Summary of significant accounting policies (Policies)
|9 Months Ended
May 31, 2019
|Summary Of Significant Accounting Policies Policies
|Basis of Presentation
The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements of the Company have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) and the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) applicable to interim reports of companies filing as a smaller reporting company. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required by GAAP for complete financial statements. In the opinion of management, all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring accruals) considered necessary for fair presentation have been included. The results of operations for the three and nine months ended May 31, 2019, are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending August 31, 2019.
The condensed consolidated balance sheet as of August 31, 2018, has been derived from the audited consolidated financial statements at that date but does not include all the information and footnotes required by GAAP for complete financial information.
For further information, refer to the consolidated financial statements and footnotes thereto included in the Company’s annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended August 31, 2018, filed with the SEC on November 29, 2018.
|Principles of Consolidation
The Company and its wholly-owned subsidiary have been consolidated in the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements. All intercompany balances have been eliminated.
|Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires the Company to make estimates and assumptions that affect certain reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. Significant estimates include:
The Company’s revenues are primarily attributable to fees for providing staffing solutions and PEO/HCM (“Professional Employer Organization” / “Human Capital Management”) services. The Company recognizes revenue when all of the following criteria are met: (i) persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists; (ii) the services have been rendered to the customer; (iii) the sales price is fixed or determinable, and (iv) collectability is reasonably assured.
The Company accounts for its PEO revenues in accordance with ASC 605-45, Revenue Recognition, Principal Agent Considerations. The Company’s PEO solutions revenue is primarily derived from the Company’s gross billings, which are based on (i) the payroll cost of the Company’s worksite employees and (ii) a mark-up computed as a percentage of payroll costs.
The gross billings are invoiced concurrently with each periodic payroll of the Company’s worksite employees. Revenues, which exclude the payroll cost component of gross billings and therefore consist solely of markup are recognized ratably over the payroll period as worksite employees perform their service at the client worksite.
Revenues that have been recognized but not invoiced are included in unbilled accounts receivable on our condensed consolidated balance sheets.
Consistent with its revenue recognition policy, its direct costs do not include the payroll cost of its worksite employees. The Company’s cost of revenue associated with its revenue generating activities are primarily comprised of all other costs related to its worksite employees, such as the employer portion of payroll-related taxes, employee benefit plan premiums and workers’ compensation insurance costs.
|Concentration of Credit Risk
The Company considers all highly liquid investments with an original maturity of three months or less when purchased as cash equivalents. The Company maintains cash with a commercial bank and from time to time exceed the federally insured limits. The deposits are made with a reputable financial institution, and the Company had not experienced losses from these deposits.
No one individual client represents more than 10% of revenues for the three and nine months ended May 31, 2019, or 2018. However, four clients represent 85% of total accounts receivable at May 31, 2019, compared to four clients representing approximately 86% of our total accounts receivable at August 31, 2018.
|Impairment and Disposal of Long-Lived Assets
The Company periodically evaluate its long-lived assets for impairment in accordance with ASC 360-10, Property, Plant, and Equipment. ASC 360-10 requires that an impairment loss be recognized for assets to be disposed of or held-for-use when the carrying amount of an asset is deemed to not be recoverable. If events or circumstances were to indicate that any of our long-lived assets might be impaired, the Company would assess recoverability based on the estimated undiscounted future cash flows to be generated from the applicable asset. In addition, the Company may record an impairment loss to the extent that the carrying value of the asset exceeded the fair value of the asset. Fair value is generally determined using an estimate of discounted future net cash flows from operating activities or upon disposal of the asset. There were no impairments recognized for the periods ended May 31, 2019, and 2018.
Up to July 2018, a portion of the Company’s workers’ compensation risk was covered by a retrospective rated policy, which calculates the final policy premium based on the Company’s loss experience during the term of the policy and the stipulated formula set forth in the policy. The Company funds the policy premium based on standard premium rates on a monthly basis and based on the gross payroll applicable to workers covered by the policy. During the policy term and thereafter, periodic adjustments may involve either a return of previously paid premiums or a payment of additional premiums by the Company or a combination of both. If the Company’s losses under that policy exceed the expected losses under that policy, then the Company could receive a demand for additional premium payments. During the year ended August 31, 2017, the Company funded an initial deposit of $2.3 million, which was included in Deposits – worker’ compensation (“deposits”) on the condensed consolidated balance sheet. During the year ended August 31, 2018, the Company funded two-month worth of policy premiums against this initial deposit for approximately $0.8 million. As of May 31, 2019, the Company had “deposit-workers’ compensation” of $1.3 million for this retrospective rated policy.
The Company utilizes a third-party to estimate its loss development rate, which is based primarily upon the nature of worksite employees’ job responsibilities, the location of worksite employees, the historical frequency and severity of workers’ compensation claims, and an estimate of future cost trends. Each reporting period, changes in the assumptions resulting from changes in actual claims experience and other trends are incorporated into our workers’ compensation claims cost estimates. As of May 31, 2019, the Company classified $0.1 million in short term accrued workers’ compensation and $0.3 million in long term accrued workers’ compensation in our condensed consolidated balance sheets.
Starting in July 2018, the Company’s workers’ compensation program for its worksite employees has been provided through an arrangement with United Wisconsin Insurance Company (“UWIC”) and administered by Sunz. Under this program, the Company has financial responsibility for the first $0.5 million of claims per occurrence. The Company provides and maintains a loss fund that will be used to pay claims and claim related expenses. The workers’ compensation insurance carrier established monthly funding requirements comprised of premium costs and funds to be set aside for payment of future claims (“claim loss funds”). The level of claim loss funds is primarily based upon anticipated worksite employee payroll levels and expected worker’s compensation loss rates, as determined by the insurance carrier. Monies funded into the program for incurred claims expected to be paid within one year are recorded as “Deposit - workers’ compensation, a short-term asset, while the remainder of claim funds are included in deposits- workers’ compensation, a long-term asset in our consolidated balance sheets.
As of May 31, 2019, the Company had $0.9 million in “deposit – workers’ compensation”, classified as a short-term asset and $5.4 million, classified as a long-term asset.
The Company’s estimate of incurred claim costs expected to be paid within one year is included in short-term liabilities, while its estimate of incurred claim costs expected to be paid beyond one year is included in long-term liabilities on its consolidated condensed balance sheets. As of May 31, 2019, the Company had short term accrued workers’ compensation costs of $0.9 million and long term accrued workers’ compensation costs of $2.7 million.
Because the Company bears the financial responsibility for claims up to the level noted above, such claims, which are the primary component of our workers’ compensation costs, are recorded in the period incurred. Workers’ compensation insurance includes ongoing health care and indemnity coverage whereby claims are paid over numerous years following the date of injury. Accordingly, the accrual of related incurred costs in each reporting period includes estimates, which takes into account the ongoing development of claims and therefore requires a significant level of judgment. In estimating ultimate loss rates, the Company utilizes historical loss experience, exposure data, and actuarial judgment, together with a range of inputs which are primarily based upon the worksite employee’s job responsibilities, their location, the historical frequency and severity of workers’ compensation claims, and an estimate of future cost trends. For each reporting period, changes in the actuarial assumptions resulting from changes in actual claims experience and other trends are incorporated into our workers’ compensation claims cost estimates. The estimated incurred claims are based upon: (i) the level of claims processed during each quarter; (ii) estimated completion rates based upon recent claim development patterns under the plan; and (iii) the number of participants in the plan.
|Debt issuance Costs and Debt discount
Debt issuance costs and debt discounts are being amortized over the lives of the related financings on a basis that approximates the effective interest method. Costs and discounts are presented as a reduction of the related debt in the accompanying condensed balance sheets
|Beneficial Conversion Features
The intrinsic value of a beneficial conversion feature (“BCF”) inherent to a convertible note payable, which is not bifurcated and accounted for separately from the convertible note payable and may not be settled in cash upon conversion, is treated as a discount to the convertible note payable. This discount is amortized over the period from the date of issuance to the stated maturity using the straight-line method which approximates the effective interest method. If the note payable is retired prior to the end of the contractual term, the unamortized discount is expensed in the period of retirement to interest expense. In general, the BCF is measured by comparing the effective conversion price, after considering the relative fair value of detachable instruments included in the financing transaction, if any, to the fair value of the common shares at the commitment date to be received upon conversion.
|Derivative financial instruments
When a Company issues debt that contains a conversion feature, it first evaluates whether the conversion feature meets the requirement to be treated as a derivative: a) the settlement amount is determined by one or more underlying, typically the price of the Company’s stock, b) the settlement amount is determined by one or more notional amounts or payments provisions or both, generally the number of shares upon conversion; c) no initial net investment, which typically excludes the amount borrowed; and d) net settlement provision, which in the case of convertible debt generally means the stock received upon conversion can be readily sold for cash. There are certain scope exception from derivative treatment, but these typically exclude conversion features that provide for a variable number of shares. When ShiftPixy, Inc., issues warrant to purchase its common stock, the Company must evaluate whether they meet the requirements to be treated as derivative. Generally, warrants would be treated as a derivative if the provisions of the warrants agreements create uncertainty as to a) the number of shares to be issued upon exercise, or b) whether shares may be issued upon exercise. If the conversion feature within convertible debt or warrants meet the requirements to be treated as a derivative, ShiftPixy estimates the fair value of the derivative liability using the lattice-based option valuation model upon the date of issuance. If the fair value of the derivative liability is higher than the face value of the convertible debt, the excess is immediately recognized as interest expense. Otherwise, the fair value of the derivative is recorded as a liability with an offsetting amount recorded as a debt discount, which offsets the carrying amount of the debt. The derivative liability is revalued at the end of each reporting period and any change in fair value is recorded as a change in fair value in the condensed statement of operations. The debt discount is amortized through interest expense over the life of the debt. Derivative instrument liabilities and the host debt agreements are classified on the condensed balance sheets as current or non-current based on whether settlement of the derivative instrument could be required within twelve months of the condensed balance sheet date.
The accounting treatment of derivative financial instruments requires that the Company record the embedded conversion option and warrants at their fair values as of the inception date of the agreement and at fair value as of each subsequent balance sheet date. Any change in fair value is recorded as non-operating, non-cash income or expense for each reporting period at each balance sheet date. The Company reassesses the classification of its derivative instruments at each balance sheet date. If the classification changes as a result of events during the period, the contract is reclassified as of the date of the event that caused the reclassification.
|Fair Value of Financial Instruments
FASB ASC 825, “Financial Instruments,” requires entities to disclose the fair value of financial instruments, both assets and liabilities recognized and not recognized on the balance sheet, for which it is practical to estimate fair value. FASB 825 defines fair value of a financial instrument as the amount at which the instrument could be exchanged in a current transaction between willing parties. At May 31, 2019, and August 31, 2018, the carrying value of certain financial instruments (cash, accounts receivable and payable, and other financial instruments) approximates fair value due to the short-term nature of the instruments. Convertible notes approximate fair value based on comparison of terms from similar instruments in the marketplace.
The Company measures fair value under a framework that utilizes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (level 1 measurements) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (level 3 measurements). The three levels of inputs which prioritize the inputs used in measuring fair value are:
If the asset or liability has a specified (contractual) term, the level 2 input must be observable for substantially the full term of the asset or liability
The Company did not have any Level 1 or Level 2 assets and liabilities at May 31, 2019. The Derivative liabilities and warrants at May 31, 2019, are Level 3 fair value measurements.
The table below sets forth a summary of the changes in the fair value of the Company’s derivative liabilities classified as Level 3 for the three and nine months ended May 31, 2019:
At May 31, 2019, the Company estimated the fair value of the conversion feature derivatives embedded in the convertible debentures based on weighted probabilities of assumptions used in the Lattice-based option valuation model. The key valuation assumptions used consists, in part, of the price of the Company’s common stock, a risk free interest rate based on the average yield (2.41%-2.485%) of a Treasury note and expected volatility of the Company’s common stock all as of the measurement dates (120%-122%), and the various estimated reset exercise prices weighted by probability.
The table below sets forth a summary of the changes in the fair value of the Company’s warrant liabilities classified as Level 3 for the three and nine months ended May 31, 2019:
At May 31, 2019, the Company estimated the fair value of the warrant liabilities based on the Lattice-based option valuation model. The key valuation assumptions used consists, in part, of the price of the Company’s common stock, a risk-free interest rate based on the average yield of a Treasury note (2.41%) and expected volatility of the Company’s common stock all as of the measurement dates (120%-122%).
When the Company changes its valuation inputs for measuring financial assets and liabilities at fair value, either due to changes in current market conditions or other factors, it may need to transfer those assets or liabilities to another level in the hierarchy based on the new inputs used. The Company recognizes these transfers at the end of the reporting period that the transfers occur. For the periods ended May 31, 2019 and August 31, 2018, there were no significant transfers of financial assets or financial liabilities between the hierarchy levels.
The Company expenses all advertising as incurred. The Company incurred advertising costs totaling $366,475 and $948,414 for the three and nine months ended May 31, 2019, respectively and $181,957 and $362,207 for the three and nine months ended May 31, 2018, respectively.
|Earnings (Loss) Per Share
The Company utilizes Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 260, “Earnings per Share.” Basic earnings (loss) per share is computed by dividing earnings (loss) attributable to common stockholders by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the reporting period. Diluted earnings (loss) per share is computed similar to basic earnings (loss) per share except that the denominator is increased to include additional common share equivalents available upon exercise of stock options and warrants using the treasury stock method. Dilutive common share equivalents include the dilutive effect of in-the-money share equivalents, which are calculated based on the average share price for each period using the treasury stock method, excluding any common share equivalents if their effect would be anti-dilutive. In periods in which a net loss has been incurred, all potentially dilutive common shares are considered anti-dilutive and thus are excluded from the calculation.
The table below shows earnings per common share and diluted earnings per common share and reconciles the numerator and denominator of both earnings per common share calculations.
Securities that are excluded from the calculation of weighted average dilutive common shares, because their inclusion would have been antidilutive are:
At May 31, 2019, the Company has one stock-based compensation plan under which the Company may issue awards. The Company accounts for this plan under the recognition and measurement principles of ASC 718, Compensation- Stock Compensation, which requires all share-based payments to employees, including grants of employee stock options, to be recognized in the condensed consolidated statements of operations on their fair values.
The grant date fair value is determined using the Black-Scholes-Merton (“Black-Scholes”) pricing model. For all employee stock options, the Company recognizes expense over the requisite service period on an accelerated basis over the employee’s requisite service period (generally the vesting period of the equity grant).
The Company’s option pricing model requires the input of highly subjective assumptions, including the expected stock price volatility and expected term. The expected volatility is based on the historical volatility of the Company since our Initial Public Offering. Any changes in these highly subjective assumptions significantly impact stock-based compensation expense.
The Company elected to account for forfeitures as they occur, as such, compensation cost previously recognized for an award that is forfeited because of the failure to satisfy a service condition is revised in the period of forfeiture.
Certain reclassifications have been made to prior year’s data to confirm to the current year’s presentation. Such reclassifications had no impact on the Company’s financial condition, operating results, cash flows or stockholder’s equity.
|Recent Accounting Standards
In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-13, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Disclosure Framework – Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement. For all entities, amendments are effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2019. The amendments on changes in unrealized gains and losses, the range and weighted average of significant unobservable inputs used to develop Level 3 fair value measurements, and the narrative description of measurement uncertainty should be applied prospectively for only the most recent interim or annual period presented in the initial fiscal year of adoption. All other amendments should be applied retrospectively to all periods presented upon their effective date. Early adoption is permitted. An entity is permitted to early adopt any removed or modified disclosures upon issuance of ASU No. 2018-13 and delay adoption of the additional disclosures until their effective date. The Company is currently evaluating the potential impact this guidance will have on the condensed consolidated financial statements, if any.
In July 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-10, Codification Improvements to Topic 842, Leases. For entities that early adopted Topic 842, the amendments are effective upon issuance of ASU 2018-10, and the transition requirements are the same as those in Topic 842. For entities that have not adopted Topic 842, the effective date and transition requirements will be the same as the effective date and transition requirements in Topic 842. ASU 2018-10 will be effective for use for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019. The Company is currently evaluating the potential impact this guidance will have on the consolidated financial statements, if any.
In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606), which outlines a single comprehensive model for entities to use in accounting for revenue arising from contracts with customers and supersedes most current revenue recognition guidance, including industry-specific guidance. The core principle of the revenue model is that “an entity recognizes revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services.” The standard provides enhancements to the quality and consistency of how revenue is reported by companies, while also improving comparability in the financial statements of companies reporting using International Financial Reporting Standards or U.S. GAAP. The new standard also will require enhanced revenue disclosures, provide guidance for transactions that were not previously addressed comprehensively, and improve guidance for multiple-element arrangements. This accounting standard becomes effective for the Company for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim reporting periods within annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019. Early adoption is permitted for annual reporting periods (including interim periods) beginning after December 15, 2016. This new standard permits the use of either the retrospective or cumulative effect transition method.
In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-08, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Principal versus Agent Considerations. The purpose of this standard is to clarify the implementation of guidance on principal versus agent considerations related to ASU 2014-09. The standard has the same effective date as ASU 2014-09 described above.
In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-10, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing, which provides clarity related to ASU 2014-09 regarding identifying performance obligations and licensing implementation. The standard has the same effective date as ASU 2014-09 described above.
In May 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-12: Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients, which provides narrow scope improvements and practical expedients related to ASU 2014-09. The purpose of this standard is to clarify certain narrow aspects of ASU 2014-09, such as assessing the collectability criterion, presentation of sales taxes, and other similar taxes collected from customers, noncash considerations, contract modifications at transition, completed contracts are transition, and technical correction. The standard has the same effective date as ASU 2014-09 described above.
In December 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-20: Technical Corrections and Improvements to Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. The amendments in this standard affect narrow aspects of guidance issued in ASU 2014-09. The standard has the same effective date as ASU 2014-09 described above.
The Company is currently developing an adoption plan of how it currently recognizes revenue compared to the accounting treatment required under the new guidance. This plan includes a review of client contracts and revenue transactions to determine the impact of the accounting treatment under the new guidance, evaluation of the adoption method and completing a rollout plan for the new guidance. Additionally, the Company is in the process of assessing the impact of the new standard on its disclosures and internal controls.
In February 2016, the FASB issued new accounting guidance on leases ASU 2016-02, Leases. The new standard requires that a lessee recognize assets and liabilities on the balance sheet for leases with terms longer than 12 months. The recognition, measurement and presentation of lease expenses and cash flows by a lessee will depend on its classification as a finance or operating lease. The guidance also includes new disclosure requirements providing information on the amounts recorded in the financial statements. The ASU is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019 and interim periods within fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2020. The Company is currently evaluating the impact that this standard will have on its consolidated financial statement.
In June 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-07, which simplifies the accounting for nonemployee share-based payment transactions. The amendments specify that Topic 718 applies to all share-based payment transactions in which a grantor acquires goods or services to be used or consumed in a grantor’s own operations by issuing share-based payment awards. The standard will be effective for the Company in the first quarter of fiscal year 2020, although early adoption is permitted (but no sooner than the adoption of Topic 606). The Company does not expect that the adoption of this ASU will have a significant impact on its consolidated financial statements.