Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Policies)	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2018
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Recent Accounting Pronouncements	Recent Accounting Pronouncements In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09 "Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)." The core principle of the guidance is that an entity should recognize 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 and services. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-14 “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606) Deferral of the Effective Date.” This accounting standard update deferred the effective date of ASU 2014-09 for an additional year. ASU 2015-14 was effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. The amendments could be applied retrospectively to each prior reporting period or retrospectively with the cumulative effect of initially applying this update recognized at the date of initial application. Early application was not permitted. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-08 “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (TOPIC 606): Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net)” and in April 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-10 “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (TOPIC 606): Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing.” ASU 2016-08 requires the entity to determine if it is acting as a principal with control over the goods or services it is contractually obligated to provide, or an agent with no control over specified goods or services provided by another party to a customer. ASU 2016-10 was issued to further clarify ASU 2014-09 implementation regarding identifying performance obligation materiality, identification of key contract components, and scope. The Company performed an analysis of the impact of adoption of this ASU, reviewing revenue recorded from service charges on deposit accounts, asset management fees, gains (losses) on other real estate owned, and debit card interchange fees. Certain revenue received, such as service charges on deposit accounts and interchange fees, is recorded immediately or as the service is performed. Asset management fees recorded by the Company take the form of wealth management income and brokerage income, and both types of fees are recorded after services are rendered, with no contractual requirement of refund to a customer based on non-achievement of fund performance objectives. Finally, the methodology used to record revenue from gains (losses) due to the sale of other real estate owned is not anticipated to change, as the Company currently records income or expense only upon consummation of the sale, and any revenue recorded stemming from seller financed transactions is reviewed for deferral, as appropriate. The Company adopted ASU 2014-09 and related issuances on January 1, 2018, with no cumulative effect adjustment to opening retained earnings required upon implementation of this standard. In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01 “Financial Instruments-Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities.” The objective of the issuance is to provide users of financial statements with more decision–useful information, by making targeted improvements to GAAP. These targeted improvements included revisions to the methodology of accounting for equity investments, eliminating certain disclosures on fair value assumptions for financial instruments measured at amortized cost, and requiring public business entities to use the exit price notion, as defined in ASC 820, for the measurement of the fair value of financial instruments. This standard was effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company adopted this standard as of January 1, 2018. Adoption of this standard resulted in the Company’s use of an exit price rather than an entrance price to determine the fair value of loans and deposits not already measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis in the consolidated balance sheet disclosures; see Note 14–Fair Value of Financial Instruments for further information regarding the valuation processes. In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02 “Leases (Topic 842).” This ASU was issued to increase transparency and comparability among organizations by recognizing lease assets and liabilities on the balance sheet and disclosing key information about leasing arrangements. One key revision from prior guidance was to include operating leases within assets and liabilities recorded; another revision was included which created a new model to follow for sale-leaseback transactions. The impact of this pronouncement will affect lessees primarily, as virtually all of their assets will be recognized on the balance sheet, by recording a right of use asset and lease liability. This pronouncement is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018. The Company is assessing the impact of ASU 2016-02 on its accounting and disclosures. In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13 “Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments (Topic 326).” ASU 2016-13 was issued to provide financial statement users with more useful information about the expected credit losses on financial instruments and other commitments to extend credit held by a reporting entity at each reporting date to enhance the decision making process. The new methodology to be used should reflect expected credit losses based on relevant vintage historical information, supported by reasonable forecasts of projected loss given defaults, which will affect the collectability of the reported amounts. This new methodology will also require available-for-sale debt securities to have a credit loss recorded through an allowance rather than write-downs. ASU 2016-13 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019. The Company is assessing the impact of ASU 2016-13 on its accounting and disclosures, and is in the process of accumulating data and evaluating model options to support future risk assessments. In March 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-08 “Receivables-Nonrefundable Fees and Other Costs – Premium Amortization on Purchased Callable Debt Securities (Subtopic 310-20).” This ASU was issued to shorten the amortization period for the premium to the earliest call date on debt securities. This premium is required to be recorded as a reduction to net interest margin during the shorter yield to call period, as compared to prior practice of amortizing the premium as a reduction to net interest margin over the contractual life of the instrument. This ASU does not change the current method of amortizing any discount over the contractual life of the debt security, and this pronouncement is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, with earlier adoption permitted. The Company adopted ASU 2017-08 as a change in accounting principle in the third quarter of 2017 on a modified retrospective basis, which required the Company to reflect its adoption effective January 1, 2017. The effect of amortizing the premium over a shorter period will continue to decrease future quarterly net interest income over the call period until the premium is fully amortized. As a result of management’s analysis, the impact of the change in accounting principle as a result of ASU 2017-08 to adjust beginning of year retained earnings was considered insignificant and, accordingly, the impact was adjusted through 2017 earnings. In August 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-12, “Derivatives and Hedging: 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 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. The Company adopted ASU 2017-12 on January 1, 2018, on a modified retrospective basis. FASB ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging (“ASC 815”), provides the disclosure requirements for derivatives and hedging activities with the intent to provide users of financial statements with an enhanced understanding of: (a) how and why an entity uses derivative instruments, (b) how the entity accounts for derivative instruments and related hedged items, and (c) how derivative instruments and related hedged items affect an entity’s financial position, financial performance, and cash flows. Further, qualitative disclosures are required that explain the Company’s objectives and strategies for using derivatives, as well as quantitative disclosures about the fair value of and gains and losses on derivative instruments, and disclosures about credit-risk-related contingent features in derivative instruments. As required by ASC 815, the Company records all derivatives on the balance sheet at fair value. The accounting for changes in the fair value of derivatives depends on the intended use of the derivative, whether the Company has elected to designate a derivative in a hedging relationship and apply hedge accounting and whether the hedging relationship has satisfied the criteria necessary to apply hedge accounting. Derivatives designated and qualifying as a hedge of the exposure to changes in the fair value of an asset, liability, or firm commitment attributable to a particular risk, such as interest rate risk, are considered fair value hedges. Derivatives designated and qualifying as a hedge of the exposure to variability in expected future cash flows, or other types of forecasted transactions, are considered cash flow hedges. Derivatives may also be designated as hedges of the foreign currency exposure of a net investment in a foreign operation. Hedge accounting generally provides for the matching of the timing of gain or loss recognition on the hedging instrument with the recognition of the changes in the fair value of the hedged asset or liability that are attributable to the hedged risk in a fair value hedge or the earnings effect of the hedged forecasted transactions in a cash flow hedge. The Company may enter into derivative contracts that are intended to economically hedge certain of its risk, even though hedge accounting does not apply or the Company elects not to apply hedge accounting. In accordance with the FASB’s fair value measurement guidance in ASU 2011-04, the Company made an accounting policy election to measure the credit risk of its derivative financial instruments that are subject to master netting agreements on a net basis by counterparty portfolio. As the Company does not currently have any derivative financial instruments subject to master netting agreements, there was no impact to the balance sheet. In February 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-02, “Income Statement-Reporting Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Reclassification of Certain Tax Effects from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income.” This ASU was issued in response to the enactment of tax bill H.R.1 “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act”, which resulted in “stranding” the tax effects of items within accumulated other comprehensive income related to the adjustment of deferred taxes due to the reduction of the federal corporate income tax rate. The amendments proposed allow the reclassification of these stranded tax effects to retained earnings, and were effective for all entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted, and should be applied either in the period of adoption or retrospectively to each period in which the effect of the change in the U.S. federal corporate tax rate is recognized. The Company adopted ASU 2018-02 as of January 1, 2018, and a reclassification of $319,000, net, was recorded, which increased accumulated other comprehensive income and reduced retained earnings with the change in accounting principle.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09 "Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)." The core principle of the guidance is that an entity should recognize 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 and services. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-14 “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606) Deferral of the Effective Date.” This accounting standard update deferred the effective date of ASU 2014-09 for an additional year. ASU 2015-14 was effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. The amendments could be applied retrospectively to each prior reporting period or retrospectively with the cumulative effect of initially applying this update recognized at the date of initial application. Early application was not permitted. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-08 “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (TOPIC 606): Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net)” and in April 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-10 “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (TOPIC 606): Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing.” ASU 2016-08 requires the entity to determine if it is acting as a principal with control over the goods or services it is contractually obligated to provide, or an agent with no control over specified goods or services provided by another party to a customer. ASU 2016-10 was issued to further clarify ASU 2014-09 implementation regarding identifying performance obligation materiality, identification of key contract components, and scope.

The Company performed an analysis of the impact of adoption of this ASU, reviewing revenue recorded from service charges on deposit accounts, asset management fees, gains (losses) on other real estate owned, and debit card interchange fees. Certain revenue received, such as service charges on deposit accounts and interchange fees, is recorded immediately or as the service is performed. Asset management fees recorded by the Company take the form of wealth management income and brokerage income, and both types of fees are recorded after services are rendered, with no contractual requirement of refund to a customer based on non-achievement of fund performance objectives. Finally, the methodology used to record revenue from gains (losses) due to the sale of other real estate owned is not anticipated to change, as the Company currently records income or expense only upon consummation of the sale, and any revenue recorded stemming from seller financed transactions is reviewed for deferral, as appropriate. The Company adopted ASU 2014-09 and related issuances on January 1, 2018, with no cumulative effect adjustment to opening retained earnings required upon implementation of this standard.

In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01 “Financial Instruments-Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities.” The objective of the issuance is to provide users of financial statements with more decision–useful information, by making targeted improvements to GAAP. These targeted improvements included revisions to the methodology of accounting for equity investments, eliminating certain disclosures on fair value assumptions for financial instruments measured at amortized cost, and requiring public business entities to use the exit price notion, as defined in ASC 820, for the measurement of the fair value of financial instruments. This standard was effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company adopted this standard as of January 1, 2018. Adoption of this standard resulted in the Company’s use of an exit price rather than an entrance price to determine the fair value of loans and deposits not already measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis in the consolidated balance sheet disclosures; see Note 14–Fair Value of Financial Instruments for further information regarding the valuation processes.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02 “Leases (Topic 842).” This ASU was issued to increase transparency and comparability among organizations by recognizing lease assets and liabilities on the balance sheet and disclosing key information about leasing arrangements. One key revision from prior guidance was to include operating leases within assets and liabilities recorded; another revision was included which created a new model to follow for sale-leaseback transactions. The impact of this pronouncement will affect lessees primarily, as virtually all of their assets will be recognized on the balance sheet, by recording a right of use asset and lease liability. This pronouncement is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018. The Company is assessing the impact of ASU 2016-02 on its accounting and disclosures.

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13 “Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments (Topic 326).” ASU 2016-13 was issued to provide financial statement users with more useful information about the expected credit losses on financial instruments and other commitments to extend credit held by a reporting entity at each reporting date to enhance the decision making process. The new methodology to be used should reflect expected credit losses based on relevant vintage historical information, supported by reasonable forecasts of projected loss given defaults, which will affect the collectability of the reported amounts. This new methodology will also require available-for-sale debt securities to have a credit loss recorded through an allowance rather than write-downs. ASU 2016-13 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019. The Company is assessing the impact of ASU 2016-13 on its accounting and disclosures, and is in the process of accumulating data and evaluating model options to support future risk assessments.

In March 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-08 “Receivables-Nonrefundable Fees and Other Costs – Premium Amortization on Purchased Callable Debt Securities (Subtopic 310-20).” This ASU was issued to shorten the amortization period for the premium to the earliest call date on debt securities. This premium is required to be recorded as a reduction to net interest margin during the shorter yield to call period, as compared to prior practice of amortizing the premium as a reduction to net interest margin over the contractual life of the instrument. This ASU does not change the current method of amortizing any discount over the contractual life of the debt security, and this pronouncement is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, with earlier adoption permitted. The Company adopted ASU 2017-08 as a change in accounting principle in the third quarter of 2017 on a modified retrospective basis, which required the Company to reflect its adoption effective January 1, 2017. The effect of amortizing the premium over a shorter period will continue to decrease future quarterly net interest income over the call period until the premium is fully amortized. As a result of management’s analysis, the impact of the change in accounting principle as a result of ASU 2017-08 to adjust beginning of year retained earnings was considered insignificant and, accordingly, the impact was adjusted through 2017 earnings.

In August 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-12, “Derivatives and Hedging: 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 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. The Company adopted ASU 2017-12 on January 1, 2018, on a modified retrospective basis. FASB ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging (“ASC 815”), provides the disclosure requirements for derivatives and hedging activities with the intent to provide users of financial statements with an enhanced understanding of: (a) how and why an entity uses derivative instruments, (b) how the entity accounts for derivative instruments and related hedged items, and (c) how derivative instruments and related hedged items affect an entity’s financial position, financial performance, and cash flows. Further, qualitative disclosures are required that explain the Company’s objectives and strategies for using derivatives, as well as quantitative disclosures about the fair value of and gains and losses on derivative instruments, and disclosures about credit-risk-related contingent features in derivative instruments.

As required by ASC 815, the Company records all derivatives on the balance sheet at fair value. The accounting for changes in the fair value of derivatives depends on the intended use of the derivative, whether the Company has elected to designate a derivative in a hedging relationship and apply hedge accounting and whether the hedging relationship has satisfied the criteria necessary to apply hedge accounting. Derivatives designated and qualifying as a hedge of the exposure to changes in the fair value of an asset, liability, or firm commitment attributable to a particular risk, such as interest rate risk, are considered fair value hedges. Derivatives designated and qualifying as a hedge of the exposure to variability in expected future cash flows, or other types of forecasted transactions, are considered cash flow hedges. Derivatives may also be designated as hedges of the foreign currency exposure of a net investment in a foreign operation. Hedge accounting generally provides for the matching of the timing of gain or loss recognition on the hedging instrument with the recognition of the changes in the fair value of the hedged asset or liability that are attributable to the hedged risk in a fair value hedge or the earnings effect of the hedged forecasted transactions in a cash flow hedge. The Company may enter into derivative contracts that are intended to economically hedge certain of its risk, even though hedge accounting does not apply or the Company elects not to apply hedge accounting.

In accordance with the FASB’s fair value measurement guidance in ASU 2011-04, the Company made an accounting policy election to measure the credit risk of its derivative financial instruments that are subject to master netting agreements on a net basis by counterparty portfolio. As the Company does not currently have any derivative financial instruments subject to master netting agreements, there was no impact to the balance sheet.

In February 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-02, “Income Statement-Reporting Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Reclassification of Certain Tax Effects from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income.” This ASU was issued in response to the enactment of tax bill H.R.1 “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act”, which resulted in “stranding” the tax effects of items within accumulated other comprehensive income related to the adjustment of deferred taxes due to the reduction of the federal corporate income tax rate. The amendments proposed allow the reclassification of these stranded tax effects to retained earnings, and were effective for all entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted, and should be applied either in the period of adoption or retrospectively to each period in which the effect of the change in the U.S. federal corporate tax rate is recognized. The Company adopted ASU 2018-02 as of January 1, 2018, and a reclassification of $319,000, net, was recorded, which increased accumulated other comprehensive income and reduced retained earnings with the change in accounting principle.