Note 1 – Nature of Business and Significant Accounting Policies

Basis of Presentation

These financial statements and related notes are presented in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States and are expressed in US dollars. The Company has adopted a fiscal year end of May 31st.

Principals of Consolidation

The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of CLS Holdings USA, Inc., and its direct and indirect wholly owned operating subsidiaries, CLS Nevada, Inc., (“CLS Nevada”), CLS Labs, Inc. (“CLS Labs”), CLS Labs Colorado, Inc. (“CLS Colorado”), CLS Massachusetts, Inc. (“CLS Massachusetts”), and Alternative Solutions, LLC (“Alternative Solutions”), and its 50% interest in Kealii Okamalu LLC (“Kealii Okamalu”). Alternative Solutions is the sole owner of the following three entities (collectively, the “Oasis LLCs”): Serenity Wellness Center, LLC (“Serenity Wellness Center”); Serenity Wellness Products, LLC (“Serenity Wellness Products”); and Serenity Wellness Growers, LLC (“Serenity Wellness Growers”). The Company consolidates Kealii Okamalu because the Company is its sole manager. All material intercompany transactions have been eliminated upon consolidation of these entities.

Nature of Business

CLS Holdings USA, Inc. (the “Company”) was originally incorporated as Adelt Design, Inc. (“Adelt”) on March 31, 2011 to manufacture and market carpet binding art. Production and marketing of carpet binding art never commenced.

On November 12, 2014, CLS Labs acquired 10,000,000 shares, or 55.6%, of the outstanding shares of common stock of Adelt from its founder, Larry Adelt. On that date, Jeffrey Binder, the Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of CLS Labs, was appointed Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company. On November 20, 2014, Adelt adopted amended and restated articles of incorporation, thereby changing its name to CLS Holdings USA, Inc. Effective December 10, 2014, the Company effected a reverse stock split of its issued and outstanding common stock at a ratio of 1-for-0.625 (the “Reverse Split”), wherein 0.625 shares of the Company’s common stock were issued in exchange for each share of common stock issued and outstanding. As a result, 6,250,000 shares of the Company’s common stock were issued to CLS Labs in exchange for the 10,000,000 shares that it owned by virtue of the above-referenced purchase from Larry Adelt.

On April 29, 2015, the Company, CLS Labs and CLS Merger Inc., a Nevada corporation and wholly owned subsidiary of CLS Holdings (“Merger Sub”), entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger Agreement”) and completed a merger, whereby CLS Merger Inc. merged with and into CLS Labs, with CLS Labs remaining as the surviving entity (the “Merger”). Upon the consummation of the Merger, the shares of the common stock of CLS Holdings owned by CLS Labs were extinguished and the former stockholders of CLS Labs were issued an aggregate of 15,000,000 (post Reverse Split) shares of common stock in CLS Holdings in exchange for their shares of common stock in CLS Labs. As a result of the Merger, the Company acquired the business of CLS Labs and abandoned its previous business.

The Company has been issued a U.S. patent with respect to its proprietary method of extracting cannabinoids from cannabis plants and converting the resulting cannabinoid extracts into concentrates such as oils, waxes, edibles and shatter. These concentrates may be ingested in a number of ways, including through vaporization via electronic cigarettes (“e-cigarettes”), and used for a variety of pharmaceutical and other purposes. Internal testing of this extraction method and conversion process has revealed that it produces a cleaner, higher quality product and a significantly higher yield than the cannabinoid extraction processes currently existing in the marketplace. The Company has not commercialized its patented proprietary process or otherwise earned any revenues from it. The Company plans to generate revenues through licensing, fee-for-service and joint venture arrangements related to its patented proprietary method of extracting cannabinoids from cannabis plants and converting the resulting cannabinoid extracts into saleable concentrates.

On December 4, 2017, the Company and Alternative Solutions, entered into a Membership Interest Purchase Agreement (the “Acquisition Agreement”), as amended, for the Company to acquire the Oasis LLCs from Alternative Solutions. Pursuant to the Acquisition Agreement, the Company initially contemplated acquiring all of the membership interests in the Oasis LLCs from Alternative Solutions. Just prior to closing, the parties agreed that the Company would instead acquire all of the membership interests in Alternative Solutions, the parent of the Oasis LLCs, from its members, and the membership interests in the Oasis LLCs owned by members other than Alternative Solutions.

Pursuant to the Acquisition Agreement, the Company paid a non-refundable deposit of $250,000 upon signing, which was followed by an additional payment of $1,800,000 paid in February 2018, for an initial 10% of each of the Oasis LLCs. At that time, the Company applied for regulatory approval to own an interest in the Oasis LLCs, which approval was received. On June 27, 2018, the Company made the payments to indirectly acquire the remaining 90% of the Oasis LLCs, which were equal to cash in the amount of $5,995,543, a $4.0 million promissory note due in December 2019 (the “Oasis Note”), and 22,058,823 shares of its common stock (the “Purchase Price Shares”) (collectively, the “Closing Consideration”). The cash payment of $5,995,543 was less than the $6,200,000 payment originally contemplated because the Company assumed an additional $204,457 of liabilities. The Company used the proceeds of a Canadian private securities offering to fund the cash portion of the Closing Consideration. The Company then applied for regulatory approval to own the additional 90% in membership interests in the Oasis LLCs, which it received on December 12, 2018. The Company has applied for regulatory approval to own its interest in the Oasis LLCs through Alternative Solutions under the revised structure of the transaction, which is currently under review.

On October 31, 2018, the Company, CLS Massachusetts, Inc., a Massachusetts corporation and a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company (“CLS Massachusetts”), and In Good Health, Inc., a Massachusetts corporation (“IGH”), entered into an Option Agreement (the “IGH Option Agreement”). Under the terms of the IGH Option Agreement, CLS Massachusetts had an exclusive option to acquire all of the outstanding capital stock of IGH (the “IGH Option”) during the period beginning on the earlier of the date that is one year after the effective date of the conversion and December 1, 2019 and ending on the date that was 60 days after such date. If CLS Massachusetts exercised the IGH Option, the Company, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company and IGH would enter into a merger agreement (the form of which had been agreed to by the parties) (the “IGH Merger Agreement”). At the effective time of the merger contemplated by the IGH Merger Agreement, CLS Massachusetts would pay a purchase price of $47,500,000, subject to reduction as provided in the IGH Merger Agreement, payable as follows: $35 million in cash, $7.5 million in the form of a five-year promissory note, and $5 million in the form of restricted common stock of the Company, plus $2.5 million as consideration for a non-competition agreement with IGH’s President, payable in the form of a five-year promissory note. IGH and certain IGH stockholders holding sufficient aggregate voting power to approve the transactions contemplated by the IGH Merger Agreement entered into agreements pursuant to which such stockholders, among other things, agreed to vote in favor of such transactions. On October 31, 2018, as consideration for the IGH Option, the Company made a loan to IGH, in the principal amount of $5,000,000, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in that certain loan agreement, dated as of October 31, 2018 between IGH as the borrower and the Company as the lender. The loan was evidenced by a secured promissory note of IGH, which bore interest at the rate of 6% per annum and was to mature on October 31, 2021. To secure the obligations of IGH to the Company under the loan agreement and the promissory note, the Company and IGH entered into a security agreement dated as of October 31, 2018, pursuant to which IGH granted to the Company a first priority lien on and security interest in all personal property of IGH. If the Company did not exercise the Option on or prior to the date that was 30 days following the end of the option period, the loan amount would be reduced to $2,500,000 as a break-up fee, subject to certain exceptions set forth in the IGH Option Agreement. On August 26, 2019, the parties amended the IGH Option Agreement to, among other things, delay closing until January 2020. By letter agreement dated January 31, 2020, the Company, CLS Massachusetts and IGH extended the IGH Option Agreement to February 4, 2020. On February 4, 2020, CLS Massachusetts exercised the IGH Option and IGH subsequently asserted that CLS Massachusetts’ exercise was invalid. By letter dated February 26, 2020, the Company informed IGH that as a result of its breaches of the IGH Option, which remained uncured, an event of default had occurred under the IGH Note. The Company advised IGH that it was electing to cause the IGH Note to bear interest at the default rate of 15% per annum effective February 26, 2020 and to accelerate all amounts due under the IGH Note. On February 27, 2020, IGH informed CLS Massachusetts that it did not plan to make further payments under the IGH Note on the theory that the break-up excused additional payments. This dispute, including whether IGH breached the IGH Option and whether CLS was entitled to collect default interest, was in litigation. During the twelve months ended May 31, 2021, the Company impaired the remaining amounts due under the IGH Note in the amount of $2,498,706, which included $2,497,884 in principal and $822 in accrued interest.

On June 14, 2021, the parties to the IGH lawsuit entered into a confidential settlement agreement to resolve the action and a secured promissory note dated and executed by IGH in favor of the Company effective on June 11, 2021 (the “IGH Settlement Note”). Pursuant to the IGH Settlement Note, IGH shall pay the Company $3,000,000, $500,000 of which was paid on or before June 21, 2021. A second payment of $500,000 was paid on or before July 12, 2021. The remaining $2,000,000 and accrued interest is being paid in 12 equal monthly installments beginning on August 12, 2021, pursuant to the terms of the promissory note. During the nine months ended February 28, 2022, the Company received $2,218,572 under the IGH Settlement Note, which includes $2,166,667 in principal and $51,905 in accrued interest. As of February 28, 2022, the amount due under the IGH Settlement Note was $833,333. The Company records amounts paid under the IGH Settlement Note as gains when payments are received.

On August 24, 2021, the Company formed Kealii Okamalu, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company. The Company and an additional investor each acquired a 50% ownership interest in Kealii Okamalu, and agreed to contribute up to $3,000,000 each for their respective membership interests. At February 28, 2022, the Company and the outside investor had contributed $100,000 and $0 of this amount, respectively. Kealii Okamalu was formed in order to pursue certain joint venture opportunities in the state of Nevada.

On January 4, 2018, the former Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, rescinded the memorandum issued by former Deputy Attorney General James Cole on August 29, 2013 (as amended on February 14, 2014, the “Cole Memo”), the Cole Banking Memorandum, and all other related Obama-era DOJ cannabis enforcement guidance. While the rescission did not change federal law, as the Cole Memo and other DOJ guidance documents were not themselves laws, the rescission removed the DOJ’s formal policy that state-regulated cannabis businesses in compliance with the Cole Memo guidelines should not be a prosecutorial priority. Notably, former Attorney General Sessions’ rescission of the Cole Memo has not affected the status of the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) memorandum issued by the Department of Treasury, which remains in effect. This memorandum outlines Bank Secrecy Act-compliant pathways for financial institutions to service state-sanctioned cannabis businesses, which echoed the enforcement priorities outlined in the Cole Memo. In addition to his rescission of the Cole Memo, Attorney General Sessions issued a one-page memorandum known as the “Sessions Memorandum”. The Sessions Memorandum explains the DOJ’s rationale for rescinding all past DOJ cannabis enforcement guidance, claiming that Obama-era enforcement policies are “unnecessary” due to existing general enforcement guidance adopted in the 1980s, in chapter 9.27.230 of the U.A. Attorneys’ Manual (“USAM”). The USAM enforcement priorities, like those of the Cole Memo, are based on the use of the federal government’s limited resources and include “law enforcement priorities set by the Attorney General,” the “seriousness” of the alleged crimes, the “deterrent effect of criminal prosecution,” and “the cumulative impact of particular crimes on the community.” Although the Sessions Memorandum emphasizes that cannabis is a federally illegal Schedule I controlled substance, it does not otherwise instruct U.S. Attorneys to consider the prosecution of cannabis-related offenses a DOJ priority, and in practice, most U.S. Attorneys have not changed their prosecutorial approach to date. However, due to the lack of specific direction in the Sessions Memorandum as to the priority federal prosecutors should ascribe to such cannabis activities, there can be no assurance that the federal government will not seek to prosecute cases involving cannabis businesses that are otherwise compliant with state law.

William Barr served as United States Attorney General from February 14, 2019 to December 23, 2020. The DOJ under Mr. Barr did not take a formal position on federal enforcement of laws relating to cannabis. On March 11, 2021, United States President Biden’s nominee, Merrick Garland was sworn in as the U.S. Attorney General. During his campaign, President Biden stated a policy goal to decriminalize possession of cannabis at the federal level, but he has not publicly supported the full legalization of cannabis. It is unclear what impact, if any, the new administration will have on U.S. federal government enforcement policy on cannabis. Nonetheless, there is no guarantee that the position of the Department of Justice will not change.

Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles 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 amount of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Reclassification

Certain amounts in the prior period have been reclassified to conform to the current period presentation.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

The Company considers all highly liquid investments with maturities of three months or less to be cash equivalents. The Company had cash and cash equivalents of $3,454,584 and $1,665,263 as of February 28, 2022 and May 31, 2021, respectively.

Allowance for Doubtful Accounts

The Company generates the majority of its revenues and corresponding accounts receivable from the sale of cannabis, and cannabis related products. The Company evaluates the collectability of its accounts receivable considering a combination of factors. In circumstances where it is aware of a specific customer’s inability to meet its financial obligations to it, the Company records a specific reserve for bad debts against amounts due in order to reduce the net recognized receivable to the amount it reasonably believe will be collected. For all other customers, the Company recognizes reserves for bad debts based on past write-off experience and the length of time the receivables are past due. The Company had $2,329 and $0 of bad debt expense during the three months ended February 28, 2022 and 2021, respectively. The Company had $2,329 and $5,927 of bad debt expense during the nine months ended February 28, 2022 and 2021, respectively.

Inventory

Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market. Cost is determined using a perpetual inventory system whereby costs are determined by acquisition costs of individual items included in inventory. Market is determined based on net realizable value. Appropriate consideration is given to obsolescence, excessive levels, deterioration, and other factors in evaluating net realizable values. Our cannabis products consist of prepackaged purchased goods ready for resale, along with produced edibles and extracts developed under our production license.

Property, Plant and Equipment

Property and equipment is recorded at the lower of cost or estimated net recoverable amount, and is depreciated using the straight-line method over its estimated useful life. Property acquired in a business combination is recorded at estimated initial fair value. Property, plant, and equipment are depreciated using the straight-line method based on the lesser of the estimated useful lives of the assets or the lease term based upon the following life expectancy:

Repairs and maintenance expenditures are charged to operations as incurred. Major improvements and replacements, which extend the useful life of an asset, are capitalized and depreciated over the remaining estimated useful life of the asset. When assets are retired or sold, the cost and related accumulated depreciation are eliminated and any resulting gain or loss is reflected in operations.

Long-Lived Assets

The Company reviews its property and equipment and any identifiable intangibles including goodwill for impairment on an annual basis utilizing the guidance set forth in the Statement of Financial Accounting Standards Board ASC 350 “Intangibles – Goodwill and Other” and ASC 360 “Property, Plant, and Equipment.” At February 28, 2022, the net carrying value of goodwill on the Company’s balance sheet remained at $557,896.

Comprehensive Income

ASC 220-10-15 “Reporting Comprehensive Income,” establishes standards for reporting and displaying of comprehensive income, its components and accumulated balances. Comprehensive income is defined to include all changes in equity except those resulting from investments by owners and distributions to owners. Among other disclosures, ASC 220-10-15 requires that all items that are required to be recognized under current accounting standards as components of comprehensive income be reported in a financial statement that is displayed with the same prominence as other financial statements. The Company does not have any items of comprehensive income in any of the periods presented.

Non-Controlling Interests

The Company reports “non-controlling interest in subsidiary” as a component of equity, separate from parent’s equity, on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. In addition, the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Operations includes “net income (loss) attributable to non-controlling interest.”

Variable Interest Entities

The Company’s consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company, its wholly owned subsidiaries and variable interest entities (“VIE”), where the Company is the primary beneficiary under the provisions of ASC 810, Consolidation (“ASC 810”). A VIE must be consolidated by its primary beneficiary when, along with its affiliates and agents, the primary beneficiary has both: (i) the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance; and (ii) the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive the benefits of the VIE that could potentially be significant to the VIE. The Company reconsiders whether an entity is still a VIE only upon certain triggering events and continually assesses its consolidated VIEs to determine if it continues to be the primary beneficiary. See “Note 3 – Joint Ventures” for additional information on the Company’s VIEs.

Concentrations of Credit Risk

The Company maintains its cash in bank deposit accounts and other accounts, the balances of which at times may be uninsured or exceed federally insured limits. From time to time, some of the Company’s funds are also held by escrow agents; these funds may not be federally insured. The Company continually monitors its banking relationships and consequently has not experienced any losses in such accounts.

Advertising and Marketing Costs

All costs associated with advertising and promoting products are expensed as incurred. Total recognized advertising and marketing expenses were $299,154 and $383,128 for the three months ended February 28, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Total recognized advertising and marketing expenses were $1,087,692 and $826,867 for the nine months ended February 28, 2022 and 2021, respectively.

Research and Development

Research and development expenses are charged to operations as incurred. Total recognized research and development expenses were $1,800 and $8,334 for the three months ended February 28, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Total recognized research and development expenses were $12,308 and $20,726 for the nine months ended February 28, 2022 and 2021, respectively.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

Pursuant to Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) No. 825 - Financial Instruments, the Company is required to estimate the fair value of all financial instruments included on its balance sheets. The carrying amounts of the Company’s cash and cash equivalents, notes receivable, convertible notes payable, accounts payable and accrued expenses, none of which is held for trading, approximate their estimated fair values due to the short-term maturities of those financial instruments.

A three-tier fair value hierarchy is used to prioritize the inputs in measuring fair value as follows:

Level 1 - Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.

Level 2 - Quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets, quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active, or other inputs that are observable, either directly or indirectly.

Level 3 - Significant unobservable inputs that cannot be corroborated by market data.

Revenue Recognition

Revenue from the sale of cannabis products is recognized by Oasis at the point of sale, at which time payment is received. Management estimates an allowance for sales returns.

The Company also recognizes revenue from Serenity Wellness Products LLC and Serenity Wellness Growers LLC, d/b/a City Trees (“City Trees”). City Trees recognizes revenue from the sale of the following cannabis products and services to licensed dispensaries, cultivators and distributors within the State of Nevada:

Effective June 1, 2018, the Company adopted ASC 606 — Revenue from Contracts with Customers. Under ASC 606, the Company recognizes revenue from commercial sales of products and licensing agreements by applying the following steps: (1) identifying the contract with a customer; (2) identifying the performance obligations in the contract; (3) determining the transaction price; (4) allocating the transaction price to each performance obligation in the contract; and (5) recognizing revenue when each performance obligation is satisfied. For the comparative periods, revenue has not been adjusted and continues to be reported under ASC 605 — Revenue Recognition. Under ASC 605, revenue is recognized when the following criteria are met: (1) persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists; (2) the performance of the service has been rendered to a customer or delivery has occurred; (3) the amount of fee to be paid by a customer is fixed and determinable; and (4) the collectability of the fee is reasonably assured. There was no impact on the Company’s financial statements as a result of adopting Topic 606 for the three and nine months ended February 28, 2022 and 20201

Disaggregation of Revenue

The following table represents a disaggregation of revenue for the three and nine months ended February 28, 2022 and 2021:

Basic and Diluted Earnings or Loss Per Share

Basic net earnings per share is based on the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the period, while fully diluted net earnings per share is based on the weighted average number of shares of common stock and potentially dilutive securities assumed to be outstanding during the period using the treasury stock method. Potentially dilutive securities consist of options and warrants to purchase common stock, and convertible debt. Basic and diluted net loss per share are computed based on the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period. At February 28, 2022 and 2021, the Company had the following potentially dilutive instruments outstanding: At February 28, 2022, a total of 76,251,384 shares (7,346,297 issuable upon the exercise of warrants, 3,041,290 issuable upon the exercise of unit warrants, 65,693,797 issuable upon the conversion of convertible notes payable and accrued interest, and 170,000 in stock to be issued). At February 28 2021, a total of 87,861,815 shares (54,410,145 issuable upon the exercise of warrants; 7,676,974 issuable upon the exercise of unit warrants; 25,454,696 issuable upon the conversion of convertible notes payable and accrued interest; and 320,000 in stock to be issued).

The Company uses the treasury stock method to calculate the impact of outstanding stock options and warrants. Stock options and warrants for which the exercise price exceeds the average market price over the period have an anti-dilutive effect on earnings per common share and, accordingly, are excluded from the calculations.

A net loss causes all outstanding stock options and warrants to be anti-dilutive. As a result, the basic and dilutive losses per common share are the same for the three and nine months ended February 28, 2022 and for the three months ended February 28, 2021. For the nine months ended February 28, 2022, the Company excluded from the calculation of fully diluted earnings per share the following instruments which were anti-dilutive: shares issuable pursuant to the conversion of notes payable and accrued interest, and shares issuable pursuant to the exercise of stock options and warrants. The Company included 170,000 shares of common stock issuable in fully diluted earnings per share for the nine months ended February 28, 2022.

Income Taxes

The Company accounts for income taxes under the asset and liability method in accordance with ASC 740. The Company recognizes deferred tax liabilities and assets for the expected future tax consequences of events that have been included in the financial statements or tax returns. Under this method, deferred tax liabilities and assets are determined based on the difference between the financial statement and tax bases of assets and liabilities using enacted tax rates in effect for the year in which the differences are expected to reverse. The components of the deferred tax assets and liabilities are classified as current and non-current based on their characteristics. A valuation allowance is provided for certain deferred tax assets if it is more likely than not that the Company will not realize tax assets through future operations.

Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, prohibits businesses from deducting certain expenses associated with trafficking controlled substances (within the meaning of Schedule I and II of the Controlled Substances Act). The IRS has invoked Section 280E in tax audits against various cannabis businesses in the U.S. that are permitted under applicable state laws. Although the IRS has issued a clarification allowing the deduction of certain expenses, the bulk of operating costs and general administrative costs are generally not permitted to be deducted. The operations of certain of the Company’s subsidiaries are subject to Section 280E. This results in permanent differences between ordinary and necessary business expenses deemed non-deductible under IRC Section 280E. Therefore, the effective tax rate can be highly variable and may not necessarily correlate with pre-tax income or loss.

Commitments and Contingencies

Certain conditions may exist as of the date the financial statements are issued, which may result in a loss to the Company but which will only be resolved when one or more future events occur or fail to occur. The Company’s management and its legal counsel assess such contingent liabilities, and such assessment inherently involves an exercise of judgment. In assessing loss contingencies related to legal proceedings that are pending against the Company or unasserted claims that may result in such proceedings, the Company’s legal counsel evaluates the perceived merits of any legal proceedings or unasserted claims brought to such legal counsel’s attention as well as the perceived merits of the amount of relief sought or expected to be sought therein.

If the assessment of a contingency indicates that it is probable that a material loss has been incurred and the amount of the liability can be estimated, then the estimated liability would be accrued in the Company’s financial statements. If the assessment indicates that a potentially material loss contingency is not probable, but is reasonably possible, or is probable but cannot be estimated, then the nature of the contingent liability, together with an estimate of the range of possible loss if determinable and material, would be disclosed.

Loss contingencies considered remote are generally not disclosed unless they involve guarantees, in which case the nature of the guarantee would be disclosed.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-04, Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment, which simplifies the subsequent measurement of goodwill by eliminating Step 2 from the goodwill impairment test. In computing the implied fair value of goodwill under Step 2, current U.S. GAAP requires the performance of procedures to determine the fair value at the impairment testing date of assets and liabilities (including unrecognized assets and liabilities) following the procedure that would be required in determining the fair value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed in a business combination. Instead, the amendments under this ASU require the goodwill impairment test to be performed by comparing the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying amount. An impairment charge should be recognized for the amount by which the carrying amount exceeds the reporting unit’s fair value; however, the loss recognized should not exceed the total amount of goodwill allocated to that reporting unit. The ASU became effective for the Company on January 1, 2020. During the year ended May 31, 2020, the Company recorded an impairment of goodwill in the amount of $25,185,003 pursuant to ASU No. 2017-04. At February 28, 2022, the net amount of goodwill on the Company’s balance sheet remained at $557,896.

There are various other updates recently issued, most of which represented technical corrections to the accounting literature or application to specific industries and are not expected to a have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.