Recent Accounting Pronouncements

With the exception of those discussed below, there have been no recent accounting pronouncements or changes in accounting pronouncements during the six months ended June 30, 2012, as compared to those described in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, that are of significance, or potential significance, to the Company.

In December 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued a new standard which indefinitely defers certain provisions of a previously issued standard, Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2011-05 Comprehensive Income (Topic 220) that revised the manner in which companies present comprehensive income in financial statements. One of the ASU provisions required companies to present, by component, reclassification adjustments out of accumulated other comprehensive income in both the statement in which net income is presented and the statement in which other comprehensive income is presented. This requirement has been indefinitely deferred and will be further deliberated by the FASB at a future date. The new standard is effective for fiscal years and interim periods within those years that begin after December 15, 2011. The Company adopted this standard on January 1, 2012. The adoption of the new standard did not have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations, financial position or liquidity.

In June 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-05 Comprehensive Income (Topic 220). This update required that all non-owner changes in stockholders’ equity be presented either in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements. In the two-step approach, the first statement should present total net income and its components followed consecutively by a second statement that should present total other comprehensive income, the components of other comprehensive income, and the total of comprehensive income. The updated guidance was effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning on or after December 15, 2011 and was to be applied on a retrospective basis to the beginning of the annual period of adoption. The new standard does not change the items that must be reported in other comprehensive income and was effective for fiscal years and interim periods within those years that begin after December 15, 2011. The Company adopted this standard on January 1, 2012. The adoption of the new standard did not have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations, financial position or liquidity.

In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-08 Intangibles-Goodwill and Other (Topic 350). The updated guidance is intended to reduce complexity and costs by allowing an entity the option to make a qualitative evaluation about the likelihood of goodwill impairment, using factors such as changes in management, key personnel, business strategy, technology or customers, to determine whether it should calculate the fair value of a reporting unit. Previous accounting literature required an entity to test goodwill for impairment by comparing the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying amount, including goodwill. If the fair value of a reporting unit was less than its carrying amount, then the second step of the test had to be performed to measure the amount of the impairment loss, if any. In the second step, the implied fair value of the reporting unit’s goodwill was determined in the same manner as goodwill is measured in a business combination (by measuring the fair value of the reporting unit’s assets, liabilities and unrecognized intangible assets and determining the remaining amount ascribed to goodwill) and comparing the amount of the implied goodwill to the carrying amount of the goodwill. Under the updated guidance, an entity is not required to calculate the fair value of a reporting unit unless the entity determines that is more likely than not that its fair value is less than its carrying amount. This update is effective for annual and interim goodwill impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after December 31, 2011. The Company adopted this standard January 1, 2012 and it did not have any material impact on its results of operations, financial position or liquidity.

In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-04, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820). The ASU generally aligns the principles for fair value measurements and the related disclosure requirements under GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”). ASU 2011-04 changes certain fair value measurement principles and enhances the disclosure requirements, particularly for Level 3 fair value measurements. The amendment is effective on a prospective basis for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2011. The Company adopted this standard on January 1, 2012 and adoption of the standard did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In April 2011, the FASB amended its guidance on accounting for repurchase agreements. The amendments eliminate as a criteria for demonstrating effective control over the transferred asset whether a transferor has the ability to repurchase or redeem the financial assets. Under the amended guidance, a transferor maintains effective control over transferred financial assets (and thus accounts for the transfer as a secured borrowing) if there is an agreement that both entitles and obligates the transferor to repurchase the financial assets before maturity and if all of the following conditions previously required are met: (i) financial assets to be repurchased or redeemed are the same or substantially the same as those transferred; (ii) repurchase or redemption date before maturity at a fixed or determinable price; and (iii) the agreement is entered into contemporaneously with, or in contemplation of, the transfer. As a result, more arrangements could be accounted for as secured borrowings rather than sales. The updated guidance is effective on a prospective basis for interim and annual reporting periods beginning on or after December 15, 2011. The Company adopted this standard January 1, 2012 and it did not have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations, financial position or liquidity.

In October 2010, the FASB issued ASU No. 2010-26, Accounting for Costs Associated with Acquiring or Renewing Insurance Contracts (“ASU 2010-26”). ASU 2010-26 modifies the types of costs that may be deferred, allowing insurance companies to only defer costs directly related to a successful contract acquisition or renewal. These costs include incremental direct costs of successful contracts, the portion of employees’ salaries and benefits related to time spent on acquisition activities for successful contracts and other costs incurred in the acquisition of a contract. Additional disclosure of the type of acquisition costs capitalized is also required.

The Company adopted ASU 2010-26 prospectively. During 2012, the Company estimates that pre-tax expenses will increase by approximately $8,000 to $10,000 as a lower amount of acquisition costs will be capitalized and existing costs that no longer meet the criteria for deferral under ASU 2010-26 will be recognized in expense over the original amortization periods. For the three and six months ended June 30, 2012, the Company recognized approximately $300 and $3,600, respectively, of expense related to such previously deferrable costs. If the Company had adopted ASU 2010-26 retrospectively, approximately $1,700 and $6,300, respectively, of acquisition costs that were deferred would have been recognized in expense for the three and six month period ended June 30, 2011.