XML 43 R16.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.0.6
Accounting Developments (Policies)
 6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2012
Accounting Developments [Abstract]  
Fair Value Measurement

In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-04, Fair Value Measurement. ASU 2011-04 amends the fair value measurement and disclosure requirements in order to gain consistency between the generally accepted accounting principles in the United States and the International Financial Reporting Standards. The guidance, which became effective on January 1, 2012, did not have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations, financial position or disclosures.

Comprehensive Income

In June 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-05, Comprehensive Income. ASU 2011-05 requires entities to present the total of comprehensive income, the components of net income and the components of other comprehensive income in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate consecutive statements. The revised financial statement presentation for comprehensive income became effective on January 1, 2012 and has been incorporated into this quarterly report on Form 10-Q.

Intangibles - Goodwill and Other

In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-08, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other. ASU 2011-08 amends the accounting guidance on goodwill impairment testing. The amendments in this accounting standard update are intended to reduce complexity and costs by allowing an entity the option to make a qualitative evaluation about the likelihood of goodwill impairment to determine whether it should calculate the fair value of a reporting unit. The amendments also improve previous guidance by expanding upon the examples of events and circumstances that an entity should consider between annual impairment tests in determining whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. The adoption of ASU 2011-08 became effective on January 1, 2012. The adoption of the guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations, financial position or disclosures.

Receivables

In accordance with the provisions of ASC 310, Receivables, the Company records loans considered impaired at fair value. A loan is considered impaired if it is probable the Company will be unable to collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms of the loan agreement. Fair value is measured at the fair value of the collateral for collateral-dependent loans. For non-collateral-dependent loans, fair value is measured by present valuing expected future cash flows. Impaired loans are classified as Level 3 assets when measured using appraisals from external parties of the collateral less any prior liens and there is no observable market price. Repossessed assets are initially recorded at fair value less estimated costs to sell. The fair value of repossessed assets is based on property appraisals and an analysis of similar properties available. As such, the Company classifies repossessed assets as Level 3 assets. Repossessed assets are classified as Level 3 assets when an appraised value is not available or management determines the fair value of the property is further impaired below the appraised value and there is no observable market price.

Acquired loans, the FDIC loss sharing receivable, acquired FHLB advances, and acquired interest-bearing deposit liabilities are measured on a nonrecurring basis using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3).

Creditor's Determination of Whether a Restructuring is a Troubled Debt Restructuring

During the course of its lending operations, the Company periodically grants concessions to its customers in an attempt to protect as much of its investment as possible and to minimize risk of loss. These concessions may include restructuring the terms of a customer loan to alleviate the burden of the customer’s near-term cash requirements. Effective January 1, 2011, the Company adopted the provisions of ASU No. 2011-02, Receivables (Topic 310): A Creditor’s Determination of Whether a Restructuring is a Troubled Debt Restructuring, which provides clarification on the determination of whether loan restructurings are considered troubled debt restructurings (“TDRs”). In accordance with the ASU, in order to be considered a TDR, the Company must conclude that the restructuring of a loan to a borrower who is experiencing financial difficulties constitutes a “concession”. The Company defines a concession as a modification of existing terms granted to a borrower for economic or legal reasons related to the borrower’s financial difficulties that the Company would otherwise not consider. The concession is either granted through an agreement with the customer or is imposed by a court or law. Concessions include modifying original loan terms to reduce or defer cash payments required as part of the loan agreement, including but not limited to:

 

•  

a reduction of the stated interest rate for the remaining original life of the debt,

 

•  

an extension of the maturity date or dates at an interest rate lower than the current market rate for new debt with similar risk characteristics,

 

•  

a reduction of the face amount or maturity amount of the debt, or

 

•  

a reduction of accrued interest receivable on the debt.

In its determination of whether the customer is experiencing financial difficulties, the Company considers numerous indicators, including, but not limited to:

 

•  

whether the customer is currently in default on its existing loan, or is in an economic position where it is probable the customer will be in default on its loan in the foreseeable future without a modification,

 

•  

whether the customer has declared or is in the process of declaring bankruptcy,

 

•  

whether there is substantial doubt about the customer’s ability to continue as a going concern,

 

•  

whether, based on its projections of the customer’s current capabilities, the Company believes the customer’s future cash flows will be insufficient to service the debt, including interest, in accordance with the contractual terms of the existing agreement for the foreseeable future, and

 

•  

whether, without modification, the customer cannot obtain sufficient funds from other sources at an effective interest rate equal to the current market rate for similar debt for a non-troubled debtor.

If the Company concludes that both a concession has been granted and the concession was granted to a customer experiencing financial difficulties, the Company identifies the loan as a TDR. For purposes of the determination of an allowance for loan losses on TDRs, such loans are reviewed for specific impairment in accordance with the Company’s allowance for loan loss methodology. If it is determined that losses are probable on such TDRs, either because of delinquency or other credit quality indicators, the Company specifically allocates a portion of the allowance for loan losses to these loans.