Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
|6 Months Ended|
Jun. 30, 2017
|Accounting Policies [Abstract]|
|Summary of Significant Accounting Policies||
2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Basis of Presentation and Consolidation
The accompanying financial information as of June 30, 2017 and for the three and six months ended June 30, 2017 and 2016 has been prepared by the Company, without audit, pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in consolidated financial statements prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”) have been condensed or omitted pursuant to such rules and regulations. The balance sheet as of December 31, 2016 was derived from the Company’s audited financial statements. The Company’s audited financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2016, including all related disclosures and the complete listing of significant accounting policies as described in Note 2 thereof, are included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K that was filed with the SEC on March 15, 2017.
In the opinion of management, the unaudited financial information as of June 30, 2017 and for the three and six months ended June 30, 2017 and 2016 reflects all adjustments, which are normal recurring adjustments, necessary to present a fair statement of financial position, results of operations and cash flows. The results of operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2017 are not necessarily indicative of the operating results for the full fiscal year or any future periods.
The Company has a wholly-owned subsidiary, ContraFect International Limited, in Scotland that establishes legal status for interactions with the European Economic Area. This subsidiary is dormant or is otherwise non-operative. Any inter-company accounts have been eliminated in consolidation.
Significant Risks and Uncertainties
The Company’s operations are subject to a number of factors that can affect its operating results and financial condition. Such factors include, but are not limited to, the results of clinical testing and trial activities of the Company’s products, the Company’s ability to obtain regulatory approval to market its products, competition from products manufactured and sold or being developed by other companies, the price of, and demand for, the Company’s products, the Company’s ability to negotiate favorable licensing or other manufacturing and marketing agreements for its products and the Company’s ability to raise capital.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of the consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements and the reported amounts of expenses during the reporting period. The Company bases estimates and assumptions on historical experience when available and on various factors that it believes to be reasonable under the circumstances. On an ongoing basis, the Company evaluates its estimates and assumptions, including those related to accruals, fair value measurements, stock-based compensation, warrant valuation and income taxes. The Company’s actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions. There have been no significant changes from the Company’s original estimates in any periods presented.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
The Company considers all highly liquid investments with maturities at the date of purchase of three months or less to be cash equivalents. Cash and cash equivalents include bank demand deposits, marketable securities with maturities of three months or less at purchase, and money market funds that invest primarily in certificates of deposit, commercial paper and U.S. government and U.S. government agency obligations. Cash equivalents are reported at fair value.
Concentrations of Credit Risk
Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to concentration of credit risk consist primarily of cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities. The Company holds these investments in highly rated financial institutions, and, by policy, limits the amounts of credit exposure to any one financial institution. These amounts at times may exceed federally insured limits. The Company has not experienced any credit losses in such accounts and does not believe it is exposed to any significant credit risk on these funds. The Company has no off-balance sheet concentrations of credit risk, such as foreign currency exchange contracts, option contracts or other hedging arrangements.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
The Company’s financial instruments consist of cash and cash equivalents, marketable securities, accounts payable, accrued liabilities and warrant liabilities. Fair value estimates of these instruments are made at a specific point in time, based on relevant market information. These estimates may be subjective in nature and involve uncertainties and matters of significant judgment and therefore cannot be determined with precision. The fair value of the Company’s warrant liabilities is based upon unobservable inputs, as described further below.
The Company is required to disclose information on all assets and liabilities reported at fair value that enables an assessment of the inputs used in determining the reported fair values. Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standard Codification (“ASC”) Topic 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures, establishes a hierarchy of inputs used in measuring fair value that maximizes the use of observable inputs and minimizes the use of unobservable inputs by requiring that the observable inputs be used when available. Observable inputs are inputs that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on market data obtained from sources independent of the Company. Unobservable inputs are inputs that reflect the Company’s assumptions about the inputs that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability, and are developed based on the best information available in the circumstances. The fair value hierarchy applies only to the valuation inputs used in determining the reported fair value of the investments and is not a measure of the investment credit quality.
The three levels of the fair value hierarchy are described below:
Level 1—Valuations based on unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Company has the ability to access at the measurement date.
Level 2—Valuations based on quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active or for which all significant inputs are observable, either directly or indirectly.
Level 3—Valuations that require inputs that reflect the Company’s own assumptions that are both significant to the fair value measurement and unobservable.
To the extent that valuation is based on models or inputs that are less observable or unobservable in the market, the determination of fair value requires more judgment. Accordingly, the degree of judgment exercised by the Company in determining fair value is greatest for instruments categorized in Level 3. A financial instrument’s level within the fair value hierarchy is based on the lowest level of any input that is significant to the fair value measurement.
The Company had no liabilities classified as Level 1 or Level 2. The carrying amounts reported in the accompanying financial statements for accounts payable and accrued expenses approximate their respective fair values due to their short-term maturities. The fair value of the warrant liabilities is discussed in Note 4, “Fair Value Measurements.”
The Company accounts for stock-based compensation in accordance with ASC 718, Compensation—Stock Compensation, which requires the measurement and recognition of compensation expense for all stock-based payment awards made to employees and non-employee directors, including employee stock options. Compensation expense based on the grant date fair value is generally amortized over the requisite service period of the award on a straight-line basis.
The fair value of options is calculated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model to determine the fair value of stock options on the date of grant based on key assumptions such as stock price, expected volatility and expected term. The Company’s estimates of these assumptions are primarily based on historical data, peer company data and judgment regarding future trends and factors.
The Company recognizes a receivable and the related reduction in its research and development expenses when the actual reimbursable costs have been incurred and there is reasonable assurance that the Company has complied with the conditions of the grants and the amounts will be received. For the three and six months June 30, 2017, the Company recognized a reduction to its research and development expense in the amount of $474,263 and $556,294, respectively. There were no similar grants recognized for the three and six month periods ended June 30, 2016. The receivable for grants as of June 30, 2017 for costs incurred through June 30, 2017 was $341,959. The Company has $2,673,935 of approved grant award funding remaining as of June 30, 2017.
Net Loss Per Share
Basic net loss per share is calculated by dividing net loss by the weighted average shares outstanding during the period, without consideration for common stock equivalents. Diluted net loss per share is calculated by adjusting weighted average shares outstanding for the dilutive effect of common stock equivalents outstanding for the period, determined using the treasury-stock method. For purposes of the dilutive net loss per share calculation, stock options and warrants are considered to be common stock equivalents but are excluded from the calculation of diluted net loss per share, as their effect would be anti-dilutive given the Company’s net loss; therefore, basic and diluted net loss per share were the same for all periods presented.
Comprehensive loss is defined as the change in equity of a business enterprise during a period from transactions, and other events and circumstances from non-owner sources, and currently consists of net loss and changes in unrealized gains and losses on available-for-sale securities.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In January 2016, the FASB issued a new Accounting Standards Update, Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities (“ASU 2016-01”). ASU 2016-01 amends the guidance in U.S. GAAP on the classification and measurement of financial instruments. Although the ASU retains many current requirements, it significantly revises an entity’s accounting related to (1) the classification and measurement of investments in equity securities and (2) the presentation of certain fair value changes for financial liabilities measured at fair value. The ASU also amends certain disclosure requirements associated with the fair value of financial instruments. The new standard is effective for fiscal years and interim periods within those fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted for certain changes. The Company is currently evaluating the potential effects the new standard will have on the Company’s financial statements and related disclosures.
In February 2016, the FASB issued a new Accounting Standards Update, Leases (“ASU 2016-02”). ASU 2016-02 is aimed at making leasing activities more transparent and comparable and requires most leases be recognized by lessees on the balance sheets as a right-of-use asset and corresponding lease liability, regardless of whether they are classified as finance or operating leases. The new standard is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within that reporting period, with early adoption permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of the new pronouncement on the Company’s financial statements and related disclosures.
In March 2016, the FASB issued a new Accounting Standards Update, Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting (“ASU 2016-09”). ASU 2016-09 requires all income tax effects of awards to be recognized in the income statement when the awards vest or are settled, thus eliminating additional paid-in-capital pools. ASU 2016-09 also changed the threshold to qualify for equity classification from the minimum tax statutory withholding to the maximum tax statutory withholding in the applicable jurisdictions. In addition, companies are required to elect whether to account for forfeitures as they occur or to estimate the number of awards expected to be forfeited and adjust the estimate when it is likely to change, which is the method currently required. The new standard was effective for the annual reporting period beginning January 1, 2017. The Company adopted this guidance as of January 1, 2017. The Company has elected to recognize forfeitures of share-based payment awards as they occur. The prior year windfall benefits that were required to be recognized were not material. These changes were applied on a modified retrospective basis. There was no material impact and cumulative adjustment to accumulated deficit as of January 1, 2017 as a result of the adoption of this standard.
In June 2016, the FASB issued a new Accounting Standards Update, Financial Instruments-Credit Losses (“ASU 2016-13”). ASU 2016-13 amends the guidance for measuring and recording credit losses on financial assets measured at amortized cost by replacing the “incurred loss” model with an “expected loss” model. Accordingly, these financial assets will be presented at the net amount expected to be collected. This new standard also requires that credit losses related to available-for-sale debt securities be recorded through an allowance for such losses rather than reducing the carrying amount under the current, other-than-temporary-impairment model. The new standard is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2019. The Company is currently evaluating the impact that this new standard will have on its financial statements and related disclosures.
In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-15, Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments (“ASU 2016-15”), which amended the existing accounting standards for the statement of cash flows by providing guidance on eight classification issues related to the statement of cash flows. ASU 2016-15 will be effective in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years, and early adoption is permitted. The amendments should be applied retrospectively to all periods presented. For issues that are impracticable to apply retrospectively, the amendments may be applied prospectively as of the earliest date practicable. The Company does not anticipate a significant impact from the adoption of ASU 2016-15.
The entire disclosure for all significant accounting policies of the reporting entity.
Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef