Quarterly report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d)

Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2016

Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

1.	Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Basis of Presentation: The information presented as of September 30, 2016 and for the three-month and nine-month periods ended September 30, 2016 and 2015 is unaudited, but includes all adjustments (which consist only of normal recurring adjustments) that the management of Navidea Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. (Navidea, the Company, or we) believes to be necessary for the fair presentation of results for the periods presented. Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America have been condensed or omitted pursuant to the rules and regulations of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The balances as of September 30, 2016 and the results for the interim periods are not necessarily indicative of results to be expected for the year. The consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with Navidea’s audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2015, which were included as part of our Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Our consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Navidea and our wholly owned subsidiaries, Navidea Biopharmaceuticals Limited and Cardiosonix Ltd, as well as those of our majority-owned subsidiary, Macrophage Therapeutics, Inc. (MT). All significant inter-company accounts were eliminated in consolidation. Prior to termination of Navidea’s joint venture with R-NAV, LLC (R-NAV), Navidea's investment in R-NAV was being accounted for using the equity method of accounting and was therefore not consolidated. See Note 8.

Financial Instruments and Fair Value: In accordance with current accounting standards, the fair value hierarchy prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value, giving 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 the fair value hierarchy are described below:

Level 1 – Unadjusted quoted prices in active markets that are accessible at the measurement date for identical, unrestricted assets or liabilities;

Level 2 – Quoted prices in markets that are not active or financial instruments for which all significant inputs are observable, either directly or indirectly; and

Level 3 – Prices or valuations that require inputs that are both significant to the fair value measurement and unobservable.

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. In determining the appropriate levels, we perform a detailed analysis of the assets and liabilities whose fair value is measured on a recurring basis. At each reporting period, all assets and liabilities for which the fair value measurement is based on significant unobservable inputs or instruments which trade infrequently and therefore have little or no price transparency are classified as Level 3. See Note 3.

The following methods and assumptions were used to estimate the fair value of each class of financial instruments:

(1)

Cash, restricted cash, accounts and other receivables, accounts payable, and accrued liabilities: The carrying amounts approximate fair value because of the short maturity of these instruments. At September 30, 2016, restricted cash represents the balance in an account that is under the control of Capital Royalty Partners II L.P. (CRG). See Note 10. At September 30, 2016, approximately $894,000 of accounts payable was being disputed by the Company related to unauthorized expenditures by a former executive.

(2)

Notes payable: The carrying value of our debt at September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015 primarily consists of the face amount of the notes less unamortized discounts. See Note 9. At September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, certain notes payable were also required to be recorded at fair value. The estimated fair value of our debt was calculated using a discounted cash flow analysis as well as a Monte Carlo simulation. These valuation methods include Level 3 inputs such as the estimated current market interest rate for similar instruments with similar creditworthiness. Unrealized gains and losses on the fair value of the debt are classified in other expenses as a change in the fair value of financial instruments in the consolidated statements of operations. At September 30, 2016, the fair value of our notes payable is approximately $62.2 million, equal to the carrying value of $62.2 million.

(3)

Derivative liabilities: Derivative liabilities are related to certain outstanding warrants which are recorded at fair value. Derivative liabilities totaling $63,000 as of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015 were included in other liabilities on the consolidated balance sheets. The assumptions used to calculate fair value as of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015 included volatility, a risk-free rate and expected dividends. In addition, we considered non-performance risk and determined that such risk is minimal. Unrealized gains and losses on the derivatives are classified in other expenses as a change in the fair value of financial instruments in the statements of operations. See Note 3.

Revenue Recognition: We currently generate revenue primarily from sales of Lymphoseek^® (technetium Tc 99m tilmanocept) injection. Our standard shipping terms are free on board (FOB) shipping point, and title and risk of loss passes to the customer upon delivery to a carrier for shipment. We generally recognize sales revenue related to sales of our products when the products are shipped. Our customers have no right to return products purchased in the ordinary course of business, however, we may allow returns in certain circumstances based on specific agreements.

We earn additional revenues based on a percentage of the actual net revenues achieved by Cardinal Health on sales to end customers made during each fiscal year. The amount we charge Cardinal Health related to end customer sales of Lymphoseek are subject to a retroactive annual adjustment. To the extent that we can reasonably estimate the end-customer prices received by Cardinal Health, we record sales based upon these estimates at the time of sale. If we are unable to reasonably estimate end customer sales prices related to products sold, we record revenue related to these product sales at the minimum (i.e., floor) price provided for under our distribution agreement with Cardinal Health.

During the nine-month periods ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, over 99% of Lymphoseek sales were made to Cardinal Health. As of September 30, 2016, approximately 81% of accounts and other receivables were due from Cardinal Health.

We also earn revenues related to our licensing and distribution agreements. The terms of these agreements may include payment to us of non-refundable upfront license fees, funding or reimbursement of research and development efforts, milestone payments if specified objectives are achieved, and/or royalties on product sales. We evaluate all deliverables within an arrangement to determine whether or not they provide value on a stand-alone basis. We recognize a contingent milestone payment as revenue in its entirety upon our achievement of a substantive milestone if the consideration earned from the achievement of the milestone (i) is consistent with performance required to achieve the milestone or the increase in value to the delivered item, (ii) relates solely to past performance and (iii) is reasonable relative to all of the other deliverables and payments within the arrangement. We received a non-refundable upfront cash payment of $2.0 million from SpePharm AG upon execution of the SpePharm License Agreement in March 2015. We have determined that the license and other non-contingent deliverables do not have stand-alone value because the license could not be deemed to be fully delivered for its intended purpose unless we perform our other obligations, including specified development work. Accordingly, they do not meet the separation criteria, resulting in these deliverables being considered a single unit of account. As a result, revenue relating to the upfront cash payment was deferred and was being recognized on a straight-line basis over the estimated obligation period of two years. However, the remaining deferred revenue of $417,000 was recognized upon obtaining European approval of a reduced-mass vial in September 2016, several months earlier than originally anticipated.

We generate additional revenue from grants to support various product development initiatives. We generally recognize grant revenue when expenses reimbursable under the grants have been paid and payments under the grants become contractually due. Lastly, we recognized revenues from the provision of services to R-NAV and its subsidiaries through the termination of the R-NAV joint venture on May 31, 2016. See Note 8.

Recent Accounting Standards: In August 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2014-15, Presentation of Financial Statements-Going Concern. ASU 2014-15 defines when and how companies are required to disclose going concern uncertainties, which must be evaluated each interim and annual period. ASU 2014-15 requires management to determine whether substantial doubt exists regarding the entity's going concern presumption. Substantial doubt about an entity's ability to continue as a going concern exists when relevant conditions and events, considered in the aggregate, indicate that it is probable that the entity will be unable to meet its obligations as they become due within one year after the date that the financial statements are issued (or available to be issued). If substantial doubt exists, certain disclosures are required; the extent of those disclosures depends on an evaluation of management's plans (if any) to mitigate the going concern uncertainty. ASU 2014-15 is effective prospectively for annual periods ending after December 15, 2016, and to annual and interim periods thereafter. Early adoption is permitted. We do not expect the adoption of ASU 2014-15 to have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements, however it may affect our disclosures.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-08, Revenue from Contracts with Customers – Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net). ASU 2016-08 does not change the core principle of the guidance, rather it clarifies the implementation guidance on principal versus agent considerations. ASU 2016-08 clarifies the guidance in ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606), which is not yet effective. The effective date and transition requirements for ASU 2016-08 are the same as for ASU 2014-09, which was deferred by one year by ASU No. 2015-14, Revenue from Contracts with Customers – Deferral of the Effective Date. Public business entities should adopt the new revenue recognition standard for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within that year. Early adoption is permitted only as of annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within that year. We are currently evaluating the potential impact that the adoption of ASU 2014-09 may have on our consolidated financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09, Compensation – Stock Compensation. ASU 2016-09 simplifies several aspects of the accounting for share-based payment transactions, including the income tax consequences, classification of awards as either equity or liabilities, and classification on the statement of cash flows. Some of the simplified areas apply only to nonpublic entities. ASU 2016-09 is effective for public business entities for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016, and interim periods within those annual periods. Early adoption is permitted in any interim or annual period. If an entity early adopts ASU 2016-09 in an interim period, any adjustments should be reflected as of the beginning of the fiscal year that includes that interim period. Methods of adoption vary according to each of the amendment provisions. We are currently evaluating the potential impact that the adoption of ASU 2016-09 may have on our consolidated financial statements.

In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-10, Revenue from Contracts with Customers – Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing. ASU 2016-10 does not change the core principle of the guidance, rather it clarifies the identification of performance obligations and the licensing implementation guidance, while retaining the related principles for those areas. ASU 2016-10 clarifies the guidance in ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606), which is not yet effective. The effective date and transition requirements for ASU 2016-10 are the same as for ASU 2014-09, which was deferred by one year by ASU No. 2015-14, Revenue from Contracts with Customers – Deferral of the Effective Date. Public business entities should adopt the new revenue recognition standard for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within that year. Early adoption is permitted only as of annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within that year. We are currently evaluating the potential impact that the adoption of ASU 2014-09 may have on our consolidated financial statements.

In May 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-12, Revenue from Contracts with Customers – Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients. ASU 2016-12 does not change the core principle of the guidance, rather it affects only certain narrow aspects of Topic 606, including assessing collectability, presentation of sales taxes, noncash consideration, and completed contracts and contract modifications at transition. ASU 2016-12 affects the guidance in ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606), which is not yet effective. The effective date and transition requirements for ASU 2016-12 are the same as for ASU 2014-09, which was deferred by one year by ASU No. 2015-14, Revenue from Contracts with Customers – Deferral of the Effective Date. Public business entities should adopt the new revenue recognition standard for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within that year. Early adoption is permitted only as of annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within that year. We are currently evaluating the potential impact that the adoption of ASU 2014-09 may have on our consolidated financial statements.

In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-15, Statement of Cash Flows – Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments. ASU 2016-15 addresses certain specific cash flow issues with the objective of reducing the existing diversity in practice in how certain cash receipts and cash payments are presented and classified in the statement cash flows. ASU 2016-15 is effective for public business entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted in any interim or annual period. If an entity early adopts ASU 2016-15 in an interim period, any adjustments should be reflected as of the beginning of the fiscal year that includes that interim period. ASU 2016-15 should be applied using a retrospective transition method to each period presented, with certain exceptions. We adopted ASU 2016-15 upon issuance, which resulted in debt prepayment costs being classified as financing costs rather than operating costs on the statement of cash flows.

Reclassifications: Certain reclassifications have been made to the prior year’s financial statements to conform to the 2016 presentation. The reclassifications relate to the presentation of the consolidated statements of cash flows and do not change the consolidated balance sheets, statements of operations, or net cash used in operating activities.