires enhanced disclosures to provide better understanding surrounding significant estimates and judgments used in estimating credit losses, as well as the credit quality and underwriting standards of a company’s portfolio. These disclosures include qualitative and quantitative requirements that provide additional information about the amounts recorded in the financial statements. Additionally, the ASU amends the accounting for credit losses on available-for-sale debt securities and purchased financial assets with credit deterioration (“PCD assets”). Most debt instruments will require a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings on the statement of financial position as of the beginning of the first reporting period in which the guidance is adopted (modified retrospective approach). However, there is instrument-specific (such as PCD assets) transition guidance requiring a prospective transition approach. For existing purchased credit-impaired assets, upon adoption, the amortized cost basis will be adjusted to reflect the addition of the allowance for credit losses. This transition relief avoids the need to reassess purchased financial assets that exist as of the date of adoption in order to determine whether they would have met, at acquisition, the new criteria of ‘more than insignificant’ credit deterioration since origination. The transition relief also allows the remaining accretable discount (based on the revised amortized cost basis) to accrete into interest income over the life of the related asset using the interest method. ASU No. 2016-13 is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2019. Early application will be permitted for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2018.

The Company is evaluating the provisions of ASU No. 2016-13, and will closely monitor developments and additional guidance to determine the potential impact on the Company's Consolidated Financial Statements. A cross-functional working group has been formed and is comprised of individuals from various functional areas including credit, risk management, finance and information technology, among others. Management is working through its implementation plan which includes assessment and documentation of processes and internal controls; model development and documentation; and system configuration. This is in preparation for performing a full end to end parallel run. Management is also in the process of implementing a third-party vendor solution to assist us in the application of ASU No. 2016-13. The Company expects the primary changes to be the application of the new expected credit loss model from the incurred model. In addition, the Company expects the guidance to change the presentation of credit losses within the available-for-sale fixed maturities portfolio through an allowance method rather than as a direct write-down. The expected credit loss model will require a financial asset to be presented at the net amount expected to be collected. The allowance method for available-for-sale debt securities will allow the Company to record reversals of credit losses if the estimate of credit losses declines. The Company is in the process of identifying and implementing required changes to loan loss estimation models and processes and evaluating the impact of this new accounting guidance, which at the date of adoption is expected to increase the allowance for credit losses with a resulting increase to loans for the non-accretable discount on existing purchased credit-impaired assets and a negative adjustment to retained earnings for the remaining credit losses for financial assets.

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-04, “Intangibles: Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment.” The ASU simplifies the test for goodwill impairment by eliminating the second step of the current two-step method. Under the new accounting guidance, entities will compare the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying amount. If the carrying amount exceeds the reporting unit’s fair value, the entity is required to recognize an impairment charge for this amount. Current guidance requires an entity to proceed to a second step, whereby the entity would determine the fair value of its assets and liabilities. The new method applies to all reporting units. The performance of a qualitative assessment is still allowable. This accounting guidance is effective prospectively for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019. Early adoption is permitted. The Company does not expect adoption to have a material effect on its Consolidated Financial Statements.

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-13, “Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Disclosure Framework - Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement.” This ASU eliminates, adds, and modifies certain disclosure requirements for fair value measurements. Among the changes, entities will no longer be required

to disclose the amount of and reasons for transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy, but will be required to disclose the range and weighted average used to develop significant unobservable inputs for Level 3 fair value measurements. ASU No. 2018-13 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019. Early adoption is permitted. Entities are also allowed to elect early adoption for the eliminated or modified disclosure requirements and delay adoption of the new disclosure requirements until their effective date. As ASU No. 2018-13 only revises disclosure requirements, it will not have a material impact on its Consolidated Financial Statements.

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-14, “Compensation - Retirement Benefits - Defined Benefit Plans - General (Subtopic 715-20): Disclosure Framework - Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Defined Benefit Plans.” This ASU amends and modifies the disclosure requirements for employers that sponsor defined benefit pension or other post-retirement plans. The amendments in this update remove disclosures that no longer are considered cost beneficial, clarify the specific requirements of disclosures, and add disclosure requirements identified as relevant. ASU No. 2018-14 is effective for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2020, with early adoption permitted. As ASU No. 2018-14 only revises disclosure requirements, it will not have a material impact on the Consolidated Financial Statements.

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 No. 2018-15 clarifies certain aspects of ASU No. 2015-05, “Intangibles - Goodwill and Other - Internal-Use Software (Subtopic 350-40): Customer’s Accounting for Fees Paid in a Cloud Computing Arrangement,” which was issued in April 2015. Specifically, ASU No. 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). ASU No. 2018-15 does not affect the accounting for the service element of a hosting arrangement that is a service contract. ASU No. 2018-15 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019. Early adoption is permitted. The amendments in this ASU should be applied either retrospectively or prospectively to all implementation costs incurred after the date of adoption. While the Company continues to assess all potential impacts of the standard, we currently do not expect adoption to have a material impact on its Consolidated Financial Statements.

As mentioned in the previous section in April 2019 the FASB issued ASU No. 2019-04, “Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses, Topic 815, Derivatives and Hedging, and Topic 825, Financial Instruments.” With respect to FASB ASC Topic 326, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses, ASU No. 2019-04 clarifies the scope of the credit losses standard and addresses issues related to accrued interest receivable balances, recoveries, variable interest rates and prepayments, among other things. With respect to FASB ASC Topic 825, Financial Instruments, on recognizing and measuring financial instruments, ASU No. 2019-04 addresses the scope of the guidance, the requirement for remeasurement under FASB ASC Topic 820 when using the measurement alternative, certain disclosure requirements and which equity securities have to be remeasured at historical exchange rates. The amendments to FASB ASC Topic 326 have the same effective dates as ASU 2016-13 (i.e., the first quarter of 2020). The Company is currently evaluating the potential impact of FASB ASC Topic 326 amendments on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. The amendments to FASB ASC Topic 825 are effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019 and are not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

In May 2019, the FASB issued ASU No. 2019-05, “Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326); Targeted Transition Relief.” ASU No. 2019-05 allows entities to irrevocably elect, upon adoption of ASU No. 2016-13, the fair value option on financial instruments that (1) were previously recorded at amortized cost and (2) are within the scope of ASC 326-20 if the instruments are eligible for the fair value option under ASC 825-10. The fair value option election does not apply to held-to-maturity debt securities. Entities are required to make this election on an instrument-by-instrument basis. ASU No. 2019-05 has the same effective date as ASU No. 2016-13 (i.e., the first quarter of 2020). The Company is continuing to evaluate the potential impact of ASU No. 2016-13 and the subsequently issued ASUs, which provide additional guidance and clarifications to various aspects of FASB ASC Topic 326.