The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued ASU No. 2014-09, "Revenue from Contracts with Customers" ("ASU 2014-09"). The standard is a comprehensive new revenue recognition model that requires revenue to be recognized in a manner to depict the transfer of goods or services to a customer at an amount that reflects the consideration expected to be received in exchange for those goods or services. The FASB has also issued a number of updates to this standard. The standard is effective for us for annual and interim periods beginning January 1, 2018, and, at that time, we expect to apply the modified retrospective method of adoption. We have been actively engaged in discussions with the FASB and within our industry and continue to evaluate the impact that the standard will have on our financial statements.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, "Leases (Topic 842)" ("ASU 2016-02"), which amends the existing accounting standards for lease accounting, including requiring lessees to recognize most leases on their balance sheets. ASU 2016-02 is effective for us for annual and interim periods beginning January 1, 2019 and early adoption is permitted. The standard requires a modified retrospective transition approach for all leases existing at, or entered into after, the date of initial application, with an option to use certain transition relief. We are currently evaluating the impact that the standard will have on our financial statements.

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13, "Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments" ("ASU 2016-13"), which changes the impairment model for most financial assets and certain other instruments from an "incurred loss" approach to a new "expected credit loss" methodology and also requires that credit losses from available-for-sale debt securities be presented as an allowance instead of a write-down. ASU 2016-13 is effective for us for annual and interim periods beginning January 1, 2020, with early adoption permitted, and requires full retrospective application on adoption. We are currently evaluating the impact the standard will have on our financial statements.

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 addresses several specific cash flow issues. ASU 2016-15 is

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-04, "Intangibles - Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Accounting for Goodwill Impairment" ("ASU 2017-04"), which removes the requirement to perform a hypothetical purchase price allocation to measure goodwill impairment. A goodwill impairment will now be the amount by which a reporting unit’s carrying value exceeds its fair value, not to exceed the carrying amount of goodwill. ASU 2017-04 is effective for us for annual and interim periods beginning January 1, 2020, with early adoption permitted, and applied prospectively. We do not expect ASU 2017-04 to have a material impact on our financial statements.

In February 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-05, "Other Income - Clarifying the Scope of Asset Derecognition Guidance and Accounting for Partial Sales of Nonfinancial Assets (Subtopic 610-20)" ("ASU 2017-05"). ASU 2017-05 updates the definition of an "in substance nonfinancial asset" and clarifies the derecognition guidance for nonfinancial assets to conform with the new revenue recognition standard. The effective date and transition methods of ASU 2017-05 are aligned with ASU 2014-09 described above. We are currently evaluating the impact that the standard will have on our financial statements.

We enter into land option agreements in order to procure land for the construction of homes in the future. Pursuant to these land option agreements, we generally provide a deposit to the seller as consideration for the right to purchase land at different times in the future, usually at predetermined prices. Such contracts enable us to defer acquiring portions of properties owned by third parties or unconsolidated entities until we have determined whether and when to exercise our option, which reduces our financial risks associated with long-term land holdings. Option deposits and pre-acquisition costs (such as environmental testing, surveys, engineering, and entitlement costs) are capitalized if the costs are directly identifiable with the land under option, the costs would be capitalized if we owned the land, and acquisition of the property is probable. Such costs are reflected in other assets and are reclassified to inventory upon taking title to the land. We write off deposits and pre-acquisition costs when it becomes probable that we will not go forward with the project or recover the capitalized costs. Such decisions take into consideration changes in local market conditions, the timing of required land purchases, the availability and

If an entity holding the land under option is a variable interest entity ("VIE"), our deposit represents a variable interest in that entity. No VIEs required consolidation at either March 31,June 30, 2017 or December 31, 2016 because we determined that we were not the VIEs' primary beneficiary. Our maximum exposure to loss related to these VIEs is generally limited to our deposits and pre-acquisition costs under the land option agreements.

The following provides a summary of our interests in land option agreements as of March 31,June 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016 ($000’s omitted): 

Our Homebuilding operations are engaged in the acquisition and development of land primarily for residential purposes within the U.S. and the construction of housing on such land. For reporting purposes, our Homebuilding operations are aggregated into six reportable segments:

In MarchAt June 30, 2017, aggregate outstanding debt of unconsolidated joint ventures was $55.8 million, of which our proportionate share was $27.0 million. Of this amount, we provided limited recourse guaranties for $26.3 million at June 30, 2017, which includes a limited recourse guaranty under a revolving credit facility held by one of our unconsolidated joint ventures. The Company’sOur maximum financial loss exposure related to the guaranty is limited to our proportionate share of 50% of the amount outstanding under the facility ($52.5 million at March 31, 2017) that is determined to be owed due toin the case of a triggering event under such guaranty. The limited guaranty includes, but is not limited to, the following:to: (i) completion of certain aspects of the project; (ii) an environmental indemnity provided to the lender; and (iii) an indemnification of the lender from certain "bad boy acts" of the joint venture.

ASC 820, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures,” provides a framework for measuring fair value in generally accepted accounting principles and establishes a fair value hierarchy which requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. The fair value hierarchy can be summarized as follows: 

Our assets and liabilities measured or disclosed at fair value are summarized below ($000’s omitted): 

Fair values for agency residential mortgage loans available-for-sale are determined based on quoted market prices for comparable instruments. Fair values for non-agency residential mortgage loans available-for-sale are determined based on purchase commitments from whole loan investors and other relevant market information available to management. Fair values for interest rate lock commitments, including the value of servicing rights, are based on market prices for similar instruments. Forwardand forward contracts on mortgage-backed securities are valued based on market prices for similar instruments. Fair values for whole loan commitments are based on market prices for similar instruments from the specific whole loan investor.

Our mortgage operations may be responsible for losses associated with mortgage loans originated and sold to investors in the event of errors or omissions relating to representations and warranties made by us that the loans met certain requirements, including representations as to underwriting standards, the existence of primary mortgage insurance, and the validity of certain borrower representations in connection with the loan. Determining the liabilities for anticipated losses requires a significant level of management judgment. Given the nature of these claims and the uncertainty regarding their ultimate resolution, actual costs could differ from our current estimates. Changes in these liabilities were as follows ($000's omitted):

We are involved in various litigation and legal claims in the normal course of our business operations, including actions brought on behalf of various classes of claimants. We are also subject to a variety of local, state, and federal laws and regulations related to land development activities, house construction standards, sales practices, mortgage lending operations, employment practices, and protection of the environment. As a result, we are subject to periodic examination or inquiry by various governmental agencies that administer these laws and regulations.

We establish liabilities for legal claims and regulatory matters when such matters are both probable of occurring and any potential loss is reasonably estimable. We accrue for such matters based on the facts and circumstances specific to each matter and revise these estimates as the matters evolve. In such cases, there may exist an exposure to loss in excess of any amounts currently accrued. In view of the inherent difficulty of predicting the outcome of these legal and regulatory matters, we generally cannot predict the ultimate resolution of the pending matters, the related timing, or the eventual loss. While the outcome of such contingencies cannot be predicted with certainty, we do not believe that the resolution of such matters will have a material adverse impact on our results of operations, financial position, or cash flows. However, to the extent the liability