Mastercard (MA) Risk Analysis

Governments in some countries have acted, or in the future may act, to provide resources, preferential treatment or other protection to selected national or domestic payment and switching providers, or have created, or may in the future create, their own national provider. These actions may displace us from, prevent us from entering into, or substantially restrict us from participating in, particular geographies, and may prevent us from competing effectively against those providers. For example: - Governments in some countries have implemented, or may implement, regulatory requirements that mandate switching of domestic payments either entirely in that country or by only domestic companies. - Some jurisdictions have implemented, or are considering implementing, requirements to collect, store and/or process data within their borders, as well as prohibitions on the transfer of data abroad, leading to technological and operational implications as well as increased compliance burdens and other costs. - Geopolitical events and any resulting OFAC sanctions, adverse trade policies, enforcement of U.S. laws related to countering the financing of terrorism, economic sanctions and anti-corruption, or other types of government actions could lead affected or other jurisdictions to take actions in response that could adversely affect our business. Moreover, because of various concerns jurisdictions may have with respect to our business, including any decisions we may make relating to entering or exiting a particular market, such jurisdictions may decide to begin to or increase their focus on growing local payment networks and other solutions. - Regional groups of countries are considering, or may consider, efforts to restrict our switching of regional transactions. - Governments have been increasingly creating and expanding local payments structures, which are increasingly being considered as alternatives to traditional domestic payment solutions and schemes such as ours. Such developments prevent us from utilizing our global switching capabilities for domestic or regional customers. In addition, to the extent a jurisdiction determines us not to be in compliance with regulatory requirements (including those related to data localization), we have been, and may again in the future be, subject to resource and time pressures in order to come back into compliance. Our inability to effect change in, or work with, these jurisdictions could adversely affect our ability to maintain or increase our revenues and extend our global brand. Additionally, some jurisdictions have implemented, or may implement, foreign ownership restrictions, which could potentially have the effect of forcing or inducing the transfer of our technology and proprietary information as a condition of access to their markets. Such restrictions could adversely impact our ability to compete in these markets.

We have historically implemented policies, referred to as no-surcharge rules, in certain jurisdictions, including the U.S. and Canada, that prohibit merchants from charging higher prices to consumers who pay using our products instead of other means. Authorities in several jurisdictions have acted to end or limit the application of these no-surcharge rules (or indicated interest in doing so). Additionally, our no-surcharge rules now permit U.S. and Canadian merchants to surcharge credit cards (subject to certain limitations). If, over time, an increased number of merchants choose to surcharge as permitted, this could result in consumers viewing our products less favorably and/or using alternative means of payment. These responses could result in a decrease in our overall transaction volumes, which in turn could materially and adversely impact our results of operations.

Central banks and similar regulatory bodies have increasingly established or further expanded their authority over certain aspects of payments systems such as ours, including obligations or restrictions with respect to the types of products and services that we may offer, the countries in which our products and services may be used, the way we structure and operate our business and the types of consumers and merchants who can obtain or accept our products or services. Similarly, jurisdictions that regulate a particular product may consider extending their jurisdiction to other products. For example, debit regulations could lead to regulation of credit products. Moreover, several jurisdictions are demonstrating increased interest about the network fees we charge to our customers (in some cases as part of broader market reviews of retail payments), which could in the future lead to regulation relating to our network fees. In several jurisdictions, we have been designated as a "systemically important payment system", with other regulators considering similar designations. This type of regulation and oversight is related to switching activities, and includes policies, procedures and requirements related to risk management, collateral, participant default, timely switching of financial transactions, and capital and financial resources. Parts of our business have also been deemed as a "specified service provider" or considered "critical infrastructure". The impact to our business created by any new law, regulation or designation is magnified by the potential it has to be replicated in, or conflict with, other jurisdictions, or involve other products within any particular jurisdiction. Our strategic expansion of our products and services has also created the need for us to obtain new types and increasing numbers of regulatory licenses, resulting in increased supervision and additional compliance burdens distinct from those imposed on our payment network activities. For example, certain of our subsidiaries maintain money transfer licenses that typically impose supervisory and examination requirements, as well as capital, safeguarding, risk management and other business obligations. Increased regulation and oversight of payments systems, as well as increased exposure to regulation resulting from changes to our products and services, have resulted and may continue to result in significant compliance and governance burdens or otherwise increase our costs. As a result, customers could be less willing to participate in our payments system and/or use our other products or services, reduce the benefits offered in connection with the use of our products (making our products less desirable to consumers), reduce the volume of domestic and cross-border transactions or other operational metrics, disintermediate us, impact our profitability and/or limit our ability to innovate or offer differentiated products and services, all of which could materially and adversely impact our financial performance. In addition, any regulation that is enacted related to the type and level of network fees we charge our customers could also materially and adversely impact our results of operations. Regulators could also require us to obtain prior approval for changes to our system rules, procedures or operations, or could require customization with regard to such changes, which could negatively impact us. Moreover, failure to comply with the laws and regulations to which we are subject could result in fines, sanctions, civil damages or other penalties, which could materially and adversely affect our overall business and results of operations, as well as have an impact on our brand and reputation.

As we increase our work with national, state and local governments (both indirectly through financial institutions, system integrators and other third party partners and with them directly as our customers), we may face various risks inherent in associating or contracting directly with governments. These risks include, but are not limited to, the following: - Governmental entities typically fund projects through appropriated monies. Changes in governmental priorities or other political developments, including disruptions in governmental operations, could impact approved funding and result in scope changes or termination of the arrangements or contracts we or financial institutions enter into with respect to our products and services. - Our work with governments is heavily regulated, subjecting us to additional potential exposure under U.S. and international anti-corruption laws (including the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and the U.K. Bribery Act), as well as compliance with various procurement and other laws, regulations, standards and contract terms. Any violation and subsequent judgment or settlement related to the above could subject us to substantial monetary penalties and damages and have a significant reputational impact. Moreover, as a government contractor, we are subject to a government's right to conduct audits and investigations into both our contract performance and our compliance with applicable laws, regulations and contract terms. Any adverse finding could subject us to civil or criminal penalties, sanctions, or suspension or disbarment. - Working or contracting with governments (either directly or via our financial institution customers, system integrators or other third party partners) can subject us to heightened reputational risks, including extensive scrutiny and publicity, as well as a potential association with the policies of those governments. Any negative publicity or negative association with a government entity, regardless of its accuracy, may adversely affect our reputation. In addition, threat intelligence gathering services provided to governments through our acquisition of Recorded Future could negatively impact how we are viewed by other jurisdictions. Any of the above issues could have a material or adverse impact to our overall business and/or results of operations.