Basis of Presentation (Policies) |
9 Months Ended |
|---|---|
Sep. 30, 2017 | |
| Accounting Policies [Abstract] | |
| Basis of Presentation |
Basis of Presentation
The accompanying unaudited statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles for interim financial information. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required by U.S. generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements. In the opinion of management, all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring accruals, considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included.
|
| Operating Results |
Operating Results
The results of operations for any interim period are not necessarily indicative of results for the full year. Operating results for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending December 31, 2017.
The balance sheet at December 31, 2016 has been derived from the audited financial statements at that date, but does not include all of the information and footnotes required by U.S. generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements.
|
| Description of the Business |
Description of the Business
Astronics Corporation (“Astronics” or the “Company”) is a leading supplier of products to the global aerospace, defense, electronics and semiconductor industries. Our products and services include advanced, high-performance electrical power generation, distribution and motion systems, lighting & safety systems, avionics products, aircraft structures, systems certification, automated test systems and other products.
We have operations in the United States (“U.S.”), Canada and France. We design and build our products through our wholly owned subsidiaries Armstrong Aerospace, Inc. (“Armstrong”); Astronics Advanced Electronic Systems Corp. (“AES”); Astronics AeroSat Corporation (“AeroSat”); Ballard Technology, Inc. (“Ballard”); Astronics DME LLC (“DME”); Luminescent Systems, Inc. (“LSI”); Luminescent Systems Canada, Inc. (“LSI Canada”); Max-Viz, Inc. (“Max-Viz”); Peco, Inc. (“Peco”); PGA Electronic s.a. (“PGA”) and Astronics Test Systems, Inc. (“ATS”). On April 3, 2017, Astronics Custom Control Concepts Inc. ("CCC") acquired all of the assets and certain liabilities of Custom Control Concepts LLC.
|
| Cost of Products Sold, Engineering and Development and Selling, General and Administrative Expenses |
Cost of Products Sold, Engineering and Development and Selling, General and Administrative Expenses
Cost of products sold includes the costs to manufacture products such as direct materials and labor and manufacturing overhead as well as all engineering and development costs. The Company is engaged in a variety of engineering and design activities as well as basic research and development activities directed to the substantial improvement or new application of the Company’s existing technologies. These costs are expensed when incurred and included in cost of products sold.
|
| Foreign Currency Translation |
Foreign Currency Translation
The aggregate transaction gain or loss included in operations was insignificant for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017 and October 1, 2016.
|
| Accounting Pronouncements Adopted in 2017 and Recent Accounting Pronouncements |
Accounting Pronouncements Adopted in 2017
On January 1, 2017, the Company adopted Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2016-09, Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting. Prospectively, beginning January 1, 2017, excess tax benefits/deficiencies are reflected as income tax benefit/expense in the statement of income, resulting in a $0.3 million tax benefit for the nine months ended September 30, 2017. The extent of excess tax benefits/deficiencies is subject to variation in the Company’s stock price and timing/extent of employee stock option exercises. Under previous accounting guidance, when a share-based payment award such as a stock option was granted to an employee, the fair value of the award was generally recognized over the vesting period. However, the related deduction from taxes payable was based on the award’s intrinsic value at the time of exercise, which could be either greater (creating an excess tax benefit) or less (creating a tax deficiency) than the compensation cost recognized in the financial statements. Excess tax benefits were recognized in additional paid-in capital (“APIC”) within equity, while deficiencies were first recorded to APIC to the extent previously recognized excess tax benefits existed, after which time deficiencies were recorded to income tax expense. The Company’s adoption of this ASU also resulted in associated excess tax benefits being classified as an operating activity in the same manner as other cash flows related to income taxes in the statement of cash flows prospectively beginning January 1, 2017. Based on the adoption methodology applied, the statement of cash flows classification of prior periods has not changed. As permitted by the ASU, the Company has elected to account for forfeitures as they occur. None of the other provisions in this amended guidance had a significant impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-04, Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment. Under the new standard, goodwill impairment would be measured as the amount by which a reporting unit’s carrying value exceeds its fair value, not to exceed the carrying value of goodwill. This ASU eliminates existing guidance that requires an entity to determine goodwill impairment by calculating the implied fair value of goodwill by hypothetically assigning the fair value of a reporting unit to all of its assets and liabilities as if that reporting unit had been acquired in a business combination. This ASU is effective prospectively to annual and interim impairment tests beginning after December 15, 2019, with early adoption permitted. The adoption of ASU 2017-04 on January 1, 2017 had no impact on the financial statements as of or for the three or nine months ended September 30, 2017, as there was no impairment analysis performed during the period.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued ASU No. 2014-9, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. This new standard is effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, pursuant to the issuance of ASU 2015-14, Revenue from Contracts with Customers: Deferral of Effective Date issued in August 2015. The comprehensive new standard will supersede existing revenue recognition guidance and require revenue to be recognized when promised goods or services are transferred to customers in amounts that reflect the consideration to which the company expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. Adoption of the new rules could affect the timing of revenue recognition for certain transactions. The guidance permits two implementation approaches, one requiring retrospective application of the new standard with restatement of prior years and one requiring prospective application of the new standard with disclosure of results under old standards. The Company will adopt the new standard on January 1, 2018, using the modified retrospective transition method.
The adoption of this amendment may require us to accelerate the recognition of revenue as compared to current standards, for certain customers, in cases where we produce products unique to those customers; and for which we would have an enforceable right of payment for production completed to date. The Company has identified its revenue streams, reviewed the initial impacts of adopting the new standard on those revenue streams, and appointed a project management leader. The Company continues to evaluate the quantitative and qualitative impacts of the standard.
In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016 - 02, Leases. The new standard is effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018. Early adoption is permitted. The standard will require lessees to report most leases as assets and liabilities on the balance sheet, while lessor accounting will remain substantially unchanged. The standard requires a modified retrospective transition approach for existing leases, whereby the new rules will be applied to the earliest year presented. The adoption of the standard is not expected to have a material effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-15, Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments, which is intended to reduce diversity in practice in how certain cash receipts and payments are presented and classified in the statement of cash flows. The standard provides guidance in a number of situations including, among others, settlement of zero-coupon bonds, contingent consideration payments made after a business combination, proceeds from the settlement of insurance claims, and distributions received from equity method investees. The ASU also provides guidance for classifying cash receipts and payments that have aspects of more than one class of cash flows. This ASU is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted. The standard requires application using a retrospective transition method. This ASU is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial condition.
In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-01, Clarifying the Definition of a Business, which narrows the existing definition of a business and provides a framework for evaluating whether a transaction should be accounted for as an acquisition (or disposal) of assets or a business. The ASU requires an entity to evaluate if substantially all of the fair value of the gross assets acquired is concentrated in a single identifiable asset or a group of similar identifiable assets; if so, the set of transferred assets and activities (collectively, the set) is not a business. To be considered a business, the set would need to include an input and a substantive process that together significantly contribute to the ability to create outputs. The standard also narrows the definition of outputs. The definition of a business affects areas of accounting such as acquisitions, disposals and goodwill. Under the new guidance, fewer acquired sets are expected to be considered businesses. This ASU is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017 on a prospective basis with early adoption permitted. The Company would apply this guidance to applicable transactions after the adoption date.
In March 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-07, Compensation-Retirement Benefits (Topic 715): Improving the Presentation of Net Periodic Pension Cost and Net Periodic Postretirement Benefit Cost, which requires employers to include only the service cost component of net periodic pension cost and net periodic postretirement benefit cost in operating expenses. The other components of net benefit cost, including amortization of prior service cost/credit and net actuarial gains/losses, and settlement and curtailment effects, are to be included in non-operating expenses. The ASU also stipulates that only the service cost component of net benefit cost is eligible for capitalization. The effective date for adoption of this guidance begins on January 1, 2018, with early adoption permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the effect that this standard will have on the consolidated financial statements.
|
| Fair Value |
Fair Value
A fair value measurement assumes that the transaction to sell an asset or transfer a liability occurs in the principal market for the asset or liability or, in the absence of a principal market, the most advantageous market for the asset or liability. Fair value is based upon an exit price model. The Company’s assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires judgment, and involves consideration of factors specific to the asset or liability.
The Company follows a valuation hierarchy for disclosure of the inputs to valuation used to measure fair value. This hierarchy prioritizes the inputs into three broad levels as follows:
Level 1 inputs are quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.
Level 2 inputs are quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets or inputs that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly through market corroboration, for substantially the full term of the financial instrument.
Level 3 inputs are unobservable inputs based on our own assumptions used to measure assets and liabilities at fair value.
|