Following is a discussion of FHN's key revenues within the scope of Accounting Standards Update ("ASU") 2014-09, "Revenue from Contracts with Customers", and all related amendments, except as noted.

Refer to Note 12 - Business Segment Information for a reconciliation of disaggregated revenue by major product line and reportable segment.

Effective January 1, 2018, FHN adopted the provisions of ASU 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers,” and all related amendments to all contracts using a modified retrospective transaction method. ASU 2014-09 does not change revenue recognition for financial assets. The core principle of ASU 2014-09 is that an entity 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. This is accomplished through a five-step recognition framework involving 1) the identification of contracts with customers, 2) identification of performance obligations, 3) determination of the transaction price, 4) allocation of the transaction price to the performance obligations and 5) recognition of revenue as performance obligations are satisfied. Additionally, qualitative and quantitative information is required for disclosure regarding the nature, amount, timing, and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from contracts with customers. In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-08, “Principal versus Agent Considerations,” which provides additional guidance on whether an entity should recognize revenue on a gross or net basis, based on which party controls the specified good or service before that good or service is transferred to a customer. In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-10, “Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing,” which clarifies the original guidance included in ASU 2014-09 for identification of the goods or services provided to customers and enhances the implementation guidance for licensing arrangements. ASU 2016-12, “Narrow-

and application of ASU 2014-09. “Technical Corrections and Improvements” ASU 2016-20 was issued in December 2016 and provides further guidance on certain issues. FHN elected to adopt the provisions of the revenue recognition standards through the cumulative effect alternative and determined that there were no significant effects on the timing of recognition, which resulted in no cumulative effect adjustment being required. Beginning in first quarter 2018, in situations where FHN's broker-dealer operations serve as the lead underwriter, the associated revenues and expenses are presented gross. The effect on 2018 revenues and expenses is not expected to be significant.

Effective January 1, 2018, FHN adopted the provisions of ASU 2017-05, “Clarifying the Scope of Asset Derecognition Guidance and Accounting for Partial Sales of Nonfinancial Assets” through the cumulative effect approach. ASU 2017-05 clarifies the meaning and application of the term "in substance nonfinancial asset" in transactions involving both financial and nonfinancial assets. If substantially all of the fair value of the assets that are promised to the counterparty in a contract are concentrated in nonfinancial assets, then all of the financial assets promised to the counterparty are in substance nonfinancial assets within the scope of revenue recognition guidance for nonfinancial assets. ASU 2017-05 also clarifies that an entity should identify each distinct nonfinancial asset or in substance nonfinancial asset promised to a counterparty and derecognize each asset when a counterparty obtains control of it with the amount of revenue recognized based on the allocation guidance provided in ASU 2014-09. ASU 2017-05 also requires an entity to derecognize a distinct nonfinancial asset or distinct in substance nonfinancial asset in a partial sale transaction when it 1) does not have (or ceases to have) a controlling financial interest in the legal entity that holds the asset in accordance with Topic 810 and 2) transfers control of the asset in accordance with the provisions of ASU 2014-09. Once an entity transfers control of a distinct nonfinancial asset or distinct in substance nonfinancial asset, it is required to measure any noncontrolling interest it receives (or retains) at fair value. FHN determined that there were no significant effects on the timing of revenue recognition, which resulted in no cumulative effect adjustment being required.

Effective January 1, 2018, FHN adopted the provisions of ASU 2016-01, “Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities.” ASU 2016-01 makes several revisions to the accounting, presentation and disclosure for financial instruments. Equity investments (except those accounted for under the equity method, those that result in consolidation of the investee, and those held by entities subject to specialized industry accounting which already apply fair value through earnings) are required to be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income. This excludes FRB and FHLB stock holdings which are specifically exempted from the provisions of ASU 2016-01. An entity may elect to measure equity investments that do not have readily determinable market values at cost minus impairment, if any, plus or minus changes resulting from observable price changes in orderly transactions for the identical or similar instruments from the same issuer. ASU 2016-01 also requires a qualitative impairment review for equity investments without readily determinable fair values, with measurement at fair value required if impairment is determined to exist. For liabilities for which fair value has been elected, ASU 2016-01 revises current accounting to record the portion of fair value changes resulting from instrument-specific credit risk within other comprehensive income rather than earnings. FHN has not elected fair value accounting for any existing financial liabilities. Additionally, ASU 2016-01 clarifies that the need for a valuation allowance on a deferred tax asset related to available-for-sale securities should be assessed in combination with all other deferred tax assets rather than being assessed in isolation. ASU 2016-01 also makes several changes to existing fair value presentation and disclosure requirements, including a provision that all disclosures must use an exit price concept in the determination of fair value. Transition is through a cumulative effect adjustment to retained earnings for equity investments with readily determinable fair values. Equity investments without readily determinable fair values, for which the accounting election is made, will have any initial fair value marks recorded through earnings prospectively after adoption.

Upon adoption, FHN reclassified $265.9 million of equity investments out of AFS securities to Other assets, leaving only debt securities within the AFS classification. FHN evaluated the nature of its current equity investments (excluding FRB and FHLB stock holdings which are specifically exempted from the provisions of ASU 2016-01) and determined that substantially all qualified for the election available to assets without readily determinable fair values, including its holdings of Visa Class B shares.values. Accordingly, FHN has applied this election and any future fair value marks for these investments will be recognized through earnings on a prospective basis subsequent to adoption. The requirements of ASU 2016-01 related to assessment of deferred tax assets and disclosure of the fair value of financial instruments did not have a significant effect on FHN because its current accounting and disclosure practices conform to the requirements of ASU 2016-01.

Effective January 1, 2018, FHN adopted the provisions of ASU 2016-04, “Recognition of Breakage of Certain Prepaid Stored-Value Products,” which indicates that liabilities related to the sale of prepaid stored-value products are considered financial liabilities and should have a breakage estimate applied for estimated unused funds. ASU 2016-04 does not apply to stored-value products that can only be redeemed for cash, are subject to escheatment or are linked to a segregated bank account. The adoption of ASU 2016-04 did not have a significant effect on FHN’s current accounting and disclosure practices.

Effective January 1, 2018, FHN adopted the provisions of ASU 2016-15, “Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments,” which clarifies multiple cash flow presentation issues including providing guidance as to classification on the cash flow statement for certain cash receipts and cash payments where diversity in practice exists. The adoption of ASU 2016-15 was applied retroactively resulting in proceeds from bank-owned life insurance (“BOLI”) being classified as an investing activity rather than their prior classification as an operating activity. All of these amounts are included in Other assets in the Consolidated Condensed Statement of Condition. The amounts reclassified are presented in the table below.

Effective January 1, 2018, FHN retroactively adopted the provisions of ASU 2017-07, “Improving the Presentation of Net

Periodic Pension Cost and Net Periodic Postretirement Benefit Cost,” which requires the disaggregation of the service cost component from the other components of net benefit cost for pension and postretirement plans. Service cost must be included in the same income statement line item as other compensation-related expenses. All other components of net benefit cost are required to be presented in the income statement separately from the service cost component, with disclosure of the line items where these amounts are recorded. FHN’s disclosures for pension and postretirement costs provide details of the service cost and all other components for expenses recognized for its applicable benefit plans. All of these amounts were previously included in Employee compensation, incentives, and benefits expense in the Consolidated Condensed Statements of Income. Upon adoption of ASU 2017-07 FHN reclassified the expense components other than service cost into All other expense and revised its disclosures accordingly. The amounts reclassified are presented in the table below.

Effective January 1, 2018, FHN early adopted the provisions of ASU 2017-08, “Premium Amortization on Purchased Callable Debt Securities,” which shortens the amortization period for securities that have explicit, noncontingent call features that are callable at fixed prices and on preset dates. In contrast to the current requirement for premium amortization to extend to the contractual maturity date, ASU 2017-08 requires the premium to be amortized to the earliest call date. ASU 2017-08 does not change the amortization of discounts, which will continue to be amortized to maturity. The new guidance does not apply to either 1) debt securities where the prepayment date is not preset or the price is not known in advance or 2) debt securities that qualify for amortization based on estimated prepayment rates. The adoption of ASU 2017-08 did not have an effect on FHN's current investments.

Effective January 1, 2018, FHN early adopted the provisions of ASU 2017-12, “Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities,” which revises the financial reporting for hedging relationships through changes to both the designation and measurement requirements for qualifying hedge relationships and the presentation of hedge results. ASU 2017-12 expands permissible risk component hedging strategies, including the designation of a contractually specified interest rate (e.g., a bank’s prime rate) in hedges of cash flows from variable rate financial instruments. Additionally, ASU 2017-12 makes significant revisions to fair value hedging activities, including the ability to measure the fair value changes for a hedged item solely for changes in the benchmark interest rate, permitting partial-term hedges, limiting consideration of prepayment risk for hedged debt instruments solely to the effects of changes in the benchmark interest rate and allowing for certain hedging strategies to be applied to closed portfolios of prepayable debt instruments. ASU 2017-12 also provides elections for the exclusion of certain portions of a hedging instrument’s change in fair value from the assessment of hedge effectiveness. If elected, the fair value changes of these excluded components may be recognized immediately or recorded into other comprehensive income with recycling into earnings using a rational and systematic methodology over the life of the hedging instrument.

Under ASU 2017-12 some of the documentation requirements for hedge accounting relationships are relaxed, but the highly effective threshold has been retained. Hedge designation documentation and a prospective qualitative assessment are still required at hedge inception, but the initial quantitative analysis may be delayed until the end of the quarter the hedge is commenced. If certain criteria are met, an election can be made to perform future effectiveness assessments using a purely

fair value hedges, the entire change in the fair value of the hedging instrument included in the assessment of effectiveness is recorded to the same income statement line item used to present the earnings effect of the hedged item. For cash flow hedges, the entire fair value change of the hedging instrument that is included in the assessment of hedge effectiveness is initially recorded in other comprehensive income and later recycled into earnings as the hedged transaction(s) affect net income with the income statement effects recorded in the same financial statement line item used to present the earnings effect of the hedged item.

ASU 2017-12 also makes revisions to the current disclosure requirements for hedging activities to reflect the presentation of hedging results consistent with the changes to income statement classification and to improve the disclosure of the hedging results on the balance sheet.

FHN early adopted the provisions of ASU 2017-12 in the first quarter of 2018. Prospectively, FHN is recording components of hedging results for its fair value and cash flow hedges previously recognized in other expense within either interest income or interest expense. Additionally, FHN made cumulative effect adjustments to the hedged items, accumulated other comprehensive income and retained earnings as of the beginning of 2018. The magnitude of the cumulative effect adjustments and prospective effects were insignificant for FHN’s hedge relationships.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, “Leases,” which requires a lessee to recognize in its statement of condition a liability to make lease payments (the lease liability) and a right-of-use asset representing its right to use the underlying asset for the lease term. ASU 2016-02 leaves lessor accounting largely unchanged from prior standards. For leases with a term of 12 months or less, a lessee is permitted to make an accounting policy election by class of underlying asset not to recognize lease assets and lease liabilities. If a lessee makes this election, it should recognize lease expense for such leases generally on a straight-line basis over the lease term. All other leases must be classified as financing or operating leases which depends on the relationship of the lessee’s rights to the economic value of the leased asset. For finance leases, interest on the lease liability is recognized separately from amortization of the right-of-use asset in earnings, resulting in higher expense in the earlier portion of the lease term. For operating leases, a single lease cost is calculated so that the cost of the lease is allocated over the lease term on a generally straight-line basis.

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13, “Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments,” which revises the measurement and recognition of credit losses for assets measured at amortized cost (e.g., held-to-maturity (“HTM”) loans and debt securities) and available-for-sale (“AFS”) debt securities. Under ASU 2016-13, for assets measured at amortized cost, the current expected credit loss (“CECL”) is measured as the difference between amortized cost and the net amount expected to be collected. This represents a departure from existing GAAP as the “incurred loss” methodology for recognizing credit losses delays recognition until it is probable a loss has been incurred. The measurement of current expected credit losses is based on relevant information about past events, including historical experience, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable

forecasts that affect the collectability of the reported amount. Additionally, current disclosures of credit quality indicators in relation to the amortized cost of financing receivables will be further disaggregated by year of origination. ASU 2016-13 leaves the methodology for measuring credit losses on AFS debt securities largely unchanged, with the maximum credit loss representing the difference between amortized cost and fair value. However, such credit losses will be recognized through an allowance for credit losses, which permits recovery of previously recognized credit losses if circumstances change.

ASU 2016-13 also revises the recognition of credit losses for purchased financial assets with a more-than insignificant amount of credit deterioration since origination (“PCD assets”). For PCD assets, the initial allowance for credit losses is added to the purchase price. Only subsequent changes in the allowance for credit losses are recorded as a credit loss expense for PCD assets. Interest income for PCD assets will be recognized based on the effective interest rate, excluding the discount embedded in the purchase price that is attributable to the acquirer’s assessment of credit losses at acquisition. Currently, credit losses for purchased credit-impaired assets are included in the initial basis of the assets with subsequent declines in credit resulting in expense while subsequent improvements in credit are reflected as an increase in the future yield from the assets.

The provisions of ASU 2016-13 will be generally adopted through a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the first reporting period in the year of adoption. Prospective implementation is required for debt securities for which an other-than-temporary-impairment (“OTTI”) had been previously recognized. Amounts previously recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income (“AOCI”) as of the date of adoption that relate to improvements in cash flows expected to be collected will continue to be accreted into income over the remaining life of the asset. Recoveries of amounts previously written off relating to improvements in cash flows after the date of adoption will be recorded in earnings when received. A prospective transition approach will be used for existing PCD assets where, upon adoption, the amortized cost basis will be adjusted to reflect the addition of the allowance for credit losses. Thus, an entity will not be required to reassess its purchased financial assets that exist as of the date of adoption to determine whether they would have met at acquisition the new criteria of more-than-insignificant credit deterioration since origination. An entity will accrete the remaining noncredit discount (based on the revised amortized cost basis) into interest income at the effective interest rate at the adoption date.

ASU 2016-13 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018. FHN continues to evaluate the impact of ASU 2016-13.  FHN has met with industry experts, initiated training for key employees associated with the new standard, and defined an initial approach that it is currently testing. FHN has begun developing the formal models and processes that will be required to implement the new standard.

(b) Primarily comprised of fees for severance and retention.

(c) Primarily relates to fees for temporary assistance for merger and integration activities.

(d) Primarily relates to fees associated with lease exit accruals.

(e) Consists of fees for Operations services, communications and courier, equipment rentals, depreciation, and maintenance,

supplies, travel and entertainment, computer software, and advertising and public relations.

(f) Primarily relates to contract termination charges, costs of shareholder matters and asset impairments related

to the integration, as well as other miscellaneous expenses.

In second quarter 2018, FHN sold approximately $120 million UPB of its subprime auto loans. These loans, originally acquired as part of the CBF acquisition, did not fit within FHN's risk profile. Based on the sales price, a measurement period adjustment to the acquisition-date fair value of the subprime auto loans was recorded in second quarter 2018.

See Note 2- Acquisitions and Divestitures in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017, for additional information about the CBF and Coastal acquisitions.