XML 21 R9.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT

Significant and Critical Accounting Policies and Practices

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2016

Significant and Critical Accounting Policies and Practices

Note 3 – Significant and Critical Accounting Policies and Practices

The management of the Company is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies and their application. Critical accounting policies and practices are those that are both most important to the portrayal of the Company’s financial condition and results and require management’s most difficult, subjective, or complex judgments, often as a result of the need to make estimates about the effects of matters that are inherently uncertain. The Company’s significant and critical accounting policies and practices are disclosed below as required by generally accepted accounting principles.

Basis of Presentation

The Company’s consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“US GAAP”).

Use of Estimates and Assumptions and Critical Accounting Estimates and Assumptions

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the dates of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Principles of Consolidation

The consolidated financial statements include all accounts of the entities as of the reporting period ending date(s) and for the reporting period(s) as follows:

Name of consolidated subsidiary or entity	State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization	Date of incorporation or formation (date of acquisition, if applicable)	Attributable interest

KTC Corp.	The State of Nevada, U.S.A.	September 20, 2010		100	%

Kicking the Can L.L.C.	The State of Delaware, U.S.A.	April 17, 2009		100	%

Wizard World Digital, Inc.	The State of Nevada, U.S.A.	March 18, 2011		100	%

Wiz Wizard, LLC	The State of Delaware, U.S.A.	December 29, 2014		100	%

ButtaFyngas, LLC	The State of Delaware, U.S.A.	April 10, 2015		50	%

All inter-company balances and transactions have been eliminated. Non–controlling interest represents the minority equity investment in the Company’s subsidiaries, plus the minority investors’ share of the net operating results and other components of equity relating to the non–controlling interest.

As of December 31, 2016, the aggregate non-controlling interest in ButtaFyngas was ($11,817). As of December 31, 2015, the aggregate non-controlling interest in Wiz Wizard and ButtaFyngas was ($10,786). The non-controlling interest is separately disclosed on the Consolidated Balance Sheet.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

The Company considers investments with original maturities of three months or less to be cash equivalents.

The Company minimizes its credit risk associated with cash by periodically evaluating the credit quality of its primary financial institution. The balance at times may exceed federally insured limits.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

For purpose of this disclosure, the fair value of a financial instrument is the amount at which the instrument could be exchanged in a current transaction between willing parties, other than in a forced sale or liquidation. The carrying amount of the Company’s short-term financial instruments approximates fair value due to the relatively short period to maturity for these instruments.

Accounts Receivable and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts

Accounts receivable are stated at the amount management expects to collect from outstanding balances. The Company generally does not require collateral to support customer receivables. The Company provides an allowance for doubtful accounts based upon a review of the outstanding accounts receivable, historical collection information and existing economic conditions. The Company determines if receivables are past due based on days outstanding, and amounts are written off when determined to be uncollectible by management. The maximum accounting loss from the credit risk associated with accounts receivable is the amount of the receivable recorded, which is the face amount of the receivable net of the allowance for doubtful accounts. As of December 31, 2016 and 2015, the allowance for doubtful accounts was $0 and $426,532, respectively.

Inventories

Inventories are stated at average cost using the first-in, first-out (FIFO) valuation method. Inventory was comprised of the following:

	December 31, 2016		December 31, 2015
Finished goods	$	-	$	39,552

Property and Equipment

Property and equipment are recorded at cost. Expenditures for major additions and betterments are capitalized. Maintenance and repairs are charged to operations as incurred. Depreciation is computed by the straight-line method (after taking into account their respective estimated residual values) over the estimated useful lives of the respective assets as follows:

	Estimated Useful Life (Years)

Computer equipment		3

Equipment		2-5

Furniture and fixture		7

Leasehold improvements		*

(*) Amortized on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease or the estimated useful lives, whichever period is shorter.

Upon sale or retirement of property and equipment, the related cost and accumulated depreciation are removed from the accounts and any gain or loss is reflected in the consolidated statements of operations.

Investments - Cost Method, Equity Method and Joint Venture

In accordance with sub-topic 323-10 of the FASB ASC (“Sub-topic 323-10”), the Company accounts for investments in common stock of an investee for which the Company has significant influence in the operating or financial policies even though the Company holds 50% or less of the common stock or in-substance common stock.

Method of Accounting

Investments held in stock of entities other than subsidiaries, namely corporate joint ventures and other non-controlled entities usually are accounted for by one of three methods: (i) the fair value method (addressed in Topic 320), (ii) the equity method (addressed in Topic 323), or (iii) the cost method (addressed in Subtopic 325-20). Pursuant to Paragraph 323-10-05-5, the equity method tends to be most appropriate if an investment enables the investor to influence the operating or financial policies of the investee.

Investment in CONtv

On August 27, 2014, the Company entered into a joint venture and executed an Operating Agreement for CON TV LLC (“CONtv”) with Cinedigm Entertainment Corp. (“Cinedigm”), ROAR, LLC (a related party partially owned by a member of the Board) (“ROAR”) and Bristol Capital, LLC (a related party controlled by a member of the Board) (“Bristol Capital”). The Company owned a 47.50% interest in the newly formed entity, CONtv. The Company was accounting for the interest in the joint venture utilizing the equity method of accounting.

On November 16, 2015, pursuant to that certain Amended and Restated Operating Agreement for CONtv by and among the aforementioned parties (the “A&R Operating Agreement”), the Company’s ownership interest in CONtv was reduced to 10%. Pursuant to the A&R Operating Agreement, the Company is only obligated to fund on-going costs in the amount of $25,000 in cash on an on-going monthly basis for a period of 12 months following the effective date.

For the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, the Company recognized $262,500 and $1,324,727 in losses from this venture, respectively. As of December 31, 2016 and 2015, the investment in CONtv was $0.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

The Company follows ASC 820-10 of the FASB Accounting Standards Codification to measure the fair value of its financial instruments and disclosures about fair value of its financial instruments. ASC 820-10 establishes a framework for measuring fair value in accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (U.S. GAAP), and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. To increase consistency and comparability in fair value measurements and related disclosures, ASC 820-10 establishes a fair value hierarchy which prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value into three (3) broad levels. The three (3) levels of fair value hierarchy defined by ASC 820-10 are described below:

Level 1		Quoted market prices available in active markets for identical assets or liabilities as of the reporting date.

Level 2		Pricing inputs other than quoted prices in active markets included in Level 1, which are either directly or indirectly observable as of the reporting date.

Level 3		Pricing inputs that are generally unobservable inputs and not corroborated by market data.

Financial assets are considered Level 3 when their fair values are determined using pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies or similar techniques and at least one significant model assumption or input is unobservable.

The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs. If the inputs used to measure the financial assets and liabilities fall within more than one level described above, the categorization is based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement of the instrument.

The carrying amounts of the Company’s financial assets and liabilities, such as cash, accounts receivable, inventory, prepaid expenses and other current assets, accounts payable and accrued expenses approximate their fair values because of the short maturity of these instruments.

In connection with the securities purchase agreement and debt transactions during the year ended December 31, 2016, the Company issued warrants, to purchase common stock with an exercise price of $0.15 and a five-year term. The Company identified certain put features embedded in the warrants that potentially could result in a net cash settlement in the event of a fundamental transaction, requiring the Company to classify the warrants as a derivative liability.

In connection with the issuance of a convertible promissory note as discussed below in Note 6, the Company evaluated the note agreement to determine if the agreement contained any embedded components that would qualify the agreement as a derivative. The Company identified certain put features embedded in the convertible note agreement that potentially could result in a net cash settlement in the event of a fundamental transaction, requiring the Company to classify the conversion feature as a derivative liability.

The Company determined that it is not practical to estimate the fair value of the convertible promissory note payable because of its unique nature and the costs that would be incurred to obtain an independent valuation. The Company does not have comparable outstanding debt on which to base an estimated current borrowing rate or other discount rate for purposes of estimating the fair value of the convertible note payable and the Company has not been able to develop a valuation model that can be applied consistently in a cost-efficient manner. These factors all contribute to the impracticability of estimating the fair value of the notes payable. At December 31, 2016 and 2015, the carrying value of the convertible promissory note payable net of debt discount was $1,456 and $0. At December 31, 2016, the Company recorded accrued interest of $24,243 and $0, which is included on the Consolidated Balance Sheets in the accounts payable and accrued expenses line item.

Transactions involving related parties typically cannot be presumed to be carried out on an arm’s-length basis, as the requisite conditions of competitive, free-market dealings may not exist. However, in the case of the convertible promissory note discussed in Note 6, the Company obtained a fairness opinion from an independent third party which supports that the transaction was carried out at an arm’s length basis.

The Company’s Level 3 financial liabilities consist of the derivative conversion features issued in 2016. The Company valued the conversion features using a Monte Carlo model. These models incorporate transaction details such as the Company’s stock price, contractual terms, maturity, risk free rates, and volatility as of the date of issuance and each balance sheet date.

The Company utilized the following management assumptions in valuing the derivative conversion feature during the year ended December 31, 2016:

Exercise price	$	0.12 - 0.15
Risk free interest rate		1.14% – 1.93	%
Dividend yield		0.00	%
Expected volatility		94% - 115	%
Remaining term		2 to 5 years

Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities Measured on a Recurring Basis

The Company uses Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy to measure the fair value of the derivative liabilities and revalues its derivative liability at every reporting period and recognizes gains or losses in the statements of operations that are attributable to the change in the fair value of the derivative liability.

Financial assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis are summarized below and disclosed on the balance sheets as follows:

			Fair Value Measurement Using
	Carrying Value		Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total

Embedded conversion feature	$	3,298,000	$	-	$	-	$	3,298,000	$	3,298,000
Warrant liability		3,200,137		-		-		3,200,137		3,200,137
December 31, 2016	$	6,498,737	$	-	$	-	$	6,498,737	$	6,498,737

The unobservable level 3 inputs used by the Company was the expected volatility assumption used in the Monte Carlo pricing model. Expected volatility is based on the historical stock price of the Company’s common stock.

The following table provides a summary of the changes in fair value, including net transfers in and/or out, of all financial assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable inputs during the year ended December 31, 2016.

	Warrants			Convertible Note		Total
Balance – December 31, 2015	$	-		$	-	$	-
Issuance of derivative liabilities		5,206,444			2,294,435		7,500,879
Extinguishment of derivative liability from exercise of warrants		(2,831,851	)		-		(2,831,851	)
Change in fair value of derivative liability		825,544			1,004,165		1,829,709
Balance – December 31, 2016	$	3,200,137		$	3,298,000	$	6,498,737

Changes in the unobservable input values could potentially cause material changes in the fair value of the Company’s Level 3 financial instruments. The significant unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurements is the expected volatility assumption. A significant increase (decrease) in the expected volatility assumption could potentially result in a higher (lower) fair value measurement.

Derivative Instruments

The Company evaluates its convertible debt, warrants or other contracts to determine if those contracts or embedded components of those contracts qualify as derivatives to be separately accounted for in accordance with ASC 815-15. The result of this accounting treatment is that the fair value of the embedded derivative is marked-to-market each balance sheet date and recorded as a liability. In the event that the fair value is recorded as a liability, the change in fair value is recorded in the statements of operations as other income or expense. Upon conversion or exercise of a derivative instrument, the instrument is marked to fair value at the conversion date and then that fair value is reclassified to equity.

In circumstances where the embedded conversion option in a convertible instrument is required to be bifurcated and there are also other embedded derivative instruments in the convertible instrument that are required to be bifurcated, the bifurcated derivative instruments are accounted for as a single, compound derivative instrument.

The classification of derivative instruments, including whether such instruments should be recorded as liabilities or as equity, is re-assessed at the end of each reporting period. Equity instruments that are initially classified as equity that become subject to reclassification are reclassified to liability at the fair value of the instrument on the reclassification date.

Revenue Recognition and Cost of Revenues

The Company follows Paragraph 605-10-S99-1 of the FASB Accounting Standards Codification for revenue recognition. The Company will recognize revenue when it is realized or realizable and earned. The Company considers revenue realized or realizable and earned when all of the following criteria are met: (i) persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, (ii) the product has been shipped or the services have been rendered to the customer, (iii) the sales price is fixed or determinable, and (iv) collectability is reasonably assured.

Convention revenue is generally earned upon completion of the convention. Unearned convention revenue is deposits received for conventions that have not yet taken place, which are fully or partially refundable depending upon the terms and conditions of the agreements.

Unearned ConBox revenue is non-refundable up-front payments for products. These payments are initially deferred and subsequently recognized over the subscription period, typically three months, and upon shipment of the product.

The Company recognizes cost of revenues in the period in which the revenues was earned. In the event the Company incurs cost of revenues for conventions that are yet to occur, the Company records such amounts as prepaid expenses and such prepaid expenses are expensed during the period the convention takes place.

Shipping and Handling Costs

The Company accounts for shipping and handling fees in accordance with paragraph 605-45-45-19 of the FASB Accounting Standards Codification. While amounts charged to customers for shipping products are included in revenues, the related costs are classified in cost of revenue as incurred.

Shipping and handling costs were $178,931 and $176,986 for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

Equity–based compensation

The Company recognizes compensation expense for all equity–based payments in accordance with ASC 718 “Compensation – Stock Compensation”. Under fair value recognition provisions, the Company recognizes equity–based compensation net of an estimated forfeiture rate and recognizes compensation cost only for those shares expected to vest over the requisite service period of the award.

Restricted stock awards are granted at the discretion of the Company. These awards are restricted as to the transfer of ownership and generally vest over the requisite service periods, typically over a four-year period (vesting on a straight–line basis). The fair value of a stock award is equal to the fair market value of a share of Company stock on the grant date.

The fair value of option award is estimated on the date of grant using the Black–Scholes option valuation model. The Black–Scholes option valuation model requires the development of assumptions that are input into the model. These assumptions are the expected stock volatility, the risk–free interest rate, the expected life of the option, the dividend yield on the underlying stock and the expected forfeiture rate. Expected volatility is calculated based on the historical volatility of the Company’s Common stock over the expected option life and other appropriate factors. The expected option term is computed using the “simplified” method as permitted under the provisions of ASC 718-10-S99. The Company uses the simplified method to calculate expected term of share options and similar instruments as the Company does not have sufficient historical exercise data to provide a reasonable basis upon which to estimate expected term. Risk–free interest rates are calculated based on continuously compounded risk–free rates for the appropriate term. The dividend yield is assumed to be zero as the Company has never paid or declared any cash dividends on the Common stock of the Company and does not intend to pay dividends on the Common stock in the foreseeable future. The expected forfeiture rate is estimated based on historical experience.

Determining the appropriate fair value model and calculating the fair value of equity–based payment awards requires the input of the subjective assumptions described above. The assumptions used in calculating the fair value of equity–based payment awards represent management’s best estimates, which involve inherent uncertainties and the application of management’s judgment. As a result, if factors change and the Company uses different assumptions, the equity–based compensation could be materially different in the future. In addition, the Company is required to estimate the expected forfeiture rate and recognize expense only for those shares expected to vest. If the actual forfeiture rate is materially different from the Company’s estimate, the equity–based compensation could be significantly different from what the Company has recorded in the current period.

The Company accounts for share–based payments granted to non–employees in accordance with ASC 505-40, “Equity Based Payments to Non–Employees”. The Company determines the fair value of the stock–based payment as either the fair value of the consideration received or the fair value of the equity instruments issued, whichever is more reliably measurable. If the fair value of the equity instruments issued is used, it is measured using the stock price and other measurement assumptions as of the earlier of either (1) the date at which a commitment for performance by the counterparty to earn the equity instruments is reached, or (2) the date at which the counterparty’s performance is complete. The fair value of the equity instruments is re-measured each reporting period over the requisite service period.

Income Taxes

Income taxes are provided in accordance with ASC No. 740, “Accounting for Income Taxes”. A deferred tax asset or liability is recorded for all temporary differences between financial and tax reporting and net operating loss carryforwards. Deferred tax expense (benefit) results from the net change during the period of deferred tax assets and liabilities.

Deferred tax assets are reduced by a valuation allowance when, in the opinion of management, it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are adjusted for the effects of changes in tax laws and rates on the date of enactment.

The Company is no longer subject to tax examinations by tax authorities for years prior to 2013.

During the year ended December 31, 2016, the Company partially utilized NOL carry-forwards to offset taxable income.

Earnings per Share

Earnings per share (“EPS”) is the amount of earnings attributable to each share of common stock. For convenience, the term is used to refer to either earnings or loss per share. EPS is computed pursuant to Section 260-10-45 of the FASB Accounting Standards Codification. Pursuant to ASC Paragraphs 260-10-45-10 through 260-10-45-16, basic EPS shall be computed by dividing income available to common stockholders (the numerator) by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding (the denominator) during the period. Income available to common stockholders shall be computed by deducting both the dividends declared in the period on preferred stock (whether or not paid) and the dividends accumulated for the period on cumulative preferred stock (whether or not earned) from income from continuing operations (if that amount appears in the income statement) and also from net income. The computation of diluted EPS is similar to the computation of basic EPS except that the denominator is increased to include the number of additional common shares that would have been outstanding if the dilutive potential common shares had been issued during the period to reflect the potential dilution that could occur from common shares issuable through contingent shares issuance arrangement, stock options or warrants.

The following table shows the outstanding dilutive common shares excluded from the diluted net income (loss) per share calculation as they were anti-dilutive:

	Contingent shares issuance arrangement, stock options or warrants
	For the Year Ended December 31, 2016		For the Year Ended December 31, 2015

Convertible note		16,666,667		-
Common stock options		5,319,000		9,933,500
Common stock warrants		16,666,667		-

Total contingent shares issuance arrangement, stock options or warrants		38,652,334		9,933,500

Reclassification

Certain prior period amounts have been reclassified to conform to current period presentation.

Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements

In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-15, “Presentation of Financial Statements-Going Concern (Subtopic 205-40): Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern.” ASU 2014-15 provides guidance on management’s responsibility to evaluate whether there is substantial doubt about an organization’s ability to continue as a going concern and to provide related footnote disclosures. For each reporting period, management will be required to evaluate whether there are conditions or events that raise substantial doubt about a company’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year from the date the financial statements are issued. The amendments in ASU 2014-15 are effective for annual reporting periods ending after December 15, 2016 and for annual and interim periods thereafter. Early adoption is permitted. The Company has adopted the methodologies prescribed by ASU 2014-15, the adoption of ASU 2014-15 did not have a material effect on its financial position or results of operations.

In July 2015, the FASB issued the ASU No. 2015-11 “Inventory (Topic 330): Simplifying the Measurement of Inventory” (“ASU 2015-11”). The amendments in this ASU do not apply to inventory that is measured using last-in, first-out (LIFO) or the retail inventory method. The amendments apply to all other inventory, which includes inventory that is measured using first-in, first-out (FIFO) or average cost. An entity should measure inventory within the scope of this ASU at the lower of cost and net realizable value. Net realizable value is the estimated selling prices in the ordinary course of business, less reasonably predictable costs of completion, disposal, and transportation. Subsequent measurement is unchanged for inventory measured using LIFO or the retail inventory method. For public business entities, the amendments in this ASU are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company is currently evaluating the effects of ASU 2015-11 on the consolidated financial statements.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, “Leases (Topic 842).” Under ASU 2016-02, lessees will be required to recognize, for all leases of 12 months or more, a liability to make lease payments and a right-of-use asset representing the right to use the underlying asset for the lease term. Additionally, the guidance requires improved disclosures to help users of financial statements better understand the nature of an entity’s leasing activities. This ASU is effective for public reporting companies for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2018, with early adoption permitted, and must be adopted using a modified retrospective approach. The Company is in the process of evaluating the effect of the new guidance on its consolidated financial statements and disclosures.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-06, “Derivatives and Hedging” (topic 815). The FASB issued this update to clarify the requirements for assessing whether contingent call (put) options that can accelerate the payment of principal on debt instruments are clearly and closely related to their debt hosts. An entity performing the assessment under the amendments in this update is required to assess the embedded call (put) options solely in accordance with the four-step decision sequence. The updated guidance is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption of the update is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of the new standard on the consolidated financial statements.

In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-10, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers: Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing (Topic 606)”. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-08, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers: Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross verses Net) (Topic 606)”. These amendments provide additional clarification and implementation guidance on the previously issued ASU 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers”. The amendments in ASU 2016-10 provide clarifying guidance on materiality of performance obligations; evaluating distinct performance obligations; treatment of shipping and handling costs; and determining whether an entity’s promise to grant a license provides a customer with either a right to use an entity’s intellectual property or a right to access an entity’s intellectual property. The amendments in ASU 2016-08 clarify how an entity should identify the specified good or service for the principal versus agent evaluation and how it should apply the control principle to certain types of arrangements. The adoption of ASU 2016-10 and ASU 2016-08 is to coincide with an entity’s adoption of ASU 2014-09, which the Company intends to adopt for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. The Company is in the process of evaluating the standard and does not expect the adoption will have a material effect on its consolidated financial statements and disclosures.

In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09, “Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic 718)”. The FASB issued this update to improve the accounting for employee share-based payments and affect all organizations that issue share-based payment awards to their employees. Several aspects of the accounting for share-based payment award transactions are simplified, including: (a) income tax consequences; (b) classification of awards as either equity or liabilities; and (c) classification on the statement of cash flows. The updated guidance is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption of the update is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of the new standard.

In May 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-12, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients”, which narrowly amended the revenue recognition guidance regarding collectability, noncash consideration, presentation of sales tax and transition and is effective during the same period as ASU 2014-09. The Company is currently evaluating the standard and does not expect the adoption will have a material effect on its consolidated financial statements and disclosures.

In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15, “Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments” (“ASU 2016-15”). ASU 2016-15 will make eight targeted changes to how cash receipts and cash payments are presented and classified in the statement of cash flows. ASU 2016-15 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017. The new standard will require adoption on a retrospective basis unless it is impracticable to apply, in which case it would be required to apply the amendments prospectively as of the earliest date practicable. The Company is currently in the process of evaluating the impact of ASU 2016-15 on its consolidated financial statements.

In October 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-16, “Income Taxes (Topic 740): Intra-Entity Transfers of Assets Other than Inventory”, which eliminates the exception that prohibits the recognition of current and deferred income tax effects for intra-entity transfers of assets other than inventory until the asset has been sold to an outside party. The updated guidance is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption of the update is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of the new standard.

In November 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-18, “Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230)”, requiring that the statement of cash flows explain the change in the total cash, cash equivalents, and amounts generally described as restricted cash or restricted cash equivalents. This guidance is effective for fiscal years, and interim reporting periods therein, beginning after December 15, 2017 with early adoption permitted. The provisions of this guidance are to be applied using a retrospective approach which requires application of the guidance for all periods presented. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of the new standard.

Management does not believe that any recently issued, but not yet effective accounting pronouncements, when adopted, will have a material effect on the accompanying consolidated financial statements.