Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
|6 Months Ended|
Jun. 30, 2018
|Accounting Policies [Abstract]|
|Summary of Significant Accounting Policies||
NOTE 2 - SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Basis of Presentation and Principles of Consolidation
The accompanying consolidated condensed financial statements have been prepared by the Company, without audit, pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Certain information and disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (U.S. GAAP) have been condensed or omitted pursuant to such rules and regulations. These consolidated condensed financial statements reflect all adjustments (consisting only of normal recurring adjustments) which, in the opinion of management, are necessary to present fairly the financial position, the results of operations and cash flows of the Company for the periods presented. It is suggested that these consolidated condensed financial statements be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto included in the Company’s most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K. The results of operations for the interim periods are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the full year ended December 31, 2018.
Use of Estimates and Assumptions
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with US 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 financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. Significant estimates made by management include, but are not limited to, estimating the useful lives of patent assets, the assumptions used to calculate fair value of warrants and options granted, goodwill impairment, realization of long-lived assets, deferred income taxes, unrealized tax positions and business combination accounting.
Significant Accounting Policies
There have been no material changes in the Company’s significant accounting policies to those previously disclosed in the 2017 Annual Report other than the adoption of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Accounting Standard Updates (ASU) 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers and the accounting for digital assets and crypto currency machines.
Operating segments are defined as components of an enterprise about which separate financial information is available that is evaluated regularly by the chief operating decision maker, or decision–making group in deciding how to allocate resources and in assessing performance. Our chief operating decision–making group (“CODM”) is composed of the chief executive officer and chief financials officer. The Company currently operates in the Digital Currency Blockchain segment. The Company’s Crypto-currency Machines are located in Canada and the Company has employees only in the United States and views its operations as one operating segment as the CODM reviews financial information on a consolidated basis in making decisions regarding resource allocations and assessing performance.
Digital currencies consist of crypto-currency denominated assets such as Bitcoin and are included in current assets. Digital currencies are carried at their fair market value determined by an average spot rate of the most liquid digital currency exchanges. The digital currency market is still a new market and is highly volatile; historical prices are not necessarily indicative of future value; a significant change in the market prices for digital currencies would have a significant impact on the Company’s earnings and financial position.
Management has assessed the basis of depreciation of the Company’s Crypto-currency Machines used to verify digital currency transactions and generate digital currencies and believes they should be depreciated over a 2 year period. The rate at which the Company generates digital assets and, therefore, consumes the economic benefits of its transaction verification servers are influenced by a number of factors including the following:
The Company operates in an emerging industry for which limited data is available to make estimates of the useful economic lives of specialized equipment. Management has determined that a two year diminishing value best reflects the current expected useful life of transaction verification servers. This assessment takes into consideration the availability of historical data and management’s expectations regarding the direction of the industry including potential changes in technology. Management will review this estimate annually and will revise such estimates as and when data comes available.
To the extent that any of the assumptions underlying management’s estimate of useful life of its transaction verification servers are subject to revision in a future reporting period either as a result of changes in circumstances or through the availability of greater quantities of data then the estimated useful life could change and have a prospective impact on depreciation expense and the carrying amounts of these assets.
The Company recognizes revenue when it is realized or realizable and earned. We consider revenue realized or realizable and earned when there is persuasive evidence of an arrangement and that the product has been shipped or the services have been provided to the customer, the sales price is fixed or determinable and collectability is probable. Our material revenue stream is related to the mining of digital currencies. In consideration for these services, the Company receives digital currencies which are recorded as revenue, using the average U. S. dollar spot price of the related crypto-currency on the date of receipt. The coins are recorded on the balance sheet at their fair value and re–measured at each reporting date. Revaluation gains or losses, as well as gains or losses on sale of digital currencies are recorded as a component of cost of revenues in the statement of operations. Expenses associated with running the crypto-currency mining business, such as equipment deprecation, rent and electricity cost are also recorded as cost of revenues.
There is currently no specific definitive guidance in U.S. GAAP or alternative accounting frameworks for the accounting for the production and mining of digital currencies and management has exercised significant judgement in determining appropriate accounting treatment for the recognition of revenue for mining of digital currencies. Management has examined various factors surrounding the substance of the Company’s operations and the guidance in ASC 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, including the stage of completion being the completion and addition of a block to a blockchain and the reliability of the measurement of the digital currency received. In the event authoritative guidance is enacted by the FASB, the Company may be required to change its policies which could result in a change in the Company’s financial statements.
The Company recognizes revenue under ASC 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. The core principle of the new revenue standard is that a company should recognize revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the company expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. The following five steps are applied to achieve that core principle:
In order to identify the performance obligations in a contract with a customer, a company must assess the promised goods or services in the contract and identify each promised good or service that is distinct. A performance obligation meets ASC 606’s definition of a “distinct” good or service (or bundle of goods or services) if both of the following criteria are met:
If a good or service is not distinct, the good or service is combined with other promised goods or services until a bundle of goods or services is identified that is distinct.
The transaction price is the amount of consideration to which an entity expects to be entitled in exchange for transferring promised goods or services to a customer. The consideration promised in a contract with a customer may include fixed amounts, variable amounts, or both. When determining the transaction price, an entity must consider the effects of all of the following:
Variable consideration is included in the transaction price only to the extent that it is probable that a significant reversal in the amount of cumulative revenue recognized will not occur when the uncertainty associated with the variable consideration is subsequently resolved.
The transaction price is allocated to each performance obligation on a relative standalone selling price basis.
The transaction price allocated to each performance obligation is recognized when that performance obligation is satisfied, at a point in time or over time as appropriate.
There is only one performance obligation in each digital currency transaction (transfer of a verified transaction to the blockchain). If the Company is successful in adding a block to the blockchain (by verifying an individual transaction), the Company is automatically awarded a fixed number of digital currency tokens for their effort. At the time the contract with the customer arises (upon being the first to solve the algorithm and transferring a verified transaction to the blockchain), the consideration receivable is fixed. As such, the Company concluded that there was no variable consideration. There is no significant financing component or consideration payable to the customer in these transactions.
Digital currencies are non-cash consideration and thus must be included in the transaction price at fair value at the inception of the contract, which is when the algorithm is solved and a verified transaction is transferred to the blockchain. Fair value is determined using the average U.S. dollar spot rate of the related digital currency.
The Company will subsequently account for digital currencies received at fair value, with changes in fair value flowing through current income, as the Company has concluded that the fair value measurement model, with both realized and unrealized changes reflected currently in the income statement, will best represent the economics associated with holding digital currencies. These subsequent holding gains and losses will not be reflected as revenue from contracts with customers, in accordance with the guidance above but will be recorded as a component of costs and expenses.
Expenses associated with running the digital currency mining business, such as rent and electricity cost are also recorded as cost of revenues. Depreciation on digital currency mining equipment are recorded as a component of costs and expenses.
Related Party Transactions
Parties are considered related to the Company if the parties, directly or indirectly, through one or more intermediaries, control, are controlled by, or are under common control with the Company. Related parties also include principal owners of the Company, its management, members of the immediate families of principal owners of the Company and its management and other parties with which the Company may deal if one party controls or can significantly influence the management or operating policies of the other to an extent that one of the transacting parties might be prevented from fully pursuing its own separate interests. The Company discloses all related party transactions.
At June 30, 2018 and December 31, 2017, the Company has fully reserved a Note Receivable on the Balance Sheets which consists of an uncollateralized note receivable in the amount of $588,864 from nXn, an entity owned or controlled or previously owned or controlled by Erich Spangenberg. The note receivable does not carry interest and was repayable to the Company at the earlier of March 31, 2018 or based upon certain milestones. The note receivable was not repaid by nXn and the Company took a full reserve for bad debt as of December 31, 2017.
At June 30, 2018 and December 31, 2017, the Company owed Doug Croxall (former CFO), $0 and $124,297, respectively (comprised of $187,500 bonus payable and $63,203 advance).
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
The Company measures at fair value certain of its financial and non-financial assets and liabilities by using a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value. Fair value is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date, essentially an exit price, based on the highest and best use of the asset or liability. The levels of the fair value hierarchy are:
The carrying amounts reported in the consolidated balance sheet for cash, accounts receivable, accounts payable, and accrued expenses, approximate their estimated fair market value based on the short-term maturity of these instruments. The carrying value of notes payable and other long-term liabilities approximate fair value as the related interest rates approximate rates currently available to the Company.
Financial assets and liabilities are classified in their entirety within the fair value hierarchy based on the lowest level of input that is significant to their fair value measurement. The Company measures the fair value of its marketable securities by taking into consideration valuations obtained from third-party pricing sources. The pricing services utilize industry standard valuation models, including both income and market-based approaches, for which all significant inputs are observable, either directly or indirectly, to estimate fair value. These inputs included reported trades of and broker-dealer quotes on the same or similar securities, issuer credit spreads, benchmark securities and other observable inputs.
The following tables present information about the Company’s assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis and the Company’s estimated level within the fair value hierarchy of those assets and liabilities as of June 30, 2018 and December 31, 2017, respectively:
There were no transfers between Level 1, 2 or 3 during the six months ended June 30, 2018.
The following table presents additional information about Level 1 assets measured at fair value. Changes in Level 1 assets measured at fair value for the six months ended June 30, 2018:
The Company uses Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy to measure the fair value of digital currencies and revalues its digital currencies at every reporting period and recognizes gains or losses in the condensed statements of operations that are attributable to the change in the fair value of the digital currency.
As at June 30, 2018, the Company’s digital currencies consisted of Bitcoin, with a fair value of $385,275. Digital currencies are recorded at their fair value on the date they are received as revenues, and are revalued to their current market value at each reporting date. Fair value is determined by taking the spot rate from the most liquid exchanges.
At June 30, 2018, the Company had an outstanding warrant liability in the amount of $190,719 associated with warrants that were issued in January 2017 and warrants issued in related to the Convertible Notes issued in August and September of 2017. The following table rolls forward the fair value of the Company’s warrant liability, the fair value of which is determined by Level 3 inputs for the six months ended June 30, 2018.
FV of warrant liabilities
Basic and Diluted Net Loss per Share
Net loss per common share is calculated in accordance with ASC Topic 260: Earnings Per Share (“ASC 260”). Basic loss per share is computed by dividing net loss by the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period. The computation of diluted net loss per share does not include dilutive common stock equivalents in the weighted average shares outstanding, as they would be anti-dilutive.
Securities that could potentially dilute loss per share in the future that were not included in the computation of diluted loss per share at June 30, 2018 and 2017 are as follows:
The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted loss per share:
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In June 2018, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2018-07, “Improvements to Nonemployee Share-Based Payment Accounting”, which simplifies the accounting for share-based payments granted to nonemployees for goods and services. Under the ASU, most of the guidance on such payments to nonemployees would be aligned with the requirements for share-based payments granted to employees. The changes take effect for public companies for fiscal years starting after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within that fiscal year. For all other entities, the amendments are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, and interim periods within fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2020. Early adoption is permitted, but no earlier than an entity’s adoption date of Topic 606. The Company expects that the adoption of this ASU would not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated condensed financial statements.
In March 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-5, Income Taxes (Topic 740) Amendments to SEC paragraphs pursuant to SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 118. These amendments affect the wording of SEC paragraphs in the accounting standard codification dealing with Income Taxes (Topic 740). The amendments in this update are not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated condensed financial statements.
In July 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-11, “Earnings Per Share (Topic 260) Distinguishing Liabilities from Equity (Topic 480) Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815),” which addresses the complexity of accounting for certain financial instruments with down round features. Down round features are features of certain equity-linked instruments (or embedded features) that result in the strike price being reduced on the basis of the pricing of future equity offerings. Current accounting guidance creates cost and complexity for entities that issue financial instruments (such as warrants and convertible instruments) with down round features that require fair value measurement of the entire instrument or conversion option. For public business entities, the amendments in Part I of this Update are effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2018 with early adoption permitted. We are currently evaluating the impact that the standard will have on the Company’s consolidated condensed financial statements.
In May 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-09, Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Scope of Modification Accounting. This ASU provides clarity about which changes to the terms or conditions of a share-based payment award require the application of modification accounting. Specifically, ASU 2017-09 clarifies that changes to the terms or conditions of an award should be accounted for as a modification unless all of the following are met: 1) the fair value of the modified award is the same as the fair value of the original award immediately before the original award is modified, 2) the vesting conditions of the modified award are the same as the vesting conditions of the original award immediately before the original award is modified and 3) the classification of the modified award as an equity instrument or a liability instrument is the same as the classification of the original award immediately before the original award is modified. ASU 2017-09 is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017 and early adoption is permitted. The Company adopted ASU 2017-09 on January 1, 2018 and the adoption did not have a material impact on the Company’s accounting for share-based payment awards, as changes to awards’ terms and conditions subsequent to the grant date are unusual and infrequent in nature.
In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-01 Business Combinations (Topic 805): Clarifying the Definition of a Business (“ASU 2017-01”), which clarifies the definition of a business and assists entities with evaluating whether transactions should be accounted for as acquisitions (or disposals) of assets or businesses. Under this guidance, when substantially all of the fair value of gross assets acquired is concentrated in a single asset (or group of similar assets), the assets acquired would not represent a business. In addition, in order to be considered a business, an acquisition would have to include at a minimum an input and a substantive process that together significantly contribute to the ability to create an output. The amended guidance also narrows the definition of outputs by more closely aligning it with how outputs are described in FASB guidance for revenue recognition. This guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted. The Company adopted ASU 2017-01 on January 1, 2018 and the adoption did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated condensed financial statements and notes thereto.
In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, as a new Topic, (ASC) Topic 606. The new revenue recognition standard provides a five-step analysis of transactions to determine when and how revenue is recognized. The core principle is that a company should recognize 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. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-14, Revenue from Contracts with Customers: Deferral of the Effective Date, which deferred the effective date of the new revenue standard for periods beginning after December 15, 2016 to December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted but not earlier than the original effective date. This ASU must be applied retrospectively to each period presented or as a cumulative-effect adjustment as of the date of adoption. We are considering the alternatives of adoption of this ASU and we are conducting our review of the likely impact to the existing portfolio of customer contracts entered into prior to adoption. The Company adopted ASU 2014-09 on January 1, 2018 under the modified retrospective approach and the adoption did not have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations, cash flows and financial position.
In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, “Leases (Topic 842)” (“ASU 2016-02”). The standard requires a lessee to recognize assets and liabilities on the balance sheet for leases with lease terms greater than 12 months. ASU 2016-02 is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2018, and early adoption is permitted. Accordingly, the standard is effective for us on September 1, 2019 using a modified retrospective approach. We are currently evaluating the impact that the standard will have on our consolidated condensed financial statements.
Any new accounting standards, not disclosed above, that have been issued or proposed by FASB that do not require adoption until a future date are not expected to have a material impact on the financial statements upon adoption.
The entire disclosure for all significant accounting policies of the reporting entity.
Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef