| Organization and Basis of Presentation | Organization and Basis of Presentation Newmark Group, Inc., formerly known as Newmark Knight Frank (together with its subsidiaries, “Newmark” or the “Company”), a Delaware corporation, was formed as NRE Delaware, Inc. on November 18, 2016. Newmark changed its name to Newmark Group, Inc. on October 18, 2017. Newmark Holdings, L.P. (“Newmark Holdings”) is a consolidated subsidiary of Newmark for which Newmark is the general partner. Newmark and Newmark Holdings jointly own Newmark Partners, L.P. (“Newmark OpCo”), the operating partnership. Newmark is a leading commercial real estate services firm. Newmark offers a diverse array of integrated services and products designed to meet the full needs of both real estate investors/owners and occupiers. Newmark’s investor/owner services and products include capital markets, which consists of investment sales, debt and structured finance and loan sales, agency leasing, property management, valuation and advisory, commercial real estate due diligence consulting and advisory services and Government Sponsored Enterprise (“GSE”) lending and loan servicing, mortgage brokerage and equity-raising. Newmark’s occupier services and products include tenant representation, real estate management technology systems, workplace and occupancy strategy, global corporate consulting services, project management, lease administration and facilities management. Newmark enhances these services and products through innovative real estate technology solutions and data analytics that enable clients to increase their efficiency and profits by optimizing their real estate portfolio. Newmark has relationships with many of the world’s largest commercial property owners, real estate developers and investors, as well as Fortune 500 and Forbes Global 2000 companies. Newmark was formed through the purchase by BGC Partners, Inc. (“BGC Partners” or “BGC”) of Newmark & Company Real Estate, Inc. and certain of its affiliates in 2011. A majority of the voting power of BGC Partners is held by Cantor Fitzgerald, L.P. (“Cantor”). Subsequent to the Spin-Off, as defined below, the majority of the voting power of Newmark is held by Cantor. On November 30, 2018 (the “Distribution Date”), BGC completed its previously announced pro rata distribution (the “Spin-Off”) to its stockholders of all of the shares of common stock of Newmark owned by BGC as of immediately prior to the effective time of the Spin-Off, with shares of Newmark Class A common stock distributed to the holders of shares of BGC Class A common stock (including directors and executive officers of BGC Partners) of record as of the close of business on November 23, 2018 (the “Record Date”), and shares of Newmark Class B common stock distributed to the holders of shares of BGC Class B common stock (consisting of Cantor and CF Group Management, Inc. (“CFGM”)) of record as of the close of business on the Record Date. The Spin-Off was effective as of 12:01 a.m., New York City time, on the Distribution Date. Separation and Distribution Agreement On December 13, 2017, BGC, BGC Holdings L.P. (“BGC Holdings”), BGC Partners, L.P. (“BGC U.S. OpCo”), Newmark, Newmark Holdings, Newmark OpCo and, solely for the provisions listed therein, Cantor and BGC Global Holdings, L.P. entered into a Separation and Distribution Agreement (as amended on November 8, 2018 and amended and restated on November 23, 2018, the “Separation and Distribution Agreement”). See Note 1 — “Organization and Basis of Presentation” to the Newmark financial statements in Part II, Item 8 of the Newmark Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019, for additional information regarding the transactions effected pursuant to the Separation and Distribution Agreements, including the separation of Newmark, Newmark Holdings and Newmark OpCo from BGC, BGC Holdings and BGC U.S. OpCo (the "Separation"), Newmark's initial public offering ("IPO") and the Spin-Off. BGC’s Investment in Newmark Holdings On March 7, 2018, BGC Partners and its operating subsidiaries purchased 16.6 million newly issued exchangeable limited partnership units (the “Newmark Units”) of Newmark Holdings L.P. for approximately $242.0 million (the “Investment in Newmark Holdings”) (see Note 27 — “Related Party Transactions” for additional information). Nasdaq Monetization Transactions On June 28, 2013, BGC sold certain assets of its on-the-run, electronic benchmark U.S. Treasury platform (“eSpeed”) to Nasdaq. The total consideration received in the transaction included $750.0 million in cash paid upon closing and an earn-out of up to 14,883,705 shares of Nasdaq common stock to be paid ratably over 15 years, provided that Nasdaq, as a whole, produces at least $25.0 million in consolidated gross revenues each year. The remaining rights under the Nasdaq Earn-out were transferred to Newmark on September 28, 2017 (see Note 7 — “Marketable Securities” for additional information). Exchangeable Preferred Partnership Units and Forward Contracts On June 18, 2018 and September 26, 2018, Newmark OpCo issued approximately $175.0 million and $150.0 million of exchangeable preferred partnership units (“EPUs”), respectively, in private transactions to the Royal Bank of Canada (“RBC”) (the “Newmark OpCo Preferred Investment”). Newmark received $266.1 million of cash in 2018 with respect to these transactions. The EPUs were issued in four tranches and are separately convertible by either RBC or Newmark into a fixed number of shares of Newmark Class A common stock, subject to a revenue hurdle in each of the fourth quarters of 2019 through 2022 for each of the respective four tranches. The ability to convert the EPUs into Newmark Class A common stock is subject to the SPV’s option to settle the postpaid forward contracts as described below. As the EPUs represent equity ownership of a consolidated subsidiary of Newmark, they have been included in “Noncontrolling interests” on the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheets and unaudited condensed consolidated statements of changes in equity. The EPUs are entitled to a preferred payable-in-kind dividend, which is recorded as accretion to the carrying amount of the EPUs through Retained earnings on the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated statements of changes in equity and are reductions to “Net income (loss) available to common stockholders” for the purpose of calculating earnings per share. Contemporaneously with the issuance of the EPUs, the special purpose vehicle (the “SPV”) that is a consolidated subsidiary of Newmark entered into four variable postpaid forward contracts with RBC (together, the “Nasdaq Forwards”). The SPV is an indirect subsidiary of Newmark whose sole assets are the Nasdaq Earn-outs for 2019 through 2022. The Nasdaq Forwards provide the SPV the option to settle using up to 992,247 shares of Nasdaq common stock, to be received by the SPV pursuant to the Nasdaq Earn-out (see Note 7 — “Marketable Securities”), or Newmark Class A common stock, in exchange for either cash or redemption of the EPUs, notice of which must be provided to RBC prior to November 1 of each year from 2019 through 2022. In September 2019, the SPV notified RBC of its decision to settle the first Nasdaq Forward using the Nasdaq common stock the SPV received in November 2019 in exchange for the first tranche of the EPUs, which resulted in a payable to RBC that was settled upon receipt of Nasdaq earn-out shares. The fair value of the Nasdaq common stock that Newmark received was $98.6 million . As a result of Newmark's settlement election, Newmark reclassified $93.5 million of EPUs from “Noncontrolling interest” to “Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities” on its unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheets. On December 2, 2019, Newmark settled the first Nasdaq Forward with 898,685 Nasdaq shares, with a fair value of $93.5 million , and Newmark retained 93,562 Nasdaq shares. As of March 31, 2020 , Newmark held no Nasdaq shares. The Spin-Off On November 30, 2018, BGC completed the Spin-Off to its stockholders of all of the shares of Newmark common stock owned by BGC as of immediately prior to the effective time of the Spin-Off, with shares of Newmark Class A common stock distributed to the holders of shares of BGC Class A common stock (including directors and executive officers of BGC Partners) of record as of the close of business on the Record Date, and shares of Newmark Class B common stock distributed to the holders of shares of BGC Class B common stock (consisting of Cantor and CFGM) of record as of the close of business on the Record Date. Based on the number of shares of BGC common stock outstanding as of the close of business on the Record Date, BGC’s stockholders as of the Record Date received in the Spin-Off 0.463895 of a share of Newmark Class A common stock for each share of BGC Class A common stock held as of the Record Date, and 0.463895 of a share of Newmark Class B common stock for each share of BGC Class B common stock held as of the Record Date. BGC Partners stockholders received cash in lieu of any fraction of a share of Newmark common stock that they otherwise would have received in the Spin-Off. Prior to and in connection with the Spin-Off, 14.8 million Newmark Holdings units held by BGC were exchanged into 9.4 million shares of Newmark Class A common stock, and 5.4 million shares of Newmark Class B common stock, and 7.0 million Newmark OpCo units held by BGC were exchanged into 6.9 million shares of Newmark Class A common stock. These Newmark Class A and Class B shares of common stock were included in the Spin-Off to BGC’s stockholders. In the aggregate, BGC distributed 131,886,409 shares of Newmark Class A common stock and 21,285,537 shares of Newmark Class B common stock to BGC’s stockholders in the Spin-Off. These shares of Newmark common stock collectively represented approximately 94% of the total voting power of outstanding common stock and approximately 87% of the total economics of Newmark outstanding common stock, in each case as of the Distribution Date. On November 30, 2018, BGC Partners also caused its subsidiary, BGC Holdings, L.P. (“BGC Holdings”), to distribute pro rata (the “BGC Holdings Distribution”) all of the 1,458,931 exchangeable limited partnership units of Newmark Holdings held by BGC Holdings immediately prior to the effective time of the BGC Holdings distribution to its limited partners entitled to receive distributions on their BGC Holdings units (including Cantor, CFGM and executive officers of BGC) who were holders of record of such units as of the Record Date. The Newmark Holdings units distributed to BGC Holdings partners in the BGC Holdings distribution are exchangeable for shares of Newmark Class A common stock, and in the case of the 449,917 Newmark Holdings units received by Cantor and CFGM, also into shares of Newmark Class B common stock, at the applicable exchange ratio (subject to adjustment). As of March 31, 2020 , the exchange ratio was 0.9461 shares of Newmark common stock per Newmark Holdings unit. Following the Spin-Off and the BGC Holdings Distribution, BGC Partners ceased to be Newmark’s controlling stockholder, and BGC and its subsidiaries no longer held any shares of Newmark common stock or other equity interests in it or its subsidiaries. Therefore, BGC no longer consolidates Newmark with its financial results subsequent to the Spin-Off. Cantor continues to control Newmark and its subsidiaries following the Spin-Off and the BGC Holdings Distribution. (a) Basis of Presentation The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared pursuant to the rules and regulations of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S. (“U.S. GAAP”). For the year ended December 31, 2019, Newmark changed the line item formerly known as “Allocations of net income and grant of exchangeability to limited partnership units and FPUs and issuance of common stock” to “Equity-based compensation and allocations of net income to limited partnership units and FPUs” on the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations and statements of cash flow. The change resulted in the reclassification of amortization charges related to equity-based awards, such as REUs and Restricted Stock Units (“RSUs”), from “Compensation and employee benefits” to “Equity-based compensation and allocations of net income to limited partnership units and FPUs.” “Equity-based compensation and allocations of net income to limited partnership units and FPUs” reflect the following items related to cash and equity-based compensation: • Charges with respect to the grant of shares of common stock or limited partnership units, such as HDUs, including in connection with the redemption of non-exchangeable limited partnership units, including PSUs; • Charges with respect to grants of exchangeability, such as the right of holders of limited partnership units with no capital accounts, such as PSUs, to exchange the units into shares of common stock, or HDUs, as well as the cash paid in the settlement of the related preferred units to pay withholding taxes owed by the unit holder upon such exchange; • Preferred units are granted in connection with the grant of certain limited partnership units, such as PSUs, that may be granted exchangeability to cover the withholding taxes owed by the unit holder, rather than issuing the gross amount of shares to employees, subject to cashless withholding of shares to pay applicable withholding taxes; • Charges related to the amortization of RSUs and limited partnership units; and • Allocations of net income to limited partnership units and founding/working partner units (“FPUs”), including the Preferred Distribution (as hereinafter defined). Intercompany balances and transactions within Newmark have been eliminated. Transactions between Cantor or BGC and Newmark pursuant to service agreements between Cantor and BGC (see Note 27 — “Related Party Transactions”), representing valid receivables and liabilities of Newmark which are periodically cash settled, have been included on the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements as either receivables from or payables to related parties. Newmark receives administrative services to support its operations, and in return, Cantor and/or BGC allocates certain of its expenses to Newmark. Such expenses represent costs related, but not limited to, treasury, legal, accounting, information technology, payroll administration, human resources, incentive compensation plans and other services. These costs, together with an allocation of Cantor and/or BGC overhead costs, are included as expenses on the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations. Where it is possible to specifically attribute such expenses to activities of Newmark, these amounts have been expensed directly to Newmark. Allocation of all other such expenses is based on a services agreement between Cantor and/or BGC which reflects the utilization of service provided or benefits received by Newmark during the periods presented on a consistent basis, such as headcount, square footage, revenue, etc. Management believes the assumptions underlying the stand-alone financial statements, including the assumptions regarding allocated expenses, reasonably reflect the utilization of services provided to or the benefit received by Newmark during the periods presented. However, these shared expenses may not represent the amounts that would have been incurred had Newmark operated independently from Cantor and or BGC. Actual costs that would have been incurred if Newmark had been a stand-alone company would depend on multiple factors, including organizational structure and strategic decisions in various areas, including information technology and infrastructure (see Note 27 — “Related Party Transactions” for an additional discussion of expense allocations). Transfers of cash, both to and from Cantor and/or BGC, are included in “Receivables from related parties or Payables to related parties” on the unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheets and as part of the change in payments to and borrowings from related parties in the financing section prior to the Spin-Off and in the operating section after the Spin-Off on the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated statements of cash flows. The income tax provision on the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations and unaudited condensed consolidated statements of comprehensive income has been calculated as if Newmark had been operating on a stand-alone basis and filed separate tax returns in the jurisdictions in which it operates. Prior to the Spin-Off, Newmark’s operations had been included in the BGC U.S. federal and state tax returns or separate non-U.S. jurisdictions tax returns. As Newmark operations in many jurisdictions were unincorporated commercial units of BGC and its subsidiaries, stand-alone tax returns have not been filed for the operations in these jurisdictions. The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements contain all normal and recurring adjustments that, in the opinion of management, are necessary for a fair presentation of the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheets, unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations, unaudited condensed consolidated statements of comprehensive income, unaudited condensed consolidated statements of cash flows and unaudited condensed consolidated statements of changes in equity of Newmark for the periods presented. (b) Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements In February 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842) . This standard requires lessees to recognize a Right-of-use (“ROU”) asset and lease liability for all leases with terms of more than 12 months. Recognition, measurement and presentation of expenses will depend on classification as a finance or operating lease. The amendments also require certain quantitative and qualitative disclosures. Accounting guidance for lessors is mostly unchanged. In July 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-10, Codification Improvements to Topic 842, Leases , to clarify how to apply certain aspects of the new leases standard. The amendments address the rate implicit in the lease, impairment of the net investment in the lease, lessee reassessment of lease classification, lessor reassessment of lease term and purchase options, variable payments that depend on an index or rate and certain transition adjustments, among other issues. In addition, in July 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-11, Leases (Topic 842) , Targeted Improvements , which provided an additional (and optional) transition method to adopt the new leases standard. Under the new transition method, a reporting entity would initially apply the new lease requirements at the effective date and recognize a cumulative-effect adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings in the period of adoption; continue to report comparative periods presented in the financial statements in the period of adoption in accordance with legacy U.S. GAAP (i.e., ASC 840, Leases ); and provide the required disclosures under ASC 840 for all periods presented under legacy U.S. GAAP. Further, ASU No. 2018-11 contains a practical expedient that allows lessors to avoid separating lease and associated non-lease components within a contract if certain criteria are met. In December 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-20, Leases (Topic 842), Narrow-Scope Improvements for Lessors , to clarify guidance for lessors on sales taxes and other similar taxes collected from lessees, certain lessor costs and recognition of variable payments for contracts with lease and non-lease components. In March 2019, the FASB issued ASU No. 2019-01, Leases (Topic 842), Codification Improvements , to clarify certain application and transitional disclosure aspects of the new leases standard. The amendments address determination of the fair value of the underlying asset by lessors that are not manufacturers or dealers and clarify interim period transition disclosure requirements, among other issues. The guidance in ASUs 2016-02, 2018-10, 2018-11 and 2018-20 was effective beginning January 1, 2019, with early adoption permitted; whereas the guidance in ASU No. 2019-01 is effective beginning January 1, 2020, with early adoption permitted. Newmark adopted the above mentioned standards on January 1, 2019 using the effective date as the date of initial application. Therefore, pursuant to this transition method, financial information was not updated and the disclosures required under the new leases standards were not provided for dates and periods before January 1, 2019. The guidance provides a number of optional practical expedients to be utilized by lessees upon transition. Accordingly, Newmark elected the “package of practical expedients,” which permitted Newmark not to reassess under the new standard its prior conclusions about lease identification, lease classification and initial direct costs. Newmark did not elect the use-of-hindsight or the practical expedient pertaining to land easements, with the latter not being applicable to Newmark. The new standard also provides practical expedients for an entity’s ongoing accounting as a lessee. Newmark elected the short-term lease recognition exemption for all leases that qualify. This means, for those leases that qualify, Newmark will not recognize ROU assets and lease liabilities, and this includes not recognizing ROU assets and lease liabilities for existing short-term leases of those assets upon transition. Newmark also elected the practical expedient to not separate lease and non-lease components for all leases other than leases of real estate. As a result, upon adoption, acting primarily as a lessee, Newmark recognized a $178.8 million ROU asset, net of tenant improvements, and a $226.7 million lease liability on the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheets for its real estate operating leases. The adoption of the guidance did not have a material impact on the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations, unaudited condensed consolidated statements of changes in equity and unaudited condensed consolidated statements of cash flows. See Note 18 — “Leases” for additional information on Newmark’s leasing arrangements. In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01, Financial Instruments-Overall (Subtopic 825-10): 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 recognize any changes in fair value in net income unless the investments qualify for the new measurement alternative. The guidance also requires entities to record changes in instrument-specific credit risk for financial liabilities measured under the fair value option in other comprehensive income. In February 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-03, Technical Corrections and Improvements to Financial Instruments-Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities , to clarify transition and subsequent accounting for equity investments without a readily determinable fair value, among other aspects of the guidance issued in ASU No. 2016-01. The amendments in ASU No. 2018-03 were effective for fiscal years beginning January 1, 2018 and interim periods beginning July 1, 2018. The amendments and technical corrections provided in ASU No. 2018-03 could be adopted concurrently with ASU No. 2016-01, which was effective for Newmark on January 1, 2018. Newmark adopted both ASUs on January 1, 2018 using the modified retrospective approach for equity securities with a readily determinable fair value and the prospective method for equity investments without a readily determinable fair value. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the accompanying consolidated financial statements. In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13, Financial Instruments-Credit Losses (Topic 326) : Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments, which requires financial assets that are measured at amortized cost to be presented, net of an allowance for credit losses, at the amount expected to be collected over their estimated life. Expected credit losses for newly recognized financial assets, as well as changes to credit losses during the period, are recognized in earnings. For certain purchased financial assets with deterioration in credit quality since origination (“PCD assets”), the initial allowance for expected credit losses will be recorded as an increase to the purchase price. Expected credit losses, including losses on off-balance-sheet exposures, such as lending commitments, will be measured based on historical experience, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts that affect the collectability of the reported amount. In November 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-19, Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments-Credit Losses , to clarify that operating lease receivables accounted for under ASC 842, Leases , are not in the scope of the new credit losses guidance, and, instead, impairment of receivables arising from operating leases should be accounted for in accordance with ASC 842, Leases . In April 2019, the FASB issued ASU No. 2019-04, Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments-Credit Losses, Topic 815, Derivatives and Hedging, and Topic 825, Financial Instruments . The ASU makes changes to the guidance introduced or amended by ASU No. 2016-13, Financial Instruments-Credit Losses (Topic 326)-Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments . See below for the description of the amendments stipulated in ASU No. 2019-04. In addition, in May 2019, the FASB issued ASU No. 2019-05, Financial Instruments-Credit Losses (Topic 326): Targeted Transition Relief . The amendments in this ASU allow entities, upon adoption of ASU No. 2016-13, to irrevocably elect the fair value option for financial instruments that were previously carried at amortized cost and are eligible for the fair value option under ASC 825-10, Financial Instruments: Overall. In November 2019, the FASB issued ASU No. 2019-11, Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments-Credit Losses . The amendments in this ASU require entities to include certain expected recoveries of the amortized cost basis previously written off, or expected to be written off, in the allowance for credit losses for PCD assets; provide transition relief related to troubled debt restructurings; allow entities to exclude accrued interest amounts from certain required disclosures; and clarify the requirements for applying the collateral maintenance practical expedient. The amendments in ASUs No. 2018-19, 2019-04, 2019-05 and 2019-11 are required to be adopted concurrently with the guidance in ASU No. 2016-13. Newmark adopted the standards on their required effective date beginning January 1, 2020. The primary effect of adoption, on a pre-tax basis, resulted in a decrease in assets of $8.0 million , an increase in liabilities of $17.9 million and a decrease in retained earnings of $25.9 million , respectively. In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-01, Business Combinations (Topic 805)-Clarifying the Definition of Business , which clarifies the definition of a business with the objective of providing additional guidance to assist entities with evaluating whether transactions should be accounted for as acquisitions (or disposals) of assets or businesses. The new standard became effective beginning January 1, 2018 on a prospective basis. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the accompanying consolidated financial statements. In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-04, Intangibles-Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment , which eliminates the requirement to determine the fair value of individual assets and liabilities of a reporting unit to measure goodwill impairment. Under the amendments in the new ASU, goodwill impairment testing will be performed by comparing the fair value of the reporting unit with its carrying amount and recognizing an impairment charge for the amount by which the carrying amount exceeds the reporting unit’s fair value. Newmark adopted the standard on its required effective date beginning January 1, 2020. The new guidance will be applied on a prospective basis. The adoption of the new guidance did not have a material impact on the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements. In February 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-05, Other Income-Gains and Losses from the Derecognition of Nonfinancial Assets (Subtopic 610-20): Clarifying the Scope of Asset Derecognition Guidance and Accounting for Partial Sales of Nonfinancial Assets , which clarifies the scope and application of ASC 610-20, Other Income-Gains and Losses from Derecognition of Nonfinancial Assets , and defines in substance nonfinancial assets. The ASU also impacts the accounting for partial sales of nonfinancial assets (including in substance real estate). Under this guidance, when an entity transfers its controlling interest in a nonfinancial asset but retains a noncontrolling ownership interest, the entity is required to measure the retained interest at fair value, which results in a full gain or loss recognition upon the sale of a controlling interest in a nonfinancial asset. Newmark adopted the standard on its required effective date of January 1, 2018. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the accompanying consolidated financial statements. In May 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-09, Compensation-Stock Compensation (Topic 718)-Scope of Modification Accounting , which amends the scope of modification accounting for share-based payment arrangements and provides guidance on the types of changes to the terms or conditions of share-based payment awards to which an entity would be required to apply modification accounting. Under this guidance, an entity would not apply modification accounting if the fair value, the vesting conditions, and the classification of the awards (as equity or liability) are the same immediately before and after the modification. The new standard became effective for Newmark beginning January 1, 2018 on a prospective basis for awards modified on or after the adoption date. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the accompanying consolidated financial statements. In August 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-12, Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities . The guidance intends to better align an entity’s risk management activities and financial reporting for hedging relationships through changes to both the designation and measurement guidance for qualifying hedging relationships and the presentation of hedge results. To meet that objective, the amendments expand and refine hedge accounting for both nonfinancial and financial risk components and align the recognition and presentation of the effects of the hedging instrument and the hedged item in the financial statements. In October 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-16, Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Inclusion of the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR) Overnight Index Swap (OIS) Rate as a Benchmark Interest Rate for Hedge Accounting Purposes . Based on concerns about the sustainability of LIBOR, in 2017, a committee convened by the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York identified a broad Treasury repurchase agreement (repo) financing rate referred to as the SOFR as its preferred alternative reference rate. The guidance in ASU No. 2018-16 adds the OIS rate based on SOFR as a U.S. benchmark interest rate to facilitate the LIBOR to SOFR transition and provide sufficient lead time for entities to prepare for changes to interest rate risk hedging strategies for both risk management and hedge accounting purposes. The amendments in this ASU were required to be adopted concurrently with the guidance in ASU No. 2017-12. The guidance became effective beginning January 1, 2019 and was required to be applied on a prospective and modified retrospective basis. As Newmar |
