2010 10-K: Part II Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements Also in October 2009, the FASB issued ASU No. 2009-14,  Software  (Topic 985): Certain Revenue Arrangements That Include Software  Elements . This update affects vendors that sell or lease tangible  products in an arrangement that contains software that is more  than incidental to the tangible product as a whole. ASU No. 2009- 14 does not affect software revenue arrangements that do not include  tangible products and also does not affect software revenue arrange- ments that include services if the software is essential to the func- tionality of those services. We adopted ASU No. 2009-14 effective  January 1, 2011and do not anticipate any impact on our Consolidated  Financial Statements. In January 2010, the FASB issued ASU No. 2010-06,  Fair Value  Measurements and Disclosures (Topic 820) Improving Disclosures  about Fair Value Measurements . ASU No. 2010-06 requires entities  to disclose information in the Level 3 rollforward about purchases,  sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis. We adopted  the requirement to separately disclose purchases, sales, issuances,  and settlements in the Level 3 rollforward effective January 2011and  do not anticipate any impact on our Consolidated Financial Statements. In October 2009, the FASB issued ASU No. 2009-13,  Revenue  Recognition (Topic 605): Multiple-Deliverable Revenue Arrangements .  ASU 2009-13 supersedes EITF Issue 00-21,  Revenue Arrangements  with Multiple Deliverables . ASU 2009-13 establishes the accounting  and reporting guidance for arrangements when a vendor performs  multiple revenue-generating activities, addresses how to separate  deliverables, and specifies how to measure and allocate arrange- ment consideration. Vendors often provide multiple products or  services to customers. Because products and services are often  provided at different points in time or over different time periods  within the same contractual arrangement, this guidance enables  vendors to account for products or services separately rather than  as a combined unit. For Morningstar, ASU 2009-13 is effective pro- spectively for revenue arrangements entered into or materially  modified beginning on January 1, 2011. In December 2010, the FASB issued ASU No. 2010-28,  Intangibles— Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): When to Perform Step 2 of the  Goodwill Impairment Test for Reporting Units with Zero or Negative  Carrying Amounts . ASU 2010-28 modifies Step 1 of the goodwill  impairment test for reporting units with zero or negative carrying  amounts. For these reporting units, an entity is required to perform  Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test if it is more likely than not  that a goodwill impairment exists. In making this determination, an  entity should consider whether there are any adverse qualitative  factors indicating that an impairment may exist. The qualitative  factors are consistent with the existing guidance. For Morningstar,  ASU No. 2010-28 is effective on January 1, 2011. In December 2010, the FASB issued ASU No. 2010-29,  Business  Combinations (Topic 805): Disclosure of Supplementary Pro Forma  Information for Business Combinations . ASU No. 2010-29 specifies  that if a public entity presents comparative financial statements,  the entity should disclose revenue and earnings of the combined  entity as though the business combination(s) that occurred during  the current year had occurred as of the beginning of the comparable  prior annual reporting period only. ASU No. 2010-29 also expands  the supplemental pro forma disclosures under Topic 805 to include  a description of the nature and amount of material, nonrecurring  pro forma adjustments directly attributable to the business combi- nation included in the reported pro forma revenue and earnings. For  Morningstar, ASU No. 2010-29 is effective prospectively for business  combinations occurring on or after January 1, 2011. 96