Recent Accounting Pronouncements | (2) Recent Accounting Pronouncements New accounting pronouncements implemented by the company during the nine months ended September 30, 2016 or requiring implementation in future periods are discussed below or in the related notes, where appropriate. In the first quarter of 2016, the company adopted Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2015-17, “Balance Sheet Classification of Deferred Taxes” on a retrospective basis. This ASU requires entities to classify all deferred tax assets and liabilities as noncurrent on the balance sheet instead of separating deferred taxes into current and noncurrent. As a result of the adoption of ASU 2015-17, deferred tax assets of $173 million were reclassified from current assets to noncurrent assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2015. The adoption of ASU 2015-17 did not have any impact on the company’s results of operations or cash flows. In the first quarter of 2016, the company adopted ASU 2015-16, “Simplifying the Accounting for Measurement-Period Adjustments.” This ASU requires an acquirer in a business combination to recognize adjustments to provisional amounts that are identified during the measurement period in the reporting period in which the adjustment amounts are determined. The adoption of ASU 2015-16 did not have any impact on the company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows. In the first quarter of 2016, the company adopted ASU 2015-15, “Presentation and Subsequent Measurement of Debt Issuance Costs Associated with Line-of-Credit Arrangements — Amendments to SEC Paragraphs Pursuant to Staff Announcement at June 18, 2015 EITF Meeting (SEC Update),” which clarifies the presentation and measurement of debt issuance costs incurred in connection with line of credit arrangements. The adoption of ASU 2015-15 did not have any impact on the company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows. In the first quarter of 2016, the company adopted ASU 2015-05, “Customer’s Accounting for Fees Paid in a Cloud Computing Arrangement” on a prospective basis. This ASU clarifies the circumstances under which a cloud computing customer would account for the arrangement as a license of internal-use software. The adoption of ASU 2015-05 did not have a material impact on the company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows. In the first quarter of 2016, the company adopted ASU 2015-03, “Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs” on a retrospective basis. This ASU changes the presentation of debt issuance costs on the balance sheet by requiring entities to present such costs as a direct deduction from the related debt liability rather than as an asset. As a result of the adoption of ASU 2015-03, debt issuance costs of $6 million were reclassified from noncurrent assets to a direct deduction of long-term debt on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2015. The adoption of ASU 2015-03 did not have any impact on the company’s results of operations or cash flows. In the first quarter of 2016, the company adopted ASU 2015-02, “Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis.” This ASU amends the consolidation guidance for VIEs and general partners’ investments in limited partnerships and modifies the evaluation of whether limited partnerships and similar legal entities are VIEs or voting interest entities. The adoption of ASU 2015-02 did not have a material impact on the company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows. In the first quarter of 2016, the company adopted ASU 2015-01, “Simplifying Income Statement Presentation by Eliminating the Concept of Extraordinary Items.” Under this ASU, an entity will no longer be allowed to separately disclose extraordinary items, net of tax, in the income statement after income from continuing operations if an event or transaction is unusual in nature and occurs infrequently. The adoption of ASU 2015-01 did not have any impact on the company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows. In the first quarter of 2016, the company adopted ASU 2014-12, “Accounting for Share-Based Payments When the Terms of an Award Provide That a Performance Target Could Be Achieved After the Requisite Service Period.” This ASU requires that a performance target that affects vesting, and that could be achieved after the requisite service period, be treated as a performance condition. The adoption of ASU 2014-12 did not have any impact on the company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows. In August 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued ASU 2016-15, “Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments.” ASU 2016-15 amends the guidance in Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 230, which often requires judgment to determine the appropriate classification of cash flows as operating, investing or financing activities and has resulted in diversity in practice in how certain cash receipts and cash payments are classified. ASU 2016-15 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017 and should be applied on a retrospective basis. Management does not expect the adoption of ASU 2016-13 to have a material impact on the company’s cash flows. In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13, “Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments.” The amendments in this ASU replace the incurred loss impairment methodology in current practice with a methodology that reflects expected credit losses and requires consideration of a broader range of reasonable and supportable information to estimate credit losses. ASU 2016-13 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019. Management does not expect the adoption of ASU 2016-13 to have a material impact on the company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, “Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting.” This ASU is intended to simplify various aspects of the accounting for share-based payment awards, including income tax consequences, classification of awards as either equity or liabilities, classification on the statement of cash flows and forfeiture rate calculations. ASU 2016-09 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016. Management is currently evaluating the impact of adopting ASU 2016-09 on the company’s financial position, results of operations and cash flows. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-07, “Simplifying the Transition to the Equity Method of Accounting” which eliminates the requirement to retrospectively apply equity method accounting when an investor obtains significant influence over a previously held investment. ASU 2016-07 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, and should be applied prospectively. Management does not expect the adoption of ASU 2016-07 to have a material impact on the company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-05, “Effect of Derivative Contract Novations on Existing Hedge Accounting Relationships.” This ASU clarifies that the novation of a derivative contract in a hedge accounting relationship does not, in and of itself, require dedesignation of that hedge accounting relationship. ASU 2016-05 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016. ASU 2016-05 can be applied on either a prospective or modified retrospective basis. Management does not expect the adoption of ASU 2016-05 to have a material impact on the company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows. In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, “Leases: Amendments to the FASB Accounting Standards Codification,” which amends the existing guidance on accounting for leases. This ASU requires the recognition of lease assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet, and the disclosure of key information about leasing arrangements. ASU 2016-02 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018. Early adoption is permitted and modified retrospective application is required for leases that exist or are entered into after the beginning of the earliest comparative period in the financial statements. Management is currently evaluating the impact of adopting ASU 2016-02 on the company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows. In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-01, “Financial Instruments — Overall — Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities.” This ASU requires entities to measure equity investments that do not result in consolidation and are not accounted for under the equity method at fair value and to recognize any changes in fair value in net income unless the investments qualify for a practicability exception. ASU 2016-01 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. Management does not expect the adoption of ASU 2016-01 to have a material impact on the company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows. In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-15, “Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern.” This ASU requires management to perform interim and annual assessments of an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year of the date the financial statements are issued and to provide certain disclosures if conditions or events raise substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern. ASU 2014-15 is effective for annual reporting periods ending after December 15, 2016 and subsequent interim reporting periods. Management does not expect the adoption of ASU 2014-15 to have a material impact on the company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows. Revenue Recognition In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers,” which outlines a single comprehensive model for entities to use in accounting for revenue arising from contracts with customers and supersedes most current revenue recognition guidance, including industry-specific guidance. ASU 2014-09 outlines a five-step process for revenue recognition that focuses on transfer of control, as opposed to transfer of risk and rewards, and also requires enhanced disclosures regarding the nature, amount, timing and uncertainty of revenues and cash flows from contracts with customers. Major provisions include determining which goods and services are distinct and require separate accounting (performance obligations), how variable consideration (which may include change orders and claims) is recognized, whether revenue should be recognized at a point in time or over time and ensuring the time value of money is considered in the transaction price. As a result of the deferral of the effective date in ASU 2015-14, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers — Deferral of the Effective Date,” the company will now be required to adopt ASU 2014-09 for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. Early adoption is permitted as of interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016. ASU 2014-09 can be applied either retrospectively to each prior period presented or as a cumulative-effect adjustment as of the date of adoption. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-08, “Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net)” which clarifies the principal versus agent guidance in ASU 2014-09. ASU 2016-08 clarifies how an entity determines whether to report revenue gross or net based on whether it controls a specific good or service before it is transferred to a customer. ASU 2016-08 also reframes the indicators to focus on evidence that an entity is acting as a principal rather than as an agent. In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-10, “Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing,” which amends certain aspects of ASU 2014-09. ASU 2016-10 amends how an entity should identify performance obligations for immaterial promised goods or services, shipping and handling activities and promises that may represent performance obligations. ASU 2016-10 also provides implementation guidance for determining the nature of licensing and royalties arrangements. In May 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-12, “Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients,” which also clarifies certain aspects of ASU 2014-09 including the assessment of collectability, presentation of sales taxes, treatment of noncash consideration, and accounting for completed contracts and contract modifications at transition. ASU 2016-12, 2016-10 and 2016-08 are effective upon adoption of ASU 2014-09. Management is currently evaluating the impact of adopting ASU 2014-09, 2016-08, 2016-10 and 2016-12 on the company’s financial position, results of operations, cash flows and related disclosures. Adoption of these ASUs is expected to affect the manner in which the company determines the unit of account for its projects (i.e., performance obligations). Under existing guidance, the company typically segments revenue and margin recognition between the engineering and construction phases of its contracts. Upon adoption, the company expects that the entire engineering and construction contract will typically be a single unit of account (a single performance obligation), which will result in a more constant recognition of revenue and margin over the term of the contract. The company will adopt ASU 2014-09 during the first quarter of 2018. The company expects to adopt this new standard using the modified retrospective method that will result in a cumulative effect adjustment as of the date of adoption. |