ADMA Biologics (ADMA) Risk Analysis

The testing and marketing of medical products entail an inherent risk of product liability. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against product liability claims, we may incur substantial liabilities or be required to limit commercialization of our products. Product liability claims may also result in recalls and/or regulatory enforcement actions. Even successful defense, however, could impair our results of operations. Our inability to obtain and maintain sufficient product liability insurance at an acceptable cost to protect against potential product liability claims could prevent or inhibit the commercialization of pharmaceutical products we develop, either alone or with collaborators. Many of our business practices are subject to scrutiny by federal and state regulatory authorities, as well as to lawsuits brought by private citizens under federal and state laws. Failure to comply with applicable law or an adverse decision in lawsuits may result in adverse consequences to us. The laws governing our conduct in the U.S. are enforceable on the federal, state and local levels by criminal, civil and administrative sanctions. Violations of laws such as the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the Social Security Act (including the Anti-Kickback Statute), the Public Health Service Act, the civil and criminal federal False Claims Act, the civil monetary penalty statute, requirements regarding the reporting and repayment of overpayments, other fraud and abuse laws and any regulations promulgated under the authority of the preceding, may result in significant criminal and/or civil sanctions, including jail sentences, fines or exclusion from participation in or debarment from federal and state healthcare or government procurement programs, pursuant to enforcement actions by DOJ, Medicare, Medicaid, OIG and other regulatory authorities. Similarly, the violation of applicable laws, rules and regulations of states, including the State of Florida, with respect to the manufacture and marketing of our products and product candidates may result in significant criminal and/or civil sanctions, including jail sentences, fines or exclusion from participation in applicable state healthcare programs. There can be no assurance that our activities will not come under the scrutiny of federal and/or state regulators and other government authorities or that our practices will not be found to violate applicable laws, rules and regulations or prompt lawsuits by private citizen "relators" under federal or state false claims laws. For example, under the Anti-Kickback Statute and similar state laws and regulations, the offer or payment of anything of value to induce or reward patient referrals, or in return for purchasing, leasing, ordering or arranging for or recommending the purchase, lease, or ordering of any item or service reimbursable in whole or in part by a federal healthcare program is prohibited. This places constraints on the marketing and promotion of products and on common business arrangements, such as discounted terms and volume incentives for customers in a position to recommend or choose products for patients, such as physicians and hospitals, and these practices can result in substantial legal penalties, including, among others, exclusion from participation in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Arrangements with referral sources such as purchasers, group purchasing organizations, healthcare organizations, physicians and pharmacists must be structured with care to comply with applicable requirements. Legislators and regulators may seek to further restrict the scope of financial relationships that are considered appropriate. For example, HHS recently promulgated a regulation that is effective in two phases. First, the regulation excludes from the definition of "remuneration" limited categories of (a) PBM rebates or other reductions in price to a plan sponsor under Medicare Part D or a Medicaid Managed Care Organization plan reflected in point-of-sale reductions in price and (b) PBM service fees paid by a manufacturer to a PBM. Second, effective January 1, 2023, the regulation expressly provides that rebates to plan sponsors under Medicare Part D either directly to the plan sponsor under Medicare Part D, or indirectly through a pharmacy benefit manager, will not be protected under the Anti-Kickback Statute discounts safe harbor. Recent legislation and a final rule promulgated on December 29, 2023 delayed implementation of this portion of the rule until January 1, 2032. Also, certain business practices, such as payments of consulting fees to healthcare professionals, sponsorship of educational or research grants, charitable donations, interactions with healthcare professionals who prescribe products for uses not approved by the FDA and financial support for continuing medical education programs, must be conducted within narrowly prescribed and controlled limits to avoid any possibility of wrongfully influencing healthcare professionals to prescribe or purchase particular products or as a reward for past prescribing. Under the Healthcare Reform Law, payments and transfers of value by pharmaceutical manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program (with certain exceptions) to or at the request of covered recipients, such as, but limited to, U.S.-licensed physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists and certified registered nurse anesthetists and U.S. teaching hospitals, must be tracked and reported to CMS, and are publicly disclosed. Such "applicable manufacturers" are also required to report certain ownership interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. A number of states have similar laws in place. Additional and stricter prohibitions could be implemented by federal and state authorities. Where such practices have been found to be improper incentives to use such products, government investigations and sanctions against manufacturers have resulted in substantial fines, penalties and damages. Many manufacturers have been required to enter into consent decrees or orders that prescribe allowable corporate conduct and/or Corporate Integrity Agreements that impose ongoing compliance requirements on a manufacturer. Failure to satisfy requirements under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act can also result in penalties, as well as requirements to enter into consent decrees or orders that prescribe allowable corporate conduct. In addition, while regulatory authorities generally do not regulate physicians' discretion in their choice of treatments for their patients, they do restrict communications by manufacturers on unapproved uses of approved products or on the potential safety and efficacy of unapproved products in development. Companies in the U.S., Canada and the European Union cannot promote approved products for other indications that are not specifically approved by the competent regulatory authorities such as the FDA in the U.S., nor can companies promote unapproved products. In limited circumstances, companies may disseminate to physicians information regarding unapproved uses of approved products or results of studies involving investigational products. If such activities fail to comply with applicable regulations and guidelines of the various regulatory authorities, we may be subject to warnings from, or enforcement action by, these authorities. Furthermore, if such activities are prohibited, it may harm demand for our products. Promotion of unapproved drugs or devices or unapproved indications for a drug or device is a violation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and subjects us to civil and criminal sanctions. Furthermore, sanctions under the federal False Claims Act have been brought against companies accused of promoting off-label uses of drugs, because such promotion induces unapproved the use and subsequent claims for reimbursement under Medicare and other federal programs. Similar actions for off-label promotion have been initiated by several states for Medicaid fraud. The Healthcare Reform Law significantly strengthened provisions of the federal False Claims Act, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute that applies to government healthcare programs, and other healthcare fraud provisions, leading to the possibility of greatly increased lawsuits by whistleblowers for perceived violations. Violations or allegations of violations of the foregoing restrictions could materially and adversely affect our business. We are required to report detailed pricing information, net of included discounts, rebates and other concessions, to CMS for the purpose of calculating national reimbursement levels, certain federal prices and certain federal and state rebate obligations. Inaccurate or incomplete reporting of pricing information could result in criminal and/or civil liability under the federal False Claims Act, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute and various other laws, rules and regulations. We have established systems for collecting and reporting this data accurately to CMS and have instituted a compliance program to assure that the information collected is complete in all respects. If we report pricing information that is not accurate to the federal government, we could be subject to fines and other sanctions that could adversely affect our business. If we choose to pursue clinical development and commercialization in the European Union or otherwise market and sell our products outside of the U.S., we must obtain and maintain regulatory approvals and comply with regulatory requirements in such jurisdictions. The approval procedures vary among countries in complexity and timing. We may not obtain approvals from regulatory authorities outside the U.S. on a timely basis, if at all, which would preclude us from commercializing products in those markets. In addition, some countries, particularly the countries of the European Union, regulate the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals. In these countries, pricing discussions with governmental authorities can take considerable time after the receipt of marketing approval for a product. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of our product candidate to other available therapies. Such trials may be time-consuming and expensive and may not show an advantage in efficacy for our products. If reimbursement of our products is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, in either the U.S. or the European Union, we could be adversely affected. Also, under the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the U.S. has increasingly focused on regulating the conduct by U.S. businesses occurring outside of the U.S., generally prohibiting remuneration to foreign officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. To enhance compliance with applicable healthcare laws, and mitigate potential liability in the event of noncompliance, regulatory authorities such as the HHS Office of Inspector General (the "OIG") have recommended the adoption and implementation of a comprehensive healthcare compliance program that generally contains the elements of an effective compliance and ethics program described in Section 8B2.1 of the U.S. Sentencing Commission Guidelines Manual. Most U.S.-based pharmaceutical companies have such programs. We will need to adopt healthcare compliance and ethics programs that would incorporate the OIG's recommendations and voluntary industry guidelines and train our employees. Such a program may be expensive and may not provide assurance that we will avoid compliance issues. We are also required to comply with the applicable laws, rules, regulations and permit requirements of the various states and localities in which our business operates, including the State of Florida where our manufacturing facility is located. These regulations and permit requirements are not always in concert with applicable federal laws, rules and regulations regulating our business. Although compliant with applicable federal requirements, we may be required to comply with additional state and local laws, rules, regulations and permits. Failure to appropriately comply with such state and local requirements could result in temporary or long-term cessation of our manufacturing operations, as well as fines and other sanctions. Any such penalties may have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Public ESG and sustainability reporting is becoming more broadly expected by investors, stockholders and other third parties. Certain organizations that provide corporate governance and other corporate risk information to investors and stockholders have developed, and others may in the future develop, scores and ratings to evaluate companies and investment funds based upon ESG or "sustainability" metrics. Many investment funds focus on positive ESG business practices and sustainability scores when making investments and may consider a company's ESG or sustainability scores as a reputational or other factor in making an investment decision. In addition, investors, particularly institutional investors, use these scores to benchmark companies against their peers and if a company is perceived as lagging, these investors may engage with such company to improve ESG disclosure or performance and may also make voting decisions, or take other actions, to hold these companies and their boards of directors accountable. Board diversity is an ESG topic that is, in particular, receiving heightened attention by investors, stockholders, lawmakers and listing exchanges. Certain states have passed laws requiring companies to meet certain gender and ethnic diversity requirements on their boards of directors. We may face reputational damage in the event our corporate responsibility initiatives or objectives, including with respect to board diversity, do not meet the standards set by our investors, stockholders, lawmakers, listing exchanges or other constituencies, or if we are unable to achieve an acceptable ESG or sustainability rating from third-party ratingservices. A low ESG or sustainability rating by a third-party rating service could also result in the exclusion of our common stock from consideration by certain investors who may elect to invest with our competition instead. Ongoing focus on corporate responsibility matters by investors and other parties as described above may impose additional costs or expose us to new risks.

In the ordinary course of our business, we generate, collect and store proprietary information, including intellectual property and business information. The secure storage, maintenance, and transmission of and access to this information is important to our operations and reputation. Computer hackers may attempt to penetrate our computer systems and, if successful, misappropriate our proprietary and confidential information including e-mails and other electronic communications. Further, while many of our employees and certain suppliers with whom we do business operate in a remote working environment, the risk of cybersecurity attacks and data breaches, particularly through phishing attempts, may be increased as we and third parties with whom we interact leverage our IT infrastructure in unanticipated ways. In addition, an employee, contractor, or other third party with whom we do business may attempt to obtain such information and may purposefully or inadvertently cause a breach involving such information. While we have certain safeguards in place to reduce the risk of and detect cyberattacks, including a Company-wide cybersecurity policy, our information technology networks and infrastructure may be vulnerable to unpermitted access by hackers or other breaches, such as the IT disruption described elsewhere in this report, or employee error or malfeasance. Any such compromise of our data security and access to, or public disclosure or loss of, confidential business or proprietary information could disrupt our operations, damage our reputation, provide our competitors with valuable information and subject us to additional costs which could adversely affect our business.

Geopolitical conflicts, war or other military action or international acts of terrorism may cause significant disruption to commerce throughout the world. To the extent that such disruptions result in disruptions to our supply chain, delays or cancellations of customer orders, a general decrease in consumer spending, our inability to effectively market and distribute our products and/or our inability to access the capital markets, our business and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. For example, in response to the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine, the United States has imposed and may further impose, and other countries may additionally impose, broad sanctions or other restrictive actions against governmental and other entities in Russia. Additionally, further escalation of geopolitical tensions, such as ongoing conflicts in the Middle East and the surrounding areas could have a broader impact that extends into other markets where we do business. We are unable to predict geopolitical conditions, whether acts of international terrorism or the involvement in a war or other military actions will result in any long-term commercial disruptions or if such involvement or responses will have any long-term material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, or financial condition.