Otis Worldwide Corporation: 10-K Risk Factor Changes

In connection with the Separation, our former parent UTC undertook several corporate reorganization transactions involving its subsidiaries, which, including the Separation of Otis, may be subject to various fraudulent conveyance and transfer laws. If, under these laws, a court were to determine that, at the time of the Separation, any entity involved in these reorganization transactions or the Separation: (1) was insolvent, was rendered insolvent by reason of the separation, or had remaining assets constituting unreasonably small capital, and (2) received less than fair consideration in connection with the reorganization; or intended to incur, or believed it would incur, debts beyond its ability to pay these debts as they matured, then the court could void the Separation, in whole or in part, as a fraudulent conveyance or transfer. The court could then require our shareholders to return to RTX some or all of the shares of the Common Stock issued in the distribution, or require RTX or Otis, as the case may be, to fund liabilities of the other company for the benefit of creditors. The measure of insolvency would vary depending upon the jurisdiction and the applicable law. Generally, however, an entity would be considered insolvent if the fair value of its assets was less than the amount of its liabilities (including the probable amount of contingent liabilities), or if it incurred debt beyond its ability to repay the debt as it matures. No assurance can be given as to what standard a court would apply to determine 20 20 20 20 20 20 Table of Contents Table of Contents Table of Contents insolvency or that a court would determine that Otis or any of its subsidiaries were solvent at the time of or after giving effect to the distribution.

In connection with the Separation, our former parent UTC undertook several corporate reorganization transactions involving its subsidiaries, which, including the Separation of Otis, may be subject to various fraudulent conveyance and transfer laws. If, under these laws, a court were to determine that, at the time of the Separation, any entity involved in these reorganization transactions or the Separation: (1) was insolvent, was rendered insolvent by reason of the separation, or had remaining assets constituting unreasonably small capital, and (2) received less than fair consideration in connection with the reorganization; or intended to incur, or believed it would incur, debts beyond its ability to pay these debts as they matured, then the court could void the Separation, in whole or in part, as a fraudulent conveyance or transfer. The court could then require our shareholders to return to RTX some or all of the shares of the Common Stock issued in the distribution, or require RTX or Otis, as the case may be, to fund liabilities of the other company for the benefit of creditors. The measure of insolvency would vary depending upon the jurisdiction and the applicable law. Generally, however, an entity would be considered insolvent if the fair value of its assets was less than the amount of its liabilities (including the probable amount of contingent liabilities), or if it incurred debt beyond its ability to repay the debt as it matures. No assurance can be given as to what standard a court would apply to determine insolvency or that a court would determine that Otis or any of its subsidiaries were solvent at the time of or after giving effect to the distribution. 24 24 24 24 24 24 Table of Contents Table of Contents Table of Contents

Certain of our businesses sell a significant amount of their products to distributors and agents, particularly in China, that have valuable relationships with customers. Some of these distributors and agents also sell our competitors’ products, and if they favor competing products for any reason they may fail to market our products effectively. Adverse changes in our relationships with these distributors and other partners, or adverse developments in their financial condition, performance or purchasing patterns, or compliance practices, could adversely affect our reputation, competitive position, results of operations, cash flows or financial condition. 11 11 11 11 11 11 Table of Contents Table of Contents Table of Contents

Certain of our businesses sell a significant amount of their products to distributors and agents, particularly in China, that have valuable relationships with customers. Some of these distributors and agents also sell our competitors’ products, and if they favor competing products for any reason they may fail to market our products effectively. Adverse changes in our relationships with these distributors and other partners, or adverse developments in their financial condition, performance or purchasing patterns, or compliance practices, could adversely affect our reputation, competitive position, results of operations, cash flows or financial condition.

The efficient operation of our business requires continued substantial investment in technology infrastructure systems, including partial shifting from virtual private networks to cloud-based networks, and we must attract and retain qualified people to operate these systems, expand and improve them, integrate new systems effectively and efficiently convert to new systems when required. An inability to fund, acquire and implement these systems might impact our ability to respond effectively to changing customer expectations, manage our business, scale our solutions effectively or impact our customer service levels, which could put us at a competitive disadvantage and negatively impact our financial results. Repeated or prolonged interruptions of service due to problems with our systems or third-party technologies, whether or not in our control, could have a significant negative impact on our reputation and our ability to sell products and services. Furthermore, we are highly dependent upon a variety of internal computer and telecommunication systems to operate our business. Failure to design, 16 16 16 16 16 16 Table of Contents Table of Contents Table of Contents develop and implement new technology infrastructure systems in an effective and timely manner, or to adequately invest in and maintain these systems, could result in the diversion of management’s attention and resources and could materially adversely affect our operating results, competitive position and ability to efficiently manage our business. Our existing information systems may become obsolete, requiring us to transition our systems to a new platform. Such a transition would be time-consuming, costly and damaging to our competitive position, and could require additional management resources. Failure to implement and deploy new systems or replacement systems on the schedules anticipated, could materially adversely affect our operating results. In addition, our business may be impacted by disruptions to our own or third-party information technology (“IT”) infrastructure, which could result from (among other causes) cyberattacks on or failures of such infrastructure or compromises to its physical security, as well as from damaging weather or other acts of nature. Cyber-based risks, in particular, are evolving and include attacks on our IT infrastructure, as well as attacks targeting the security, integrity and/or availability of the hardware, software and information installed, stored or transmitted in our products, including after the purchase of those products and when they are installed into third-party products, facilities or infrastructure. Such attacks could disrupt our business operations, our systems or those of third parties, and could impact the ability of our products to work as intended. We and some of our third-party suppliers have experienced cyber-based attacks, and, due to the evolving threat landscape, may continue to experience them going forward, potentially with more frequency. We continue to make investments and adopt measures designed to enhance our protection, detection, response, and recovery capabilities, and to mitigate potential risks to our technology, products, services and operations from potential cyber-attacks. However, given the unpredictability, nature and scope of cyberattacks, it is possible that potential vulnerabilities could go undetected for an extended period. As a result of a cyberattack, we could potentially be subject to production downtimes, operational delays or other detrimental impacts on our operations or ability to provide products and services to our customers; destruction or corruption of data; security breaches; manipulation or improper use of our or third-party systems, networks or products; financial losses from remedial actions, loss of business, potential liability, penalties, fines and/or damage to our reputation, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, results of operations, cash flows or financial condition.

The efficient operation of our business requires continued substantial investment in technology infrastructure systems, including partial shifting from virtual private networks to cloud-based networks, and we must attract and retain qualified people to operate these systems, expand and improve them, integrate new systems effectively and efficiently convert to new systems when required. An inability to fund, acquire and implement these systems might impact our ability to respond effectively to changing customer expectations, manage our business, scale our solutions effectively or impact our customer service levels, which could put us at a competitive disadvantage and negatively impact our financial results. Repeated or prolonged interruptions of service due to problems with our systems or third-party technologies, whether or not in our control, could have a significant negative impact on our reputation and our ability to sell products and services. Furthermore, we are highly dependent upon a variety of internal computer and telecommunication systems to operate our business. Failure to design, develop and implement new technology infrastructure systems in an effective and timely manner, or to adequately invest in and maintain these systems, could result in the diversion of management’s attention and resources and could materially adversely affect our operating results, competitive position and ability to efficiently manage our business. Our existing information systems may become obsolete, requiring us to transition our systems to a new platform. Such a transition would be time consuming, costly and damaging to our competitive position, and could require additional management resources. Failure to implement and deploy new systems or replacement systems on the schedules anticipated, could materially adversely affect our operating results. In addition, our business may be impacted by disruptions to our own or third-party information technology (“IT”) infrastructure, which could result from (among other causes) cyber-attacks on or failures of such infrastructure or compromises to its physical security, as well as from damaging weather or other acts of nature. Cyber-based risks, in particular, are evolving and include attacks on our IT infrastructure, as well as attacks targeting the security, integrity and/or availability of the hardware, software and information installed, stored or transmitted in our products, including after the purchase of those products and when they are installed into third-party products, facilities or infrastructure. Such attacks could disrupt our business operations, our systems or those of third parties, and could impact the ability of our products to work as intended. We and some of our third-party suppliers have experienced cyber-based attacks, and, due to the evolving threat landscape, may continue to experience them going forward, potentially with more frequency. We continue to make investments and adopt measures designed to enhance our protection, detection, response, and recovery capabilities, and to mitigate potential risks to our technology, products, services and operations from potential cyber-attacks. However, given the unpredictability, nature and scope of cyber-attacks, it is possible that potential vulnerabilities could go undetected for an extended period. As a result of a cyber-attack, we could potentially be subject to production downtimes, operational delays or other detrimental impacts on our operations or ability to provide products and services to our customers; destruction or corruption of data; security breaches; manipulation or improper use of our or third-party systems, networks or products; financial losses from remedial actions, loss of business, potential liability, penalties, fines and/or damage to our reputation, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, results of operations, cash flows or financial condition. Due to the evolving nature of such risks, the impact of any potential incident cannot be predicted. Any disruption to our business due to such issues, or an increase in our costs to cover these issues that is greater than what we have anticipated, could have an adverse effect on our competitive position, results of operations, cash flows or financial condition. There can be no assurance that our systems will not fail or experience disruptions, and any significant failure or disruption of these systems could prevent us from making sales, ordering supplies, delivering products, providing functional products and otherwise conducting our business. 20 20 20 20 20 20 Table of Contents Table of Contents Table of Contents

Pursuant to the Separation Agreement, the TMA and the EMA, each party agreed to indemnify the other parties for certain liabilities. Indemnities that we may be required to provide RTX and/or Carrier are not subject to any cap, may be significant and could negatively impact our business. Third parties could also seek to hold us responsible for any of the liabilities that RTX and/or Carrier has agreed to retain. The indemnities from RTX and Carrier for our benefit may not be sufficient to protect us against the full amount of such liabilities, and RTX and/or Carrier may not be able to fully satisfy their respective indemnification obligations. Any amounts we are required to pay pursuant to such indemnification obligations and other liabilities could require us to divert cash that would otherwise have been used in furtherance of our operating business. Moreover, even if we ultimately succeed in recovering from RTX or Carrier, as applicable, we may be temporarily required to bear these losses ourselves. Each of these risks could negatively affect our business, results of operations and financial condition. If the Separation, together with certain related transactions, were to fail to qualify as a transaction that is generally tax-free for U.S. federal income tax purposes, including as a result of subsequent acquisitions of our stock or the stock of RTX, we, as well as RTX, Carrier, and RTX's shareholders, could be subject to significant tax liabilities. In addition, if certain internal restructuring transactions were to fail to qualify as transactions that are generally tax-free for U.S. federal or non-U.S. income tax purposes, we, as well as RTX and Carrier could be subject to significant tax liabilities. In certain circumstances, we could be required to indemnify RTX for material taxes and other related amounts pursuant to indemnification obligations under the TMA. In connection with the Separation, our former parent UTC received a ruling from the IRS regarding certain U.S. federal income tax matters relating to the Separation and an opinion of outside counsel regarding the qualification of certain elements of the Separation under Section 355 of the Code. The IRS ruling and the opinion of counsel were based upon and rely on, among other things, various facts and assumptions, as well as certain representations, statements and undertakings of UTC (and RTX), Otis and Carrier, including those relating to the past and future conduct of UTC (and RTX), Otis and Carrier. Notwithstanding receipt of the IRS ruling and the opinion of counsel, the IRS could determine that the Separation and/or certain related transactions should be treated as taxable transactions for U.S. federal income tax purposes if it determines that any of the representations, assumptions or undertakings upon which the IRS ruling or the opinion of counsel was based were inaccurate or have not been complied with. In addition, the IRS ruling does not address all of the issues that are relevant to determining whether the Separation, together with certain related transactions, qualifies as a transaction that is generally tax-free for U.S. federal income tax purposes. The opinion of counsel represents the judgment of such counsel and is not binding on the IRS or any court, and the IRS or a court may disagree with the conclusions in the opinion of counsel. Accordingly, notwithstanding receipt by UTC of the IRS ruling and the opinion of counsel, there can be no assurance that the IRS will not assert that the Separation and/or certain related transactions did not qualify for tax-free treatment for U.S. federal income tax purposes or that a court would not sustain such a challenge. 19 19 19 19 19 19 Table of Contents Table of Contents Table of Contents If the distribution of Common Stock pursuant to the Separation were to fail to qualify as a transaction that is generally tax-free for U.S. federal income tax purposes under Sections 355 and 368(a)(1)(D) of the Code, in general, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, RTX would recognize a taxable gain as if it had sold the Common Stock in a taxable sale for its fair market value, and RTX shareholders who received Common Stock in the distribution would be subject to tax as if they had received a taxable distribution equal to the fair market value of such shares. Even if the distribution of Common Stock pursuant to the Separation were to otherwise qualify as a tax-free transaction under Sections 355 and 368(a)(1)(D) of the Code, it may result in a taxable gain to RTX (but not its shareholders) under Section 355(e) of the Code if the Separation were deemed to be part of a plan (or series of related transactions) pursuant to which one or more persons acquire, directly or indirectly, shares representing a 50% or greater interest (by vote or value) in RTX or Otis. For this purpose, any acquisitions of RTX or Otis shares within the period beginning two years before the distribution of Common Stock pursuant to the Separation and ending two years after such distribution are presumed to be part of such a plan, although RTX or Otis may be able to rebut that presumption (including by qualifying for one or more safe harbors under applicable Treasury Regulations). In addition, in connection with and prior to the Separation, UTC and its subsidiaries completed various internal reorganization transactions. With respect to certain transactions undertaken as part of the internal reorganization, UTC obtained tax rulings in certain non-U.S. jurisdictions and/or opinions of external tax advisors, in each case, regarding the tax treatment of such transactions. Such tax rulings and opinions were based upon and relied on, among other things, various facts and assumptions, as well as certain representations (including with respect to certain valuation matters relating to the internal reorganization), statements and undertakings of UTC (and RTX), Otis, Carrier or their respective subsidiaries. If any of these representations or statements were, or become, inaccurate or incomplete, or if RTX, Otis, Carrier or any of their respective subsidiaries do not fulfill or otherwise comply with any such undertakings or covenants, such tax rulings and/or opinions may be invalid or the conclusions reached therein could be jeopardized. Further, notwithstanding receipt of any such tax rulings and/or opinions, there can be no assurance that the relevant taxing authorities will not assert that the tax treatment of the relevant transactions differs from the conclusions reached in the relevant tax rulings and/or opinions. In the event the relevant taxing authorities prevail with any challenge in respect of any relevant transaction, we, as well as RTX and Carrier, could be subject to significant tax liabilities. Under the TMA, Otis generally is required to indemnify RTX and Carrier for any taxes resulting from the Separation and certain related transactions (and any related costs and other damages) to the extent such amounts resulted from (1) an acquisition of all or a portion of the equity securities or assets of Otis, whether by merger or otherwise (and regardless of whether we participated in or otherwise facilitated the acquisition), (2) other actions or failures to act by Otis or (3) certain of Otis’ representations, covenants or undertakings contained in any of the Separation-related agreements and documents or in any documents relating to the IRS ruling and/or the opinion of counsel being incorrect or violated. Further, under the TMA, we generally are required to indemnify RTX and Carrier for a specified portion of any taxes (and any related costs and other damages) (a) arising as a result of the failure of the Separation and certain related transactions to qualify as a transaction that is generally tax-free (including as a result of Section 355(e) of the Code) or a failure of any internal separation transaction that is intended to qualify as a transaction that is generally tax-free to so qualify, in each case, to the extent such amounts do not result from a disqualifying action by, or acquisition of equity securities of, Otis, Carrier or RTX or (b) arising from an adjustment, pursuant to an audit or other tax proceeding, with respect to any transaction undertaken in connection with the Separation that is not intended to qualify as a transaction that is generally tax-free. Any such indemnity obligations could be material.

Management and directors of each of RTX, Otis and Carrier may own common stock in all three companies as a result of the Separation. This ownership overlap could create, or appear to create, potential conflicts of interest when the management and directors of one company face decisions that could have different implications for themselves and the other two companies. For example, potential conflicts of interest could arise in connection with the resolution of any dispute regarding the terms of the agreements governing the separation and Otis’ relationship with RTX and Carrier thereafter. If the Separation, together with certain related transactions, were to fail to qualify as a transaction that is generally tax-free for U.S. federal income tax purposes, including as a result of subsequent acquisitions of our stock or the stock of RTX, we, as well as RTX, Carrier, and RTX's shareholders, could be subject to significant tax liabilities. In addition, if certain internal restructuring transactions were to fail to qualify as transactions that are generally tax-free for U.S. federal or non-U.S. income tax purposes, we, as well as RTX and Carrier could be subject to significant tax liabilities. In certain circumstances, we could be required to indemnify RTX for material taxes and other related amounts pursuant to indemnification obligations under the TMA. In connection with the Separation, our former parent UTC received a ruling from the IRS regarding certain U.S. federal income tax matters relating to the Separation and an opinion of outside counsel regarding the qualification of certain elements of the Separation under Section 355 of the Code. The IRS ruling and the opinion of counsel were based upon and rely on, among other things, various facts and assumptions, as well as certain representations, statements and undertakings of UTC (and RTX), Otis and Carrier, including those relating to the past and future conduct of UTC (and RTX), Otis and Carrier. Notwithstanding receipt of the IRS ruling and the opinion of counsel, the IRS could determine that the Separation and/or certain related transactions should be treated as taxable transactions for U.S. federal income tax purposes if it determines that any of the representations, assumptions or undertakings upon which the IRS ruling or the opinion of counsel was based were inaccurate or have not been complied with. In addition, the IRS ruling does not address all of the issues that are relevant to determining whether the Separation, together with certain related transactions, qualifies as a transaction that is generally tax-free for U.S. federal income tax purposes. The opinion of counsel represents the judgment of such counsel and is not binding on the IRS or any court, and the IRS or a court may disagree with the conclusions in the opinion of counsel. Accordingly, notwithstanding receipt by UTC of the IRS ruling and the opinion of counsel, there can be no assurance that the IRS will not assert that the Separation and/or certain related transactions did not qualify for tax-free treatment for U.S. federal income tax purposes or that a court would not sustain such a challenge. If the distribution of Common Stock pursuant to the Separation were to fail to qualify as a transaction that is generally tax-free for U.S. federal income tax purposes under Sections 355 and 368(a)(1)(D) of the Code, in general, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, RTX would recognize a taxable gain as if it had sold the Common Stock in a taxable sale for its fair market value, and RTX shareholders who received Common Stock in the distribution would be subject to tax as if they had received a taxable distribution equal to the fair market value of such shares. Even if the distribution of Common Stock pursuant to the Separation 23 23 23 23 23 23 Table of Contents Table of Contents Table of Contents were to otherwise qualify as a tax-free transaction under Sections 355 and 368(a)(1)(D) of the Code, it may result in a taxable gain to RTX (but not its shareholders) under Section 355(e) of the Code if the Separation were deemed to be part of a plan (or series of related transactions) pursuant to which one or more persons acquire, directly or indirectly, shares representing a 50% or greater interest (by vote or value) in RTX or Otis. For this purpose, any acquisitions of RTX or Otis shares within the period beginning two years before the distribution of Common Stock pursuant to the Separation and ending two years after such distribution are presumed to be part of such a plan, although RTX or Otis may be able to rebut that presumption (including by qualifying for one or more safe harbors under applicable Treasury Regulations). In addition, in connection with and prior to the Separation, UTC and its subsidiaries completed various internal reorganization transactions. With respect to certain transactions undertaken as part of the internal reorganization, UTC obtained tax rulings in certain non-U.S. jurisdictions and/or opinions of external tax advisors, in each case, regarding the tax treatment of such transactions. Such tax rulings and opinions were based upon and relied on, among other things, various facts and assumptions, as well as certain representations (including with respect to certain valuation matters relating to the internal reorganization), statements and undertakings of UTC (and RTX), Otis, Carrier or their respective subsidiaries. If any of these representations or statements were, or become, inaccurate or incomplete, or if RTX, Otis, Carrier or any of their respective subsidiaries do not fulfill or otherwise comply with any such undertakings or covenants, such tax rulings and/or opinions may be invalid or the conclusions reached therein could be jeopardized. Further, notwithstanding receipt of any such tax rulings and/or opinions, there can be no assurance that the relevant taxing authorities will not assert that the tax treatment of the relevant transactions differs from the conclusions reached in the relevant tax rulings and/or opinions. In the event the relevant taxing authorities prevail with any challenge in respect of any relevant transaction, we, as well as RTX and Carrier could be subject to significant tax liabilities. Under the TMA, Otis generally is required to indemnify RTX and Carrier for any taxes resulting from the Separation and certain related transactions (and any related costs and other damages) to the extent such amounts resulted from (1) an acquisition of all or a portion of the equity securities or assets of Otis, whether by merger or otherwise (and regardless of whether we participated in or otherwise facilitated the acquisition), (2) other actions or failures to act by Otis or (3) certain of Otis’ representations, covenants or undertakings contained in any of the Separation-related agreements and documents or in any documents relating to the IRS ruling and/or the opinion of counsel being incorrect or violated. Further, under the TMA, we generally are required to indemnify RTX and Carrier for a specified portion of any taxes (and any related costs and other damages) (a) arising as a result of the failure of the Separation and certain related transactions to qualify as a transaction that is generally tax-free (including as a result of Section 355(e) of the Code) or a failure of any internal separation transaction that is intended to qualify as a transaction that is generally tax-free to so qualify, in each case, to the extent such amounts do not result from a disqualifying action by, or acquisition of equity securities of, Otis, Carrier or RTX or (b) arising from an adjustment, pursuant to an audit or other tax proceeding, with respect to any transaction undertaken in connection with the Separation that is not intended to qualify as a transaction that is generally tax-free. Any such indemnity obligations could be material.

Our business, financial condition, operating results and cash flows may be adversely affected by changes in global economic conditions and geopolitical risks (see discussion of risks associated with the ongoing conflicts referred to in the immediately following Risk Factor), including global credit conditions, levels of consumer and business confidence, commodity prices, raw material and energy costs, supply chain issues, foreign currency exchange rates, interest rates, labor costs, levels of government spending and deficits, actual or anticipated default on sovereign debt, trade policies, tariffs and trade barriers, political conditions, including in connection with the results of the 2024 election in the U.S. or otherwise, regulatory changes, fluctuations in residential and commercial construction activity, natural disasters, including weather events caused by climate change, pandemic health issues, including COVID-19, and other challenges that could affect the global economy. These economic and political conditions affect businesses such as ours in a number of ways. In particular, a slowdown in building and remodeling activity or decreased public spending on infrastructure projects or decreased spending on commercial real estate or customer defaults due to higher levels of remote work in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic or otherwise, could adversely affect our financial performance. Additionally, limitations on the ability of our customers and suppliers to access credit at interest rates and on terms that are acceptable to them could lead to insolvencies of customers and suppliers, limit or prevent customers from being able to finance purchases of our products and services, and cause delays in the delivery of key products from suppliers.

Our business, financial condition, operating results and cash flows may be adversely affected by changes in global economic conditions and geopolitical risks (see discussion of risks associated with the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine below), including global credit market conditions, levels of consumer and business confidence, commodity prices, raw material and energy costs, supply chain issues, foreign currency exchange rates, interest rates, labor costs, levels of government spending and deficits, trade policies, tariffs and trade barriers, political conditions, regulatory changes, fluctuations in residential and commercial construction activity, pandemic health issues (see discussion of COVID-19 below), natural disasters, including weather events caused by climate change, actual or anticipated default on sovereign debt and other challenges that could affect the global economy. These economic and political conditions affect businesses such as ours in a number of ways. In particular, a slowdown in building and remodeling activity or decreased public spending on infrastructure projects could adversely affect our financial performance.

In order to operate more efficiently and cost effectively, we may adjust employment, optimize our footprint or undertake other restructuring or transformation activities, including in connection with UpLift. These activities are complex and may involve or require significant changes to our operations. If we do not successfully manage restructuring and other transformation activities, expected efficiencies and benefits might be delayed or not realized, and our operations and business could be disrupted. Risks associated with these actions and other workforce management issues include unfavorable political responses, unforeseen delays in the implementation of anticipated workforce reductions, additional unexpected costs, challenges in change management, adverse effects on employee morale and capacity, and the failure to meet operational targets due to the loss of employees or work stoppages, any of which may impair our ability to achieve anticipated cost reductions, otherwise harm our business or have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, results of operations, cash flows or financial condition. 12 12 12 12 12 12 Table of Contents Table of Contents Table of Contents

In order to operate more efficiently and cost effectively, we may adjust employment, optimize our footprint or undertake other restructuring activities. These activities are complex and may involve or require significant changes to our operations. If we do not successfully manage restructuring activities, expected efficiencies and benefits might be delayed or not realized, and our operations and business could be disrupted. Risks associated with these actions and other workforce management issues include unfavorable political responses, unforeseen delays in the implementation of anticipated workforce reductions, additional unexpected costs, adverse effects on employee morale, the failure to meet operational targets due to the loss of employees or work stoppages, any of which may impair our ability to achieve anticipated cost reductions, otherwise harm our business or have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, results of operations, cash flows or financial condition. 21 21 21 21 21 21 Table of Contents Table of Contents Table of Contents