Altria Group Inc.: 10-K Risk Factor Changes

Our operating companies operate in highly competitive environments. Significant competition exists with respect to product quality, taste, price, product innovation, marketing, packaging, distribution and promotional activities. Because many of our operating companies’ products are market leaders, we are subject to antitrust risk. In addition, as adult nicotine consumer preferences evolve, consumers are increasingly moving across nicotine product categories. Our operating companies’ failure to compete effectively in these environments could negatively impact their profitability, market share and shipment volume. The growth of innovative nicotine products, including legal and illicit e-vapor products and oral nicotine pouches, has contributed to reductions in the consumption levels and industry sales volumes of cigarettes and other tobacco products, including MST products. These reductions have negatively impacted our business. Furthermore, the proliferation of illicit flavored disposable e-vapor products has negatively impacted the growth of FDA-authorized e-vapor products, including NJOY’s products. If we are unable to compete effectively in innovative nicotine product categories, including through internal product development, on! oral nicotine pouch products, NJOY e-vapor products, our participation in Horizon and other potential future relationships and investments, such inability could have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, cash flows or financial position and our ability to achieve our Vision. The competitive environments in which our operating companies compete and our operating companies’ competitive positions can be significantly impacted by the price differentials between premium and discount brands. PM USA faces competition from lower-priced brands sold by certain domestic and foreign manufacturers that have cost advantages because they are not parties to settlements of certain healthcare cost recovery litigation in the United States and, as such, are not required to make annual settlement payments as required by the parties to the settlements. These settlement payments, which are inflation-adjusted, are significant for PM USA and have contributed to substantial cigarette price increases to help cover their cost. Manufacturers not party to the settlements are subject to state escrow legislation requiring escrow deposits. Such manufacturers may avoid these escrow obligations by concentrating on certain states where escrow deposits are not required or are required on fewer than all such manufacturers’ cigarettes sold in such states. Additional price competition has resulted from diversion into the United States market of cigarettes intended for sale outside the United States, diversion of tobacco products intended for sale in one taxing jurisdiction within the United States into another taxing jurisdiction, the sale of counterfeit cigarettes by third parties, the sale of cigarettes by third parties over the Internet and by other means designed to avoid collection of applicable taxes and imports of foreign lower-priced brands. Tobacco products imported to the United States are subject to the same federal excise tax as those manufactured domestically. Manufacturers of tobacco products imported to the United States can receive refunds of certain duties, taxes and fees paid on those products when offsetting volumes of the same or substantially similar products are subsequently exported out of the United States. The program that allows for these refunds is referred to as “duty drawback.” If PM USA is unable to realize duty drawback to the same extent as other manufacturers, we may be at a competitive disadvantage with respect to our ability to invest in the long-term growth of our core tobacco businesses and contribute to the strategic growth of our innovative nicotine product portfolio. Our failure to compete effectively, including as a result of litigation settlement obligations, the impacts of illicit trade in nicotine products, the price differentials between premium and discount brands and our inability to realize available tax advantages, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows or financial position.

Our operating companies operate in highly competitive environments. Significant competition exists with respect to product quality, taste, price, product innovation, marketing, packaging, distribution and promotional activities. Because many of our operating companies’ products are market leaders, we are subject to antitrust risk. In addition, as adult tobacco consumer preferences evolve, consumers are increasingly moving across tobacco categories. Our operating companies’ failure to compete effectively in these environments could negatively impact their profitability, market share and shipment volume. The growth of innovative tobacco products, including legal and illicit e-vapor products and oral nicotine pouches, has contributed to reductions in the consumption levels and industry sales volumes of cigarettes and other tobacco products, including MST products. These reductions have negatively impacted our business. Furthermore, the proliferation of illicit flavored disposable e-vapor products has negatively impacted the growth of pod-based e-vapor products, including NJOY. If we are unable to compete effectively in innovative tobacco product categories, including through internal product development, on! oral nicotine pouch products, NJOY e-vapor products, our participation in Horizon, other potential future partnerships with Japan Tobacco and potential future relationships and investments, such inability could have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, cash flows or financial position and our ability to achieve our Vision. The competitive environments in which our operating companies compete and our operating companies’ competitive positions can be significantly influenced by the price differentials between premium and discount brands. PM USA faces competition from lower-priced brands sold by certain United States and foreign manufacturers that have cost advantages because they are not parties to settlements of certain healthcare cost recovery litigation in the United States and, as such, are not required to make annual settlement payments as required by the parties to the settlements. These settlement payments, which are inflation-adjusted, are significant for PM USA and have contributed to substantial cigarette price increases to help cover their cost. Manufacturers not party to the settlements are subject to state escrow legislation requiring escrow deposits. Such manufacturers may avoid these escrow obligations by concentrating on certain states where escrow deposits are not required or are required on fewer than all such manufacturers’ cigarettes sold in such states. Additional competition has resulted from diversion into the United States market of cigarettes intended for sale outside the United States, diversion of tobacco products intended for sale in one taxing jurisdiction within the United States into another taxing jurisdiction, the sale of counterfeit cigarettes by third parties, the sale of cigarettes by third parties over the Internet and by other means designed to avoid collection of applicable taxes and imports of foreign lower-priced brands. Competition may also result from tax advantages available to companies with significant imports and exports of finished goods. Our failure to compete with lower-priced brands and counter the impacts of illicit trade in tobacco products could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows or financial position.