Quarterly report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d)

Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

v2.4.0.6
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2012
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies  
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

2.                                      Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

 

Basis of Presentation

 

The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of COPT, the Operating Partnership, their subsidiaries and other entities in which we have a majority voting interest and control.  We also consolidate certain entities when control of such entities can be achieved through means other than voting rights (“variable interest entities” or “VIEs”) if we are deemed to be the primary beneficiary of such entities.  We eliminate all significant intercompany balances and transactions in consolidation.

 

We use the equity method of accounting when we own an interest in an entity and can exert significant influence over the entity’s operations but cannot control the entity’s operations.

 

We use the cost method of accounting when we own an interest in an entity and cannot exert significant influence over its operations.

 

These interim financial statements should be read together with the financial statements and notes thereto as of and for the year ended December 31, 2011 included in our 2011 Annual Report on Form 10-K.  The unaudited consolidated financial statements include all adjustments that are necessary, in the opinion of management, to fairly present our financial position and results of operations.  All adjustments are of a normal recurring nature except for the out-of-period adjustment described below.  The consolidated financial statements have been prepared using the accounting policies described in our 2011 Annual Report on Form 10-K.

 

During the second quarter of 2012, we identified an error in the consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2011 and the quarter ended March, 31, 2012.  The error was attributable to the misapplication of accounting guidance related to the recognition of a deferred tax asset resulting from an impairment of assets in the fourth quarter of 2011 that failed to consider a partial reversal of that asset that would result from a cancellation of related inter-company debt in the first quarter of 2012.  The effect of this error was an overstatement of our income tax benefit and an understatement of our net loss for the year ended December 31, 2011 of $4.0 million ($0.05 per share).  During the first quarter of 2012, we identified an error that impacted the above referenced periods.  The error was an over-accrual of incentive compensation cost.  The effect of this error was an overstatement of general and administrative expenses and an overstatement of net loss for the year ended December 31, 2011 of $0.7 million ($0.01 per share). The net impact of these errors was an understatement of our net loss for the year ended December 31, 2011 of $3.3 million ($0.04 per share).  We have determined that the errors were not material in 2011 and are not material to our expected annual results for the year ending December 31, 2012.  Accordingly, this cumulative change is reported as an out-of-period adjustment in the three months ended March 31, 2012 as follows: a reduction in net income of $3.3 million ($0.04 per share); an increase in income tax expense of $4.0 million ($0.05 per share); and a decrease in general and administrative expenses of approximately $0.7 million ($0.01 per share) on our consolidated statement of operations.

 

Reclassifications

 

We reclassified certain amounts from prior periods to conform to the current period presentation of our consolidated financial statements with no effect on previously reported net income or equity.  Included among these reclassifications is a retrospective change in the presentation of costs expensed in connection with properties not in operations; these costs are included in the line on our consolidated statements of operations entitled “business development expenses and land carry costs,” after having been included in property operating expenses in our 2011 Annual Report on Form 10-K.

 

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

 

We adopted guidance issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) effective January 1, 2012 related to the presentation of comprehensive income that requires us to present the total of comprehensive income, the components of net income and the components of other comprehensive income either in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements.  We adopted this guidance using retrospective application.  This guidance eliminates the option to present the components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of equity.  Our adoption of this guidance did not affect our financial position, results of operations, cash flows or measurement of comprehensive income but did change the location of our disclosure pertaining to comprehensive income in our consolidated financial statements.

 

We adopted guidance issued by the FASB effective January 1, 2012 that amends measurement and disclosure requirements related to fair value measurements to improve consistency with International Financial Reporting Standards.  In connection with our adoption of this guidance, we made an accounting policy election to use an exception provided for in the guidance with respect to measuring counterparty credit risk for derivative instruments; this election enables us to continue to measure the fair value of groups of assets and liabilities associated with derivative instruments consistently with how market participants would price the net risk exposure at the measurement date.  Our adoption of this guidance did not affect our financial position, results of operations or cash flows but did result in additional disclosure pertaining to our fair value measurements.

 

We adopted guidance issued by the FASB effective January 1, 2012 relating to the testing of goodwill for impairment that permits us to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount as a basis for determining whether it is necessary to perform the two-step goodwill impairment test.  This guidance eliminates the requirement to calculate the fair value of a reporting unit unless the entity determines that it is more likely than not that its fair value is less than its carrying amount.  Our adoption of this guidance did not materially affect our consolidated financial statements or disclosures.