XML 68 R17.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.19.3
Significant Accounting Policies (Policies)
 9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2019
Accounting Policies [Abstract]  
Adopted and New Accounting Pronouncements, Policy
Adopted Accounting Pronouncements
In February 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued an accounting standards update (“ASU”) that requires recognizing lease assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet and disclosing key information about leasing arrangements. This ASU affects accounting and disclosure more dramatically for lessees as accounting and disclosure for lessors is mainly unchanged. We adopted this ASU on January 1, 2019. The adoption of this ASU resulted in the recognition of a lease asset and lease liability of $3.8 million, respectively, on our consolidated balance sheet at September 30, 2019.
In March 2017, the FASB issued an ASU that applies to certain callable debt securities where the amortized cost basis is at a premium to the price repayable by the issuer at the earliest call date. Under this guidance, the premium is amortized to the first call date. We adopted this ASU on January 1, 2019. The adoption of this ASU did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.
In June 2018, the FASB issued an ASU that expands the scope of Accounting Standards Codification 718, Compensation-Stock Compensation, to include share-based payment transactions for acquiring goods and services to nonemployees and eliminates the existing accounting model for nonemployee share-based payment awards. We adopted this ASU on January 1, 2019. While this ASU results in an earlier measurement date for our nonemployee restricted stock units that have not vested as of January 1, 2019, there was no impact to our consolidated financial statements upon adoption.
New Accounting Pronouncements
In June 2016, the FASB issued an ASU that significantly changes the impairment model for most financial assets that are measured at amortized cost and certain other instruments from an incurred loss model to an expected loss model that requires these assets be presented at the net amount expected to be collected. In addition, credit losses on available for sale debt securities will be recorded through an allowance account.  This ASU will be effective for us on January 1, 2020, with early adoption permitted. Our implementation procedures to date relative to this standard include, but are not limited to, identifying financial assets within the scope of this guidance, developing a current expected credit loss model for our commercial mortgage loans and refining internal processes for financial assets impacted by this guidance. We believe the new impairment model will lead to earlier recognition of credit losses for our commercial mortgage loans.
In August 2018, the FASB issued an ASU that revises certain aspects of the measurement models and disclosure requirements for long duration insurance and investment contracts. The FASB’s objective in issuing this ASU is to improve, simplify, and enhance the accounting for long-duration contracts. The revisions include updating cash flow assumptions in the calculation of the liability for traditional life products, introducing the term ‘market risk benefit’ ("MRB") and requiring all contract features meeting the definition of an MRB to be measured at fair value, simplifying the method used to amortize deferred policy acquisition costs and deferred sales inducements to a constant basis over the expected term of the related contracts rather than based on gross profits and enhancing disclosure requirements. While this ASU is effective for us on January 1, 2022, the transition date (the remeasurement date) is January 1, 2020. Early adoption of this ASU is permitted. We are in the process of evaluating the impact this guidance will have on our consolidated financial statements.
Fair Values of Financial Instruments, Policy
Fair value is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability (exit price) in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The objective of a fair value measurement is to determine that price for each financial instrument at each measurement date. We meet this objective using various methods of valuation that include market, income and cost approaches.
We categorize our financial instruments into three levels of fair value hierarchy based on the priority of inputs used in determining fair value. The hierarchy defines the highest priority inputs (Level 1) as quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. The lowest priority inputs (Level 3) are our own assumptions about what a market participant would use in determining fair value such as estimated future cash flows. In certain cases, the inputs used to measure fair value may fall into different levels of the fair value hierarchy. In such cases, a financial instrument's level within the fair value hierarchy is based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement. Our assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires judgment and considers factors specific to the financial instrument. We categorize financial assets and liabilities recorded at fair value in the consolidated balance sheets as follows:
Level 1—
Quoted prices are available in active markets for identical financial instruments as of the reporting date. We do not adjust the quoted price for these financial instruments, even in situations where we hold a large position and a sale could reasonably impact the quoted price.
Level 2—
Quoted prices in active markets for similar financial instruments, quoted prices for identical or similar financial instruments in markets that are not active; and models and other valuation methodologies using inputs other than quoted prices that are observable.
Level 3—
Models and other valuation methodologies using significant inputs that are unobservable for financial instruments and include situations where there is little, if any, market activity for the financial instrument. The inputs into the determination of fair value require significant management judgment or estimation. Financial instruments that are included in Level 3 are securities for which no market activity or data exists and for which we used discounted expected future cash flows with our own assumptions about what a market participant would use in determining fair value.
Transfers of securities among the levels occur at times and depend on the type of inputs used to determine fair value of each security.
Investments, Policy
We review and analyze all investments on an ongoing basis for changes in market interest rates and credit deterioration. This review process includes analyzing our ability to recover the amortized cost basis of each investment that has a fair value that is materially lower than its amortized cost and requires a high degree of management judgment and involves uncertainty. The evaluation of securities for other than temporary impairments is a quantitative and qualitative process, which is subject to risks and uncertainties.
We have a policy and process to identify securities that could potentially have impairments that are other than temporary. This process involves monitoring market events and other items that could impact issuers. The evaluation includes but is not limited to such factors as:
•
the length of time and the extent to which the fair value has been less than amortized cost or cost;
•
whether the issuer is current on all payments and all contractual payments have been made as agreed;
•
the remaining payment terms and the financial condition and near-term prospects of the issuer;
•
the lack of ability to refinance due to liquidity problems in the credit market;
•
the fair value of any underlying collateral;
•
the existence of any credit protection available;
•
our intent to sell and whether it is more likely than not we would be required to sell prior to recovery for debt securities;
•
consideration of rating agency actions; and
•
changes in estimated cash flows of mortgage and asset backed securities.
We determine whether other than temporary impairment losses should be recognized for debt securities by assessing all facts and circumstances surrounding each security. Where the decline in fair value of debt securities is attributable to changes in market interest rates or to factors such as market volatility, liquidity and spread widening, and we anticipate recovery of all contractual or expected cash flows, we do not consider these investments to be other than temporarily impaired because we do not intend to sell these investments and it is not more likely than not we will be required to sell these investments before a recovery of amortized cost, which may be maturity.
If we intend to sell a debt security or if it is more likely than not that we will be required to sell a debt security before recovery of its amortized cost basis, other than temporary impairment has occurred and the difference between amortized cost and fair value will be recognized as a loss in operations.
If we do not intend to sell and it is not more likely than not we will be required to sell the debt security but also do not expect to recover the entire amortized cost basis of the security, an impairment loss would be recognized in operations in the amount of the expected credit loss. We determine the amount of expected credit loss by calculating the present value of the cash flows expected to be collected discounted at each security's acquisition yield based on our consideration of whether the security was of high credit quality at the time of acquisition. The difference between the present value of expected future cash flows and the amortized cost basis of the security is the amount of credit loss recognized in operations. The remaining amount of the other than temporary impairment is recognized in other comprehensive income (loss).
The determination of the credit loss component of a mortgage backed security is based on a number of factors. The primary consideration in this evaluation process is the issuer's ability to meet current and future interest and principal payments as contractually stated at time of purchase. Our review of these securities includes an analysis of the cash flow modeling under various default scenarios considering independent third party benchmarks, the seniority of the specific tranche within the structure of the security, the composition of the collateral and the actual default, loss severity and prepayment experience exhibited. With the input of third party assumptions for default projections, loss severity and prepayment expectations, we evaluate the cash flow projections to determine whether the security is performing in accordance with its contractual obligation.
We utilize the models from a leading structured product software specialist serving institutional investors. These models incorporate each security's seniority and cash flow structure. In circumstances where the analysis implies a potential for principal loss at some point in the future, we use the "best estimate" cash flow projection discounted at the security's effective yield at acquisition to determine the amount of our potential credit loss associated with this security. The discounted expected future cash flows equates to our expected recovery value. Any shortfall of the expected recovery when compared to the amortized cost of the security will be recorded as the credit loss component of other than temporary impairment.
The cash flow modeling is performed on a security-by-security basis and incorporates actual cash flows on the residential mortgage backed securities through the current period, as well as the projection of remaining cash flows using a number of assumptions including default rates, prepayment rates and loss severity rates. The default curves we use are tailored to the Prime or Alt-A residential mortgage backed securities that we own, which assume lower default rates and loss severity for Prime securities versus Alt-A securities. These default curves are scaled higher or lower depending on factors such as current underlying mortgage loan performance, rating agency loss projections, loan to value ratios, geographic diversity, as well as other appropriate considerations.
The determination of the credit loss component of a corporate bond is based on the underlying financial performance of the issuer and their ability to meet their contractual obligations. Considerations in our evaluation include, but are not limited to, credit rating changes, financial statement and ratio analysis, changes in management, significant changes in credit spreads, breaches of financial covenants and a review of the economic outlook for the industry and markets in which they trade. In circumstances where an issuer appears unlikely to meet its future obligation, or the security's price decline is deemed other than temporary, an estimate of credit loss is determined. Credit loss is calculated using default probabilities as derived from the credit default swaps markets in conjunction with recovery rates derived from independent third party analysis or a best estimate of credit loss. This credit loss rate is then incorporated into a present value calculation based on an expected principal loss in the future discounted at the yield at the date of purchase and compared to amortized cost to determine the amount of credit loss associated with the security.
In addition, for debt securities which we do not intend to sell and it is not more likely than not we will be required to sell, but our intent changes due to changes or events that could not have been reasonably anticipated, an other than temporary impairment charge is recognized. Once an impairment charge has been recorded, we then continue to review the other than temporarily impaired securities for appropriate valuation on an ongoing basis. Unrealized losses may be recognized in future periods through a charge to earnings should we later conclude that the decline in fair value below amortized cost is other than temporary pursuant to our accounting policy described above. The use of different methodologies and assumptions to determine the fair value of investments and the timing and amount of impairments may have a material effect on the amounts presented in our consolidated financial statements.
Mortgage Loans on Real Estate, Allowance for Loan Losses, Policy
We evaluate our mortgage loan portfolio for the establishment of a loan loss allowance by specific identification of impaired loans and the measurement of an estimated loss for each individual loan identified. A mortgage loan is impaired when it is probable that we will be unable to collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms of the loan agreement. If we determine that the value of any specific mortgage loan is impaired, the carrying amount of the mortgage loan will be reduced to its fair value, based upon the present value of expected future cash flows from the loan discounted at the loan's effective interest rate, or the fair value of the underlying collateral less estimated costs to sell.
In addition, we analyze the mortgage loan portfolio for the need of a general loan allowance for probable losses on all other loans on a quantitative and qualitative basis. The amount of the general loan allowance is based upon management's evaluation of the collectability of the loan portfolio, historical loss experience, delinquencies, credit concentrations, underwriting standards and national and local economic conditions.
We rate each of the mortgage loans in our portfolio based on factors such as historical operating performance, loan to value ratio and economic outlook, among others. We calculate a loss factor to apply to each rating based on historical losses we have recognized in our mortgage loan portfolio. We apply the loss factors to the total principal outstanding within each rating category to determine an appropriate estimate of the general loan loss allowance. We also assess the portfolio qualitatively and apply a loss rate to all loans without a specific allowance based on management's assessment of economic conditions, and we apply an additional amount of loss allowance to a group of loans that we have identified as having higher risk of loss.
Mortgage Loans on Real Estate, Real Estate Acquired Through Foreclosure, Policy Charge-offs include allowances that have been established on loans that were satisfied either by taking ownership of the collateral or by some other means such as discounted pay-off or loan sale. When ownership of the property is taken it is recorded at the lower of the mortgage loan's carrying value or the property's fair value (based on appraised values) less estimated costs to sell. The real estate owned is recorded as a component of Other investments and the mortgage loan is recorded as fully paid, with any allowance for credit loss that has been established charged off. Fair value of the real estate is determined by third party appraisal. Recoveries are situations where we have received a payment from the borrower in an amount greater than the carrying value of the loan (principal outstanding less specific allowance).
Mortgage Loans on Real Estate, Non-Accrual Loan Status, Policy
Loans that are categorized as "in workout" consist of loans that we have agreed to lower or no mortgage payments for a period of time while the borrowers address cash flow and/or operational issues. The key features of these workouts have been determined on a loan-by-loan basis. Most of these loans are in a period of low cash flow due to tenants vacating their space or tenants requesting rent relief during difficult economic periods. Generally, we have allowed the borrower a six month interest only period and in some cases a twelve month period of interest only. Interest only workout loans are expected to return to their regular debt service payments after the interest only period. Interest only loans that are not fully amortizing will have a larger balance at their balloon date than originally contracted. Fully amortizing loans that are in interest only periods will have larger debt service payments for their remaining term due to lost principal payments during the interest only period. In limited circumstances we have allowed borrowers to pay the principal portion of their loan payment into an escrow account that can be used for capital and tenant improvements for a period of not more than twelve months. In these situations new loan amortization schedules are calculated based on the principal not collected during this twelve month workout period and larger payments are collected for the remaining term of each loan. In all cases, the original interest rate and maturity date have not been modified, and we have not forgiven any principal amounts.
Mortgage loans are considered delinquent when they become 60 days or more past due. In general, when loans become 90 days past due, become collateral dependent or enter a period with no debt service payments required we place them on non-accrual status and discontinue recognizing interest income. If payments are received on a delinquent loan, interest income is recognized to the extent it would have been recognized if normal principal and interest would have been received timely. If payments are received to bring a delinquent loan back to current we will resume accruing interest income on that loan.
Mortgage Loans on Real Estate, Troubled Debt Restructuring, Policy
A Troubled Debt Restructuring ("TDR") is a situation where we have granted a concession to a borrower for economic or legal reasons related to the borrower's financial difficulties that we would not otherwise consider. A mortgage loan that has been granted new terms, including workout terms as described previously, would be considered a TDR if it meets conditions that would indicate a borrower is experiencing financial difficulty and the new terms constitute a concession on our part. We analyze all loans where we have agreed to workout terms and all loans that we have refinanced to determine if they meet the definition of a TDR. We consider the following factors in determining whether or not a borrower is experiencing financial difficulty:
•
borrower is in default,
•
borrower has declared bankruptcy,
•
there is growing concern about the borrower's ability to continue as a going concern,
•
borrower has insufficient cash flows to service debt,
•
borrower's inability to obtain funds from other sources, and
•
there is a breach of financial covenants by the borrower.
If the borrower is determined to be in financial difficulty, we consider the following conditions to determine if the borrower is granted a concession:
•
assets used to satisfy debt are less than our recorded investment,
•
interest rate is modified,
•
maturity date extension at an interest rate less than market rate,
•
capitalization of interest,
•
delaying principal and/or interest for a period of three months or more, and
•
partial forgiveness of the balance or charge-off.
Mortgage loan workouts, refinances or restructures that are classified as TDRs are individually evaluated and measured for impairment.
Commitments and Contingencies, Policy In accordance with applicable accounting guidelines, we establish an accrued liability for litigation and regulatory matters when those matters present loss contingencies that are both probable and estimable. As a litigation or regulatory matter is developing we, in conjunction with outside counsel, evaluate on an ongoing basis whether the matter presents a loss contingency that meets conditions indicating the need for accrual and/or disclosure, and if not the matter will continue to be monitored for further developments. If and when the loss contingency related to litigation or regulatory matters is deemed to be both probable and estimable, we will establish an accrued liability with respect to that matter and will continue to monitor the matter for further developments that may affect the amount of the accrued liability.