Pending Accounting Standards Updates	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2018
New Accounting Pronouncements and Changes in Accounting Principles [Abstract]
Pending Accounting Standards Updates	Accounting Standards Updates Recently Adopted Accounting Standards Updates ASU No. 2014-09: “Revenue from Contracts with Customers” In May 2014, ASU No. 2014-09 was issued and created new Topic 606 to provide a common revenue standard to achieve consistency and clarification to the revenue recognition principles. The guidance outlines steps to achieve the core principle 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 or services. These steps consist of: (1) identify the contract with a customer, (2) identify the performance obligations in the contract, (3) determine the transaction price, (4) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract, and (5) recognize revenue when (or as) the entity satisfies a performance obligation. The new authoritative guidance, as amended, was effective on January 1, 2018. We reviewed our contracts related to trust and investment services and those related to other noninterest income to determine if changes in income recognition were required as a result of this guidance. Implementation of this guidance did not have a significant impact on our operating results for the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2018. ASU No. 2016-01: “Financial Instruments - Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Liabilities” and ASU No. 2018-03: “Technical Corrections and Improvements to Financial Instruments - Overall (Subtopic 825-10: Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities” In January 2016, ASU No. 2016-01 was issued and sets forth the following: 1) requires equity investments, with certain exceptions, to be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income; 2) simplifies the impairment assessment of equity investments without readily determinable fair values by requiring a qualitative assessment to identify impairment and requiring measurement of the investment at fair value when an impairment exists; 3) for public entities, eliminates the requirement to disclose the method(s) and significant assumptions used to estimate the fair value that is required to be disclosed for financial instruments measured at amortized cost on the balance sheet; 4) for public entities, requires the use of exit price notion when measuring the fair value of financial instruments for disclosure purposes; 5) requires an entity to present separately in other comprehensive income, the portion of the total change in the fair value of a liability resulting from a change in the instrument-specific credit risk when the entity has elected to measure the liability at fair value in accordance with the fair value option for financial instruments; 6) requires separate presentation of financial assets and financial liabilities by measurement category and form of financial asset on the balance sheet or the accompanying notes to the financial statements; and 7) clarifies that an entity should evaluate the need for a valuation allowance on a deferred tax asset related to available-for-sale securities in combination with the entity's other deferred tax assets. The new authoritative guidance was effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017. As a result of this guidance, the change in the fair value of equity investments has been recorded in net income beginning on January 1, 2018. Equity securities are now recorded separately from AFS securities and are recorded at a fair value which approximates an exit price notion. Adoption of this guidance had an insignificant impact on our operations and its future impact will depend on the fair value of these investments at the future measurement dates. The disclosures related to equity investment securities reflect a fully retrospective presentation for comparative purposes. For discussion of the fair value measurement of financial instruments, refer to “Note 12 – Fair Value”. In February 2018, ASU No. 2018-03 was issued and sets forth correction or improvement amendments for specific issues that may arise within the scope of ASU 2016-01. These amendments have been adopted and did not have a significant impact on our operating results or financial statement disclosures. ASU No. 2017-08: “Receivables - Nonrefundable Fees and Other Costs (Subtopic 310-20): Premium Amortization on Purchased Callable Debt Securities” In March 2017, ASU No. 2017-08 amended the amortization period for certain purchased callable debt securities held at a premium. Under current GAAP, entities generally amortize the premium as an adjustment of yield over the contractual life of the instrument. The amendments in this update shorten the amortization period and require the premium to be amortized to the earliest call date. The amendments do not require an accounting change for securities held at a discount; the discount continues to be amortized to maturity. The new authoritative guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2018 with early adoption permitted. The guidance has been adopted and did not have a significant impact on our operating results or financial statement disclosures. ASU No. 2017-09: “Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Scope of Modification Accounting” In May 2017, ASU No. 2017-09 was issued and provided guidance about which changes to the terms or conditions of a share-based payment award require an entity to apply modification accounting under Topic 718. The current disclosure requirements in Topic 718 apply regardless of whether an entity is required to apply modification accounting under the amendments in this update. An entity should account for the effects of a modification unless all of the following are met: 1. The fair value (or calculated value or intrinsic value, if such an alternative measurement method is used) of the modified award is the same as the fair value (or calculated value or intrinsic value, if such an alternative measurement method is used) of the original award immediately before the original award is modified. If the modification does not affect any of the inputs to the valuation technique that the entity uses to value the award, the entity is not required to estimate the value immediately before and after the modification. 2. The vesting conditions of the modified award are the same as the vesting conditions of the original award immediately before the original award is modified. 3. The classification of the modified award as an equity instrument or a liability instrument is the same as the classification of the original award immediately before the original award is modified. The new authoritative guidance was effective on January 1, 2018 and did not have a significant impact on our operating results or financial statement disclosures. Pending Accounting Standards Updates ASU No. 2016-02: “Leases (Topic 842)” In February 2016, ASU No. 2016-02 was issued to create Topic 842 - Leases which will require recognition of lease assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet for leases previously classified as operating leases. Accounting guidance is set forth for both lessee and lessor accounting. Under lessee accounting, a lessee should recognize in the statement of financial position a liability to make lease payments (the lease liability) and a right-of-use asset representing its right to use the underlying asset for the lease term. For finance leases, a lessee is required to do the following: 1) recognize a right-of-use asset and a lease liability, initially measured at the present value of the lease payments, in the statement of financial position; 2) recognize interest on the lease liability separately from amortization of the right-of-use asset in the statement of comprehensive income; and 3) classify repayments of the principal portion of the lease liability within financing activities and payments of interest on the lease liability and variable lease payments within operating activities in the statement of cash flows. For operating leases, a lessee is required to do the following: 1) recognize a right-of-use asset and a lease liability, initially measured at the present value of the lease payments, in the statement of financial position; 2) recognize a single lease cost, calculated so that the cost of the lease is allocated over the lease term on a generally straight-line basis; and 3) classify all cash payments within operating activities in the statement of cash flows. The accounting applied by a lessor is largely unchanged from that applied under previous GAAP. The new authoritative guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2018. We have and will continue to review our lease agreements to determine the appropriate treatment under this guidance. We do not expect these changes to have a significant impact on our operating results or financial statement disclosures. In July 2018, ASU No. 2018-10 was issued and provided codification improvements for various leasing issues. Also during July 2018, ASU No. 2018-11 was issued for targeted improvements related to the transition of the new guidance. Both updates are effective with the implementation of ASU 2016-02 and are not expected to impact our operating results or financial statement disclosures. ASU No. 2016-13: “Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments” In June 2016, ASU No. 2016-13 was issued and updated the measurement for credit losses for AFS debt securities and assets measured at amortized cost which include loans, trade receivables, and any other financial assets with the contractual right to receive cash. Current GAAP requires an “incurred loss” methodology for recognizing credit losses that delays recognition until it is probable a loss has been incurred. Under the incurred loss approach, entities are limited to a probable initial recognition threshold when credit losses are measured under GAAP; an entity generally only considers past events and current conditions in measuring the incurred loss. Under the new guidance, the incurred loss impairment methodology in current GAAP is replaced with a methodology that reflects current expected credit losses (CECL). This methodology requires consideration of a broader range of reasonable and supportable information to calculate credit loss estimates. The measurement of expected credit losses is based on relevant information about past events, including historical experience, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts that affect the collectability of the reported amount. An entity must use judgment in determining the relevant information and estimation methods that are appropriate in its circumstances which applies to assets measured either collectively or individually. The update allows an entity to revert to historical loss information that is reflective of the contractual term (considering the effect of prepayments) for periods that are beyond the time frame for which the entity is able to develop reasonable and supportable forecasts. In addition, the disclosures of credit quality indicators in relation to the amortized cost of financing receivables, a current disclosure requirement, are further disaggregated by year of origination (or vintage). The vintage information will be useful for financial statement users to better assess changes in underwriting standards and credit quality trends in asset portfolios over time and the effect of those changes on credit losses. Overall, the update will allow entities the ability to measure expected credit losses without the restriction of incurred or probable losses that exist under current GAAP. For users of the financial statements, the update provides decision-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. The new authoritative guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2019 and may have a significant impact on our operations and financial statement disclosures as well as that of the banking industry as a whole. We have invested a considerable amount of effort toward this guidance and will continue to invest considerable effort until its effective date. A committee was formed and has developed a road map to implementation, and the committee is accountable for timely and accurate adoption of the guidance. A company that has been focused on the ALLL for more than 10 years and serves hundreds of financial institutions has been engaged to provide us with education, advisory, and software solutions exclusively related to the ACL. We expect to run parallel processes during 2019, which will help to ensure we are ready to calculate, review, and report the ACL by the required implementation date. ASU No. 2018-13: “Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Disclosure Framework-Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement” In August 2018, ASU No. 2018-13 was issued and provided updated framework related to fair value disclosures. For entities required to make disclosures about recurring or nonrecurring fair value measurements, the update provides disclosure modifications which include the removal, modification and addition of specific disclosure requirements. The new authoritative guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2019 and will impact our financial statement disclosures. ASU No. 2018-14: “Compensation - Retirement Benefits - Defined Pension Plans - General (Subtopic 715-20): Disclosure Framework - Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Defined Benefit Plans” In August 2018, ASU No. 2018-14 was issued and provided updated framework related to defined benefit plans. For employers that sponsor defined benefit pension or other postretirement plans, the update provides disclosure modifications which include the removal of six specific requirements, the addition of two specific requirements and clarification to existing requirements. Disclosure additions include 1) the weighted-average interest crediting rates for cash balance plans and other plans with promised interest crediting rates; 2) an explanation of the reasons for significant gains and losses related to changes in the benefit obligation for the period . Clarification items relate to 1) the projected benefit obligation (PBO) and fair value of plan assets for plans with PBOs in excess of plan assets; and 2) the accumulated benefit obligation (ABO) and fair value of plan assets for plans with ABOs in excess of plan assets. The new authoritative guidance is effective for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2020, with early adoption permitted, and will likely impact our financial statement disclosures. 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” In August 2018, ASU No. 2018-15 was issued and provided guidance on the accounting for implementation, setup, and other upfront costs (collectively referred to as implementation costs) for entities that are a customer in a hosting arrangement that is a service contract. The guidance also provides clarification on requirements to capitalize implementation costs and the required accounting for expenses related to capitalization of implementation costs. The new authoritative guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2019, with early adoption permitted. The impact on our operating results and financial statement disclosures as a result of this update will depend upon our current and future arrangements and whether or not they meet the requirement to be capitalized.

Accounting Standards Updates

Recently Adopted Accounting Standards Updates

ASU No. 2014-09: “Revenue from Contracts with Customers”

In May 2014, ASU No. 2014-09 was issued and created new Topic 606 to provide a common revenue standard to achieve consistency and clarification to the revenue recognition principles. The guidance outlines steps to achieve the core principle 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 or services. These steps consist of: (1) identify the contract with a customer, (2) identify the performance obligations in the contract, (3) determine the transaction price, (4) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract, and (5) recognize revenue when (or as) the entity satisfies a performance obligation.

The new authoritative guidance, as amended, was effective on January 1, 2018. We reviewed our contracts related to trust and investment services and those related to other noninterest income to determine if changes in income recognition were required as a result of this guidance. Implementation of this guidance did not have a significant impact on our operating results for the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2018.

ASU No. 2016-01: “Financial Instruments - Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Liabilities” and ASU No. 2018-03: “Technical Corrections and Improvements to Financial Instruments - Overall (Subtopic 825-10: Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities”

In January 2016, ASU No. 2016-01 was issued and sets forth the following: 1) requires equity investments, with certain exceptions, to be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income; 2) simplifies the impairment assessment of equity investments without readily determinable fair values by requiring a qualitative assessment to identify impairment and requiring measurement of the investment at fair value when an impairment exists; 3) for public entities, eliminates the requirement to disclose the method(s) and significant assumptions used to estimate the fair value that is required to be disclosed for financial instruments measured at amortized cost on the balance sheet; 4) for public entities, requires the use of exit price notion when measuring the fair value of financial instruments for disclosure purposes; 5) requires an entity to present separately in other comprehensive income, the portion of the total change in the fair value of a liability resulting from a change in the instrument-specific credit risk when the entity has elected to measure the liability at fair value in accordance with the fair value option for financial instruments; 6) requires separate presentation of financial assets and financial liabilities by measurement category and form of financial asset on the balance sheet or the accompanying notes to the financial statements; and 7) clarifies that an entity should evaluate the need for a valuation allowance on a deferred tax asset related to available-for-sale securities in combination with the entity's other deferred tax assets.

The new authoritative guidance was effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017. As a result of this guidance, the change in the fair value of equity investments has been recorded in net income beginning on January 1, 2018. Equity securities are now recorded separately from AFS securities and are recorded at a fair value which approximates an exit price notion. Adoption of this guidance had an insignificant impact on our operations and its future impact will depend on the fair value of these investments at the future measurement dates. The disclosures related to equity investment securities reflect a fully retrospective presentation for comparative purposes.

For discussion of the fair value measurement of financial instruments, refer to “Note 12 – Fair Value”.

In February 2018, ASU No. 2018-03 was issued and sets forth correction or improvement amendments for specific issues that may arise within the scope of ASU 2016-01. These amendments have been adopted and did not have a significant impact on our operating results or financial statement disclosures.

ASU No. 2017-08: “Receivables - Nonrefundable Fees and Other Costs (Subtopic 310-20): Premium Amortization on Purchased Callable Debt Securities”

In March 2017, ASU No. 2017-08 amended the amortization period for certain purchased callable debt securities held at a premium. Under current GAAP, entities generally amortize the premium as an adjustment of yield over the contractual life of the instrument. The amendments in this update shorten the amortization period and require the premium to be amortized to the earliest call date. The amendments do not require an accounting change for securities held at a discount; the discount continues to be amortized to maturity.

The new authoritative guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2018 with early adoption permitted. The guidance has been adopted and did not have a significant impact on our operating results or financial statement disclosures.

ASU No. 2017-09: “Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Scope of Modification Accounting”

In May 2017, ASU No. 2017-09 was issued and provided guidance about which changes to the terms or conditions of a share-based payment award require an entity to apply modification accounting under Topic 718. The current disclosure requirements in Topic 718 apply regardless of whether an entity is required to apply modification accounting under the amendments in this update. An entity should account for the effects of a modification unless all of the following are met:

1. The fair value (or calculated value or intrinsic value, if such an alternative measurement method is used) of the modified award is the same as the fair value (or calculated value or intrinsic value, if such an alternative measurement method is used) of the original award immediately before the original award is modified. If the modification does not affect any of the inputs to the valuation technique that the entity uses to value the award, the entity is not required to estimate the value immediately before and after the modification.

2. The vesting conditions of the modified award are the same as the vesting conditions of the original award immediately before the original award is modified.

3. The classification of the modified award as an equity instrument or a liability instrument is the same as the classification of the original award immediately before the original award is modified.

The new authoritative guidance was effective on January 1, 2018 and did not have a significant impact on our operating results or financial statement disclosures.

Pending Accounting Standards Updates

ASU No. 2016-02: “Leases (Topic 842)”

In February 2016, ASU No. 2016-02 was issued to create Topic 842 - Leases which will require recognition of lease assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet for leases previously classified as operating leases. Accounting guidance is set forth for both lessee and lessor accounting. Under lessee accounting, a lessee should recognize in the statement of financial position a liability to make lease payments (the lease liability) and a right-of-use asset representing its right to use the underlying asset for the lease term.

For finance leases, a lessee is required to do the following: 1) recognize a right-of-use asset and a lease liability, initially measured at the present value of the lease payments, in the statement of financial position; 2) recognize interest on the lease liability separately from amortization of the right-of-use asset in the statement of comprehensive income; and 3) classify repayments of the principal portion of the lease liability within financing activities and payments of interest on the lease liability and variable lease payments within operating activities in the statement of cash flows. For operating leases, a lessee is required to do the following: 1) recognize a right-of-use asset and a lease liability, initially measured at the present value of the lease payments, in the statement of financial position; 2) recognize a single lease cost, calculated so that the cost of the lease is allocated over the lease term on a generally straight-line basis; and 3) classify all cash payments within operating activities in the statement of cash flows.

The accounting applied by a lessor is largely unchanged from that applied under previous GAAP. The new authoritative guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2018. We have and will continue to review our lease agreements to determine the appropriate treatment under this guidance. We do not expect these changes to have a significant impact on our operating results or financial statement disclosures.

In July 2018, ASU No. 2018-10 was issued and provided codification improvements for various leasing issues. Also during July 2018, ASU No. 2018-11 was issued for targeted improvements related to the transition of the new guidance. Both updates are effective with the implementation of ASU 2016-02 and are not expected to impact our operating results or financial statement disclosures.

ASU No. 2016-13: “Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments”

In June 2016, ASU No. 2016-13 was issued and updated the measurement for credit losses for AFS debt securities and assets measured at amortized cost which include loans, trade receivables, and any other financial assets with the contractual right to receive cash. Current GAAP requires an “incurred loss” methodology for recognizing credit losses that delays recognition until it is probable a loss has been incurred. Under the incurred loss approach, entities are limited to a probable initial recognition threshold when credit losses are measured under GAAP; an entity generally only considers past events and current conditions in measuring the incurred loss.

Under the new guidance, the incurred loss impairment methodology in current GAAP is replaced with a methodology that reflects current expected credit losses (CECL). This methodology requires consideration of a broader range of reasonable and supportable information to calculate credit loss estimates. The measurement of expected credit losses is based on relevant information about past events, including historical experience, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts that affect the collectability of the reported amount. An entity must use judgment in determining the relevant information and estimation methods that are appropriate in its circumstances which applies to assets measured either collectively or individually.

The update allows an entity to revert to historical loss information that is reflective of the contractual term (considering the effect of prepayments) for periods that are beyond the time frame for which the entity is able to develop reasonable and supportable forecasts. In addition, the disclosures of credit quality indicators in relation to the amortized cost of financing receivables, a current disclosure requirement, are further disaggregated by year of origination (or vintage). The vintage information will be useful for financial statement users to better assess changes in underwriting standards and credit quality trends in asset portfolios over time and the effect of those changes on credit losses.

Overall, the update will allow entities the ability to measure expected credit losses without the restriction of incurred or probable losses that exist under current GAAP. For users of the financial statements, the update provides decision-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. The new authoritative guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2019 and may have a significant impact on our operations and financial statement disclosures as well as that of the banking industry as a whole.

We have invested a considerable amount of effort toward this guidance and will continue to invest considerable effort until its effective date. A committee was formed and has developed a road map to implementation, and the committee is accountable for timely and accurate adoption of the guidance. A company that has been focused on the ALLL for more than 10 years and serves hundreds of financial institutions has been engaged to provide us with education, advisory, and software solutions exclusively related to the ACL. We expect to run parallel processes during 2019, which will help to ensure we are ready to calculate, review, and report the ACL by the required implementation date.

ASU No. 2018-13: “Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Disclosure Framework-Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement”

In August 2018, ASU No. 2018-13 was issued and provided updated framework related to fair value disclosures. For entities required to make disclosures about recurring or nonrecurring fair value measurements, the update provides disclosure modifications which include the removal, modification and addition of specific disclosure requirements.

The new authoritative guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2019 and will impact our financial statement disclosures.

ASU No. 2018-14: “Compensation - Retirement Benefits - Defined Pension Plans - General (Subtopic 715-20): Disclosure Framework - Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Defined Benefit Plans”

In August 2018, ASU No. 2018-14 was issued and provided updated framework related to defined benefit plans. For employers that sponsor defined benefit pension or other postretirement plans, the update provides disclosure modifications which include the removal of six specific requirements, the addition of two specific requirements and clarification to existing requirements.

Disclosure additions include 1) the weighted-average interest crediting rates for cash balance plans and other plans with promised interest crediting rates; 2) an explanation of the reasons for significant gains and losses related to changes in the benefit obligation for the period . Clarification items relate to 1) the projected benefit obligation (PBO) and fair value of plan assets for plans with PBOs in excess of plan assets; and 2) the accumulated benefit obligation (ABO) and fair value of plan assets for plans with ABOs in excess of plan assets.

The new authoritative guidance is effective for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2020, with early adoption permitted, and will likely impact our financial statement disclosures.

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”

In August 2018, ASU No. 2018-15 was issued and provided guidance on the accounting for implementation, setup, and

other upfront costs (collectively referred to as implementation costs) for entities that are a customer in a hosting arrangement that is a service contract. The guidance also provides clarification on requirements to capitalize implementation costs and the required accounting for expenses related to capitalization of implementation costs.

The new authoritative guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2019, with early adoption permitted. The impact on our operating results and financial statement disclosures as a result of this update will depend upon our current and future arrangements and whether or not they meet the requirement to be capitalized.