Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
|6 Months Ended|
Jun. 30, 2018
|Accounting Policies [Abstract]|
|SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES||
SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Interim Financial Information
Our interim financial statements are prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) for interim financial information and pursuant to the requirements for reporting on Form 10-Q in accordance with Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, certain disclosures accompanying annual financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP are omitted. In the opinion of our management, all adjustments (consisting solely of normal recurring accruals) necessary for the fair statement of financial statements for the interim period have been included. The interim financial statements and accompanying notes should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on February 20, 2018 (the “Form 10-K”). The results of operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2018, are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for other interim periods or for the full fiscal year.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities as of the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. Actual results could materially differ from those estimates.
Impairment of Real Estate Assets
We account for the impairment of our tangible and identifiable intangible real estate assets in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 360, “Property, Plant, and Equipment” (“ASC 360”), which requires us to periodically review the carrying value of each property to determine whether indicators of impairment exist. If circumstances support the possibility of impairment, we prepare a projection of the total undiscounted future cash flows of the specific property, including proceeds from disposition without interest charges, and compare them to the net book value of the property to determine whether the carrying value of the property is recoverable. If the carrying amount is more than the aggregate undiscounted future cash flows, we would recognize an impairment loss to the extent the carrying value exceeds the estimated fair value of the property.
We evaluate our entire property portfolio each quarter for any impairment indicators and perform an impairment analysis on those select properties that have an indication of impairment. During the three months ended March 31, 2018, a lightning strike damaged certain irrigation infrastructure on one of our properties in Arizona; however, we determined no indicator of impairment existed, and no impairment loss was recorded. See “—Property and Casualty Loss” within Note 3, “Real Estate and Intangible Assets,” for additional details on this event.
As of June 30, 2018, we concluded that none of our properties were impaired. There have been no impairments recognized on our real estate assets since our inception.
Crop Inventory and Crop Sales
Costs incurred by Land Advisers in operating the 169-acre farm located in Ventura County, California, generally consisted of growing costs (including the costs of land preparation, plants, fertilizers and pesticides, and labor costs), harvesting and selling costs (including labor costs for harvesting, packaging and cooling costs, and sales commissions), and certain overhead costs (including management/oversight costs). As of June 30, 2018, we had approximately $1.1 million of unsold crops on the farm, including approximately $28,000 of unallocated fees earned by our Adviser from Land Advisers (see Note 6, “Related-Party Transactions—TRS Fee Arrangements,” for further discussion on this fee). However, due to certain market conditions (primarily the existence of bumper crops in all of the strawberry-growing regions within California), we were unable to sell all of the crops and therefore assessed the market value of such unsold crops to be zero as of June 30, 2018. Accordingly, we wrote down the cost of crop inventory to its estimated net realizable value of zero and recorded a loss during the three and six months ended June 30, 2018, of approximately $1.1 million (including approximately $28,000 of accumulated costs incurred by our Adviser that were allocated to these unsold crops (see Note 6, “Related-Party Transactions—TRS Lease Assumption—TRS Fee Arrangements—TRS Expense Sharing Agreement”)), included within Loss on write-down of inventory on the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations.
Crop inventory as of December 31, 2017, consisted of the following (dollars in thousands, except for footnotes):
Revenues from the sale of harvested crops are recognized when the harvested crops have been delivered to the facility and title has transferred and are recorded using the market price on the date of delivery. Accumulated costs are charged to cost of products sold (based on percentage of gross revenues from sales) as the related crops are harvested and sold.
Revenues from the sale of harvested crops and accumulated costs allocated to the crops sold are shown in the following table (dollars in thousands, except for footnotes):
There was minimal harvesting and sales activity on the farm operated by Land Advisers prior to January 1, 2018. In addition, the lease to Land Advisers for such farm expired on July 31, 2018, and the farm was subsequently leased by us to a new, unrelated third-party tenant under a lease commencing on August 1, 2018.
We have operated and intend to continue to operate in a manner that will allow us to qualify as a REIT under the Sections 856-860 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). As a REIT, we generally are not subject to federal corporate income taxes on amounts that we distribute to our stockholders (except income from any foreclosure property), provided that, on an annual basis, we distribute at least 90% of our REIT taxable income (excluding net capital gains) to our stockholders and meet certain other conditions. As such, in general, as long as we qualify as a REIT, no provision for federal income taxes will be necessary, except for taxes on undistributed REIT taxable income and taxes on the income generated by a TRS (such as Land Advisers), if any.
On October 17, 2017, Land Advisers, which is subject to federal and state income taxes, took over the operations on one of our farms in California. There was no taxable income from Land Advisers for the year ended December 31, 2017, and, as of June 30, 2018, we do not expect to have any material taxable income or loss for the tax year ending December 31, 2018.
Should we have any taxable income or loss in the future, we will account for any income taxes in accordance with the provisions of ASC 740, “Income Taxes,” using the asset and liability method. Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized based on differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective income tax bases (including for operating loss, capital loss, and tax credit carryforwards) and are calculated using the enacted tax rates and laws expected to be in effect when such amounts are realized or settled. In addition, we will establish valuation allowances for tax benefits when we believe it is more-likely-than-not (defined as a likelihood of more than 50%) that such assets will not be realized.
Certain property-specific costs have been reclassified from general and administrative expenses to property operating expenses on the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2018. These reclassifications had no impact on previously-reported net income, equity, or net change in cash and cash equivalents.
Recently-Issued Accounting Pronouncements
In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (the “FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)” (“ASU 2014-09”), which was amended in each of March, April, May, and December of 2016. ASU 2014-09, as amended, supersedes or replaces nearly all GAAP revenue recognition guidance and establishes a new, control-based revenue recognition model, changes the basis for deciding when revenue is recognized over time or at a point in time and will expand disclosures about revenue. ASU 2014-09 was adopted beginning with the three months ended March 31, 2018, using the modified retrospective method (under which the cumulative effect of initially applying the guidance was recognized at the date of initial application). Our adoption of ASU 2014-09 did not (and is not expected to) have a material impact on our results of operations or financial condition, as the primary impact of this update is related to common area maintenance and other material tenant reimbursements, whereas the majority of our revenue is from rental income pursuant to net-lease agreements, with very little being attributed to tenant recoveries. The impact of ASU 2014-09 will not take effect until the new leasing standard (ASU 2016-02, as defined below) becomes effective on January 1, 2019.
In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, “Leases (Topic 842): An Amendment of the FASB Accounting Standards Codification” (“ASU 2016-02”). The new standard requires lessees to apply a dual approach, classifying leases as either finance or operating leases based on the principle of whether or not the lease is effectively a financed purchase by the lessee, which classification determines whether lease expense is recognized based on an effective interest method or on a straight-line basis, respectively, over the term of the lease. A lessee is also required to record a right-of-use asset and a lease liability for all leases with a term of greater than 12 months, regardless of the classification. Leases with a term of 12 months or less will be accounted for similar to existing guidance for operating leases. The new standard requires lessors to account for leases using an approach that is substantially equivalent to existing guidance for sales-type leases, direct financing leases and operating leases. ASU 2016-02 supersedes the previous leasing standard, ASC 840, “Leases,” and is effective on January 1, 2019, with early adoption permitted. We expect our legal expenses (included in General and administrative expenses on our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations) to increase marginally, as the new standard requires us to expense indirect leasing costs that were previously capitalized; however, we do not expect ASU 2016-02 to materially impact our condensed consolidated financial statements, as we currently only have two operating ground lease arrangements with terms greater than one year for which we are the lessee.
In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15, “Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments” (“ASU 2016-15”), which provides guidance on certain cash flow classification issues, with the objective of reducing the existing diversity in practice in how certain cash receipts and cash payments are presented and classified on the statement of cash flows. ASU 2016-15 was adopted beginning with the three months ended March 31, 2018, and did not have a material impact on our condensed consolidated financial statements.
In November 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-18, “Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Restricted cash (a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force)” (“ASU 2016-18”), which requires the statement of cash flows to explain the change during the period in the total of cash, cash equivalents, and amounts described as restricted cash or restricted cash equivalents. Under ASU 2016-18, amounts described as restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents will be included with cash and cash equivalents when reconciling the beginning-of-period and end-of-period total amounts shown on the statement of cash flows. This guidance became effective beginning with the three months ended March 31, 2018, and did not have a material impact on our condensed consolidated financial statements.
In February 2017, the FASB issued ASU 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” (“ASU 2017-05”), which provides guidance for recognizing gains and losses from the transfer of nonfinancial assets and in-substance nonfinancial assets in contracts with non-customers (unless other specific guidance applies). ASU 2017-05 requires derecognition once control of a distinct nonfinancial asset or in-substance nonfinancial asset is transferred. Additionally, when a company transfers its controlling interest in a nonfinancial asset but retains a non-controlling ownership interest, any non-controlling interest received is required to be measured at fair value, and the company is required to recognize a full gain or loss on the transaction. As a result of ASU 2017-05, the guidance specific to real estate sales in ASC 360-20 will be eliminated, and partial sales of real estate assets will now be subject to the same derecognition model as all other nonfinancial assets. ASU 2017-05 was adopted beginning with the three months ended March 31, 2018, utilizing the modified retrospective approach, and its adoption did not (and is not expected to) have a material impact on our condensed consolidated financial statements.
No definition available.
The entire disclosure for all significant accounting policies of the reporting entity.
Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef