HUMANA INC

Previous wording

We are in a highly competitive industry. Some of our competitors are more established in the health care industry in terms of a larger market share and have greater financial resources than we do in some markets. In addition, other companies may enter our markets in the future, including emerging competitors in the Medicare program or competitors in the delivery of health care services. We believe that barriers to entry in our markets are not substantial, so the addition of new competitors can occur relatively easily, and customers enjoy significant flexibility in moving between competitors through the Medicare Annual Enrollment Period. While health plans compete on the basis of many factors, including service and the quality and depth of provider networks, we expect that price will continue to be a significant basis of competition. In addition to the challenge of controlling health care costs, we face intense competitive pressure to contain premium prices. Factors such as business consolidations, strategic alliances, legislative and regulatory reform, and marketing practices create pressure to contain premium price increases, despite being faced with increasing medical and administrative costs.

Current wording

We are in a highly competitive industry. Some of our competitors are more established in the health care industry in terms of a larger market share and have greater financial resources than we do in some markets. In addition, other companies may enter our markets in the future, including emerging competitors in the Medicare or Medicaid programs or in the delivery of health care services. We believe that barriers to entry in our markets are not substantial, so the addition of new competitors can occur relatively easily, and customers enjoy significant flexibility in moving between competitors through the Medicare Annual Enrollment Period. While health plans compete on the basis of many factors, including service and the quality and depth of provider networks, we expect that price will continue to be a significant basis of competition. In addition to the challenge of controlling health care costs, we face intense competitive pressure to contain premium prices. Factors such as business consolidations, strategic alliances, legislative and regulatory reform, and marketing practices create pressure to contain premium price increases, despite being faced with increasing medical and administrative costs.

Previous wording

Our future performance depends in large part upon our ability to execute our strategy, including opportunities created by the expansion of our Medicare programs, our strategy with respect to state-based contracts, including those covering members dually eligible for the Medicare and Medicaid programs, the growth of our pharmacy, primary care, and home solutions businesses, and the successful implementation of our integrated care delivery model.

Current wording

Our future performance depends in large part upon our ability to execute our strategy, including opportunities created by the expansion of our Medicare programs, our strategy with respect to state-based contracts, including those covering members dually eligible for the Medicare and Medicaid programs, the growth of our pharmacy solutions, primary care, and home solutions businesses, and the successful implementation of our integrated care delivery model.

Previous wording

The number of our Medicare Advantage plans rated 4-star or higher will significantly decline in 2025. We have filed a lawsuit seeking to set aside and vacate the 2025 Star Ratings of our Medicare Advantage plans, but there is no assurance that we will prevail in this lawsuit. If we are not successful, the decline in our Star Ratings will negatively impact our 2026 quality bonus payments from CMS and may also significantly adversely affect our revenues, operating results, and cash flows. In addition, there can be no assurances that we will be successful in maintaining or improving our Star Ratings in future years.

Current wording

The number of our Medicare Advantage plans rated 4-star or higher significantly declined in 2025. We have filed a lawsuit seeking to set aside and vacate the 2025 Star Ratings of our Medicare Advantage plans, but there is no assurance that we will prevail in this lawsuit. If we are not successful, the decline in our Star Ratings will negatively impact our 2026 quality bonus payments from CMS and may also significantly adversely affect our revenues, operating results, and cash flows. In addition, there can be no assurances that we will be successful in maintaining or improving our Star Ratings in future years.

Previous wording

Based on 2025 Medicare Advantage Star Ratings released by CMS in October 2024, approximately 25% of our Medicare Advantage members are currently enrolled in plans rated 4-star or higher for 2025, as compared to 94% based on our 2024 Star Ratings. We have filed a lawsuit that, among other things, seeks to set aside and vacate the 2025 Star Ratings for our Medicare Advantage plans, but there is no assurance that we will prevail in the lawsuit. If we are not successful, the decline in our Star Ratings performance for 2025 will negatively impact our 2026 quality bonus payments from CMS and may also significantly adversely affect our revenues, operating results, and cash flows. Please see “Legal Proceedings and Certain Regulatory Matters” in Note 17 to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8, "Financial Statements and Supplementary Data" of this Form 10-K for a description of the lawsuit.

Current wording

Based on 2025 Medicare Advantage Star Ratings released by CMS in October 2024, we have experienced a significant decline in the number of our Medicare Advantage members enrolled in plans rated 4-star or higher for 2025. We have filed a lawsuit that, among other things, seeks to set aside and vacate the 2025 Star Ratings for our Medicare Advantage plans, but there is no assurance that we will prevail in the lawsuit. If we are not successful, the decline in our Star Ratings performance for 2025 will negatively impact our 2026 quality bonus payments from CMS and may also significantly adversely affect our revenues, operating results, and cash flows. Please see “Legal Proceedings and Certain Regulatory Matters” in Note 17 to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8, "Financial Statements and Supplementary Data" of this Form 10-K for a description of the lawsuit.

Previous wording

If we fail to properly maintain the integrity of our data, to strategically maintain existing or implement new information systems, or to protect our proprietary rights to our systems, our business may be materially adversely affected.

Current wording

If we fail to properly maintain the integrity of our data, to strategically maintain existing or implement new information systems (including systems powered by or incorporating AI/ML), or to protect our proprietary rights to our systems, our business may be materially adversely affected.

Previous wording

Our business depends significantly on effective information systems and the integrity and timeliness of the data we use to run our business. Our business strategy involves providing members and providers with easy to use products that leverage our information to meet their needs. Our ability to adequately price our products and services, provide effective and efficient service to our customers, develop new and innovative products and services (including enhanced technologies that improved connectivity across products and meet consumer expectations for engaging in their health care), automate and deploy new technologies to simplify administrative processes and clinical decision making, provide timely payments to care providers, drive administrative and operational efficiencies, and timely and accurately report our financial results depends significantly on the performance of, and integrity of the data, in our information systems. These systems require an ongoing commitment of significant resources to maintain, protect, and enhance existing systems and develop and integrate new systems, including systems powered by or incorporating artificial intelligence and machine learning (including generative AI) (AI/ML), to keep pace with continuing changes in information processing technology, evolving industry and regulatory standards, and changing customer preferences, and even with such resources there is no assurance that we will be able to do so. If the information we rely upon to run our businesses was found to be inaccurate, unreliable, or biased, if we fail to improve service levels or maintain the integrity of our data, or if we fail to effectively maintain our information systems and develop and integrate new systems (including systems powered by or incorporating AI/ML), or if our use of AI/ML technologies were to result in inaccuracies, biases or errors, we could have operational disruptions, problems in determining medical cost estimates and establishing appropriate pricing, customer and health care provider disputes, reputational challenges, regulatory or other legal obstacles (including potential investigations and enforcement), difficulty preventing and detecting fraud, increases in operating expenses, difficulty driving administrative or operational efficiencies to enhance our operations and reduce costs, loss of existing customers, difficulty in attracting new customers, or other adverse consequences, each of which may result in a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, and cash flows.

Current wording

Our business depends significantly on effective information systems and the integrity and timeliness of the data we use to run our business. Our business strategy involves providing members and providers with easy to use products that leverage our information to meet their needs. Our ability to adequately price our products and services, provide effective and efficient service to our customers, develop new and innovative products and services (including enhanced technologies that improved connectivity across products and meet consumer expectations for engaging in their health care), automate and deploy new technologies to simplify administrative processes and clinical decision making, provide timely payments to care providers, drive administrative and operational efficiencies, and timely and accurately report our financial results depends significantly on the performance of, and integrity of the data, in our information systems. These systems require an ongoing commitment of significant resources to maintain, protect, and enhance existing systems and develop and integrate new systems, including systems powered by or incorporating artificial intelligence and machine learning (including generative AI) (AI/ML), to keep pace with continuing changes in information processing technology, evolving industry and regulatory standards, and changing customer preferences, and even with such resources there is no assurance that we will be able to do so. In addition, changes to laws, regulations and guidance regarding how we may use AI/ML could make it harder for us to conduct our business using AI/ML, require us to retrain our AI/ML, delete data produced by our AI/ML, or prevent or limit our use of AI/ML. Our use of AI/ML technologies could also result in additional compliance costs, regulatory investigations, actions, fines or penalties, and consumer or other lawsuits.

Previous wording

In the ordinary course of our business, we process, store and transmit large amounts of data, and rely on third-party service providers to do the same, including protected personal information subject to privacy, security or data breach notification laws, as well as proprietary or confidential information relating to our business or a third-party with which we do business. We have been, and will likely continue to be, regular targets of attempted cybersecurity attacks and other security threats and may be, and have been, subject to breaches of our information technology systems, including breaches of the information technology systems of third-party service providers. Although the impact of such attacks has not been material to our operations or results of operations, financial position, or cash flow through December 31, 2024, we can provide no assurance that we will be able to detect, prevent, or contain the effects of such cybersecurity attacks or other information security risks or threats, or that such an attack will not be material to our business, in the future. Further, because the techniques used to obtain unauthorized access, disable or degrade service, or sabotage systems change frequently and are increasing in sophistication, in part due to use of evolving AI/ML technologies (including generative AI), and because our businesses are changing as well, we may be unable to anticipate these techniques and threats, detect data security incidents or implement adequate preventive measures. A cybersecurity attack may penetrate our layered security controls and lead to the misappropriation of or compromise of protected personal information or proprietary or confidential information, create system disruptions, cause shutdowns, or deploy viruses, ransomware, and other malicious software programs that attack our systems or those of our third-party service providers. A cybersecurity attack that bypasses our information technology systems, or the security of our third-party service providers, could materially affect us due to the theft, destruction, loss, misappropriation or release of confidential information or intellectual property, operational or business delays resulting from the disruption of our IT systems, extortion attempts, or negative publicity resulting in reputation or brand damage with our members, customers, providers, and other stakeholders.

Current wording

In the ordinary course of our business, we process, store and transmit large amounts of data, and rely on third-party service providers to do the same, including protected personal information subject to privacy, security or data breach notification laws, as well as proprietary or confidential information relating to our business or a third-party with which we do business. We have been, and will likely continue to be, regular targets of attempted cybersecurity attacks and other security threats and may be, and have been, subject to breaches of our information technology systems, including breaches of the information technology systems of third-party service providers. For example, in February 2024, Change Healthcare experienced a significant cybersecurity incident that disrupted its ability to provide services, impacting payers, providers and pharmacies nationwide, including us. Although the impact of such attacks has not been material to our operations or results of operations, financial position, or cash flow through December 31, 2025, we can provide no assurance that we will be able to detect, prevent, or contain the effects of such cybersecurity attacks or other information security risks or threats, or that such an attack will not be material to our business, in the future. Further, because the techniques used to obtain unauthorized access, disable or degrade service, or sabotage systems change frequently and are increasing in sophistication, in part due to use of evolving AI/ML technologies (including generative AI), and because our businesses are changing as well, we may be unable to anticipate these techniques and threats, detect data security incidents or implement adequate preventive measures. A cybersecurity attack may penetrate our layered security controls and lead to the misappropriation of or compromise of protected personal information or proprietary or confidential information, create system disruptions, cause shutdowns, or deploy viruses, ransomware, and other malicious software programs that attack our systems or those of our third-party service providers. A cybersecurity attack that bypasses our information technology systems, or the security of our third-party service providers, could materially affect us due to the theft, destruction, loss, misappropriation or release of sensitive personal information, confidential information or proprietary information (including intellectual property), operational or business delays resulting from the disruption of our IT systems, extortion attempts, or negative publicity resulting in reputation or brand damage with our members, customers, providers, and other stakeholders.

Previous wording

A significant portion of our revenues relates to federal and state government health care coverage programs, including the Medicare, military services, and Medicaid programs. These programs accounted for approximately 94% of our total premiums and services revenue for the year ended December 31, 2024. These programs involve various risks, as described further below.

Current wording

A significant portion of our revenues relates to federal and state government health care coverage programs, including the Medicare, military services, and Medicaid programs. These programs accounted for approximately 93% of our total premiums and services revenue for the year ended December 31, 2025. These programs involve various risks, as described further below.

Previous wording

•At December 31, 2024, under our contracts with CMS we provided health insurance coverage to approximately 924,800 individual Medicare Advantage members in Florida. These contracts accounted for approximately 14% of our total premiums and services revenue for the year ended December 31, 2024. The loss of these and other CMS contracts (which are generally renewed annually) or significant changes in the Medicare Advantage and Prescription Drug Plan programs as a result of legislative or regulatory action, including changes to the Part D prescription drug benefit design (such as the changes to plan sponsor liability across the different Part D coverage phases that will apply beginning in plan year 2025) or reductions in premium payments to us or increases in member benefits or changes to member eligibility criteria without corresponding increases in premium payments to us, may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, and cash flows.

Current wording

•At December 31, 2025, under our contracts with CMS we provided health insurance coverage to approximately 1.0 million individual Medicare Advantage members in Florida. These contracts accounted for approximately 14% of our total premiums and services revenue for the year ended December 31, 2025. The loss of these and other CMS contracts (which are generally renewed annually) or significant changes in the Medicare Advantage and Prescription Drug Plan programs as a result of legislative or regulatory action, including changes to the Part D prescription drug benefit design (such as the changes to plan sponsor liability across the different Part D coverage phases that began to apply in plan year 2025) or reductions in premium payments to us or increases in member benefits or changes to member eligibility criteria without corresponding increases in premium payments to us, may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, and cash flows.

Previous wording

•CMS uses a risk-adjustment model which adjusts premiums paid to Medicare Advantage, or MA, plans according to health status of covered members. The risk-adjustment model, which CMS implemented pursuant to the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (BBA) and the Benefits Improvement and Protection Act of 2000 (BIPA), generally pays more where a plan's membership has higher expected costs. Under this model, rates paid to MA plans are based on actuarially determined bids, which include a process whereby our prospective payments are based on our estimated cost of providing standard Medicare-covered benefits to an enrollee with a "national average risk profile." That baseline payment amount is adjusted to account for certain demographic characteristics and health status of our enrolled members. Under the risk-adjustment methodology, all MA plans must collect from providers and submit the necessary diagnosis code information to CMS within prescribed deadlines. The CMS risk-adjustment model uses the diagnosis data, collected from providers, to calculate the health status-related risk-adjusted premium payment to MA plans, which CMS further adjusts for coding pattern differences between the health plans and the government fee-for-service (FFS) program. We generally rely on providers, including certain providers in our network who are our employees, to code their claim submissions with appropriate diagnoses, which we send to CMS as the basis for our health status-adjusted payment received from CMS under the actuarial risk-adjustment model. We also rely on these providers to document appropriately all medical data, including the diagnosis data submitted with claims. In addition, we conduct medical record reviews as part of our data and payment accuracy compliance efforts, to more accurately reflect diagnosis conditions under the risk adjustment model.

Current wording

•CMS uses a risk-adjustment model that adjusts premiums paid to Medicare Advantage, or MA, plans according to health status of covered members. The risk-adjustment model, which CMS implemented pursuant to the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (BBA) and the Benefits Improvement and Protection Act of 2000 (BIPA), generally pays more where a plan's membership has higher expected costs. Under this model, rates paid to MA plans are based on actuarially determined bids, which include a process whereby our prospective payments are based on our estimated cost of providing standard Medicare-covered benefits to an enrollee with a "national average risk profile." That baseline payment amount is adjusted to account for certain demographic characteristics and health status of our enrolled members. Under the risk-adjustment methodology, all MA plans must collect from providers and submit the necessary diagnosis code information to CMS within prescribed deadlines. The CMS risk-adjustment model uses the diagnosis data, collected from providers, to calculate the health status-related risk-adjusted premium payment to MA plans, which CMS further adjusts for coding pattern differences between the health plans and the government fee-for-service (FFS) program. We generally rely on providers, including certain providers in our network who are our employees, to code their claim submissions with appropriate diagnoses, which we send to CMS as the basis for our health status-adjusted payment received from CMS under the actuarial risk-adjustment model. We also rely on these providers to document appropriately all medical data, including the diagnosis data submitted with claims. In addition, we conduct medical record reviews as part of our data and payment accuracy compliance efforts, to more accurately reflect diagnosis conditions under the risk adjustment model.

Previous wording

In 2012, CMS released an MA contract-level RADV methodology that would extrapolate the results of each CMS RADV audit sample to the audited MA contract’s entire health status-related risk adjusted premium amount for the year under audit. In doing so, CMS recognized “that the documentation standard used in RADV audits to determine a contract’s payment error (medical records) is different from the documentation standard used to develop the Part C risk-adjustment model (FFS claims).” To correct for this difference, CMS stated that it would apply a “Fee-for-Service Adjuster (FFS Adjuster)” as “an offset to the preliminary recovery amount.” This adjuster would be “calculated by CMS based on a RADV-like review of records submitted to support FFS claims data.” CMS stated that this methodology would apply to audits beginning with PY 2011. Humana relied on CMS’s 2012 guidance in submitting MA bids to CMS. Humana also launched a “Self-Audits” program in 2013 that applied CMS’s 2012 RADV audit methodology and included an estimated FFS Adjuster. Humana completed Self-Audits for PYs 2011-2016 and reported results to CMS.

Current wording

In 2012, CMS released an MA contract-level RADV methodology that would extrapolate the results of each CMS RADV audit sample to the audited MA contract’s entire health status-related risk adjusted premium amount for the year under audit. In doing so, CMS recognized “that the documentation standard used in RADV audits to determine a contract’s payment error (medical records) is different from the documentation standard used to develop the Part C risk-adjustment model (FFS claims).” To correct for this difference, CMS stated that it would apply a “Fee-for-Service Adjuster (FFS Adjuster)” as “an offset to the preliminary recovery amount.” This adjuster would be “calculated by CMS based on a RADV-like review of records submitted to support FFS claims data.” CMS stated that this methodology would apply to audits beginning with payment year (PY) 2011. Humana relied on CMS’s 2012 guidance in submitting MA bids to CMS. Humana also launched a “Self-Audits” program in 2013 that applied CMS’s 2012 RADV audit methodology and included an estimated FFS Adjuster. Humana completed Self-Audits for PYs 2011-2016 and reported results to CMS.

Previous wording

In October 2018, however, CMS issued a proposed rule announcing possible changes to the RADV audit methodology, including elimination of the FFS Adjuster. CMS proposed applying its revised methodology, including extrapolated recoveries without application of a FFS Adjuster, to RADV audits dating back to PY 2011. On January 30, 2023, CMS published a final rule related to the RADV audit methodology (Final RADV Rule). The Final RADV Rule confirmed CMS’s decision to eliminate the FFS Adjuster. The Final RADV Rule states CMS’s intention to extrapolate results from CMS and HHS-OIG RADV audits beginning with PY 2018, rather than PY 2011 as proposed. However, CMS’s Final RADV Rule does not adopt a specific sampling, extrapolation or audit methodology. CMS instead stated its general plan to rely on “any statistically valid method . . . that is determined to be well-suited to a particular audit.”

Current wording

In October 2018, however, CMS issued a proposed rule announcing possible changes to the RADV audit methodology, including elimination of the FFS Adjuster. CMS proposed (the "Proposed RADV Rule") applying its revised methodology, including extrapolated recoveries without application of a FFS Adjuster, to RADV audits dating back to PY 2011. On January 30, 2023, CMS published a final rule related to the RADV audit methodology (Final RADV Rule). The Final RADV Rule confirmed CMS’s decision to eliminate the FFS Adjuster. The Final RADV Rule states CMS’s intention to extrapolate results from CMS and HHS-OIG RADV audits beginning with PY 2018, rather than PY 2011 as proposed. However, CMS’s Final RADV Rule does not adopt a specific sampling, extrapolation or audit methodology. CMS instead stated its general plan to rely on “any statistically valid method . . . that is determined to be well-suited to a particular audit.”

Previous wording

We believe that the Final RADV Rule fails to address adequately the statutory requirement of actuarial equivalence and violates the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”). CMS failed to meet its legal obligations in the federal rulemaking process to give a reasoned justification for the rule or provide a meaningful opportunity for public comment. They also chose to apply the rule retroactively rather than prospectively, as required by law. Humana’s actuarially certified bids through PY 2023 preserved Humana’s position that CMS should apply an FFS Adjuster in any RADV audit that CMS intends to extrapolate. CMS confirmed its intent to apply the Final RADV Rule, including the first application of extrapolated audit results to determine audit settlements without the use of a FFS Adjuster, to CMS audits conducted for PY 2018 and subsequent years when it selected certain of Humana's MA contracts for PY 2018 RADV Audits. The Final RADV Rule, including the lack of a FFS Adjuster, and any related regulatory, industry or company reactions, could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, or cash flows.

Current wording

We believe that the Final RADV Rule fails to address adequately the statutory requirement of actuarial equivalence and violates the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”). CMS failed to meet its legal obligations in the federal rulemaking process to give a reasoned justification for the rule or provide a meaningful opportunity for public comment. They also chose to apply the rule retroactively rather than prospectively, as required by law. Humana’s actuarially certified bids through PY 2026 preserved Humana’s position that CMS should apply an FFS Adjuster in any RADV audit that CMS intends to extrapolate. CMS confirmed its intent to apply the Final RADV Rule, including the first application of extrapolated audit results to determine audit settlements without the use of a FFS Adjuster, to CMS audits conducted for PY 2018 and subsequent years when it selected certain of Humana's MA contracts for PY 2018 RADV audits. Further, on May 21, 2025, CMS announced that it will conduct RADV audits for all eligible MA contracts for each payment year in all newly initiated audits and expedite the completion of RADV audits for PY 2018 through PY 2024 by early 2026. The Final RADV Rule, including the lack of a FFS Adjuster, and any related regulatory, industry or company reactions, the expansion of CMS's auditing efforts to include all eligible MA contracts, the acceleration of RADV audits for PY 2018 through PY 2024, other changes CMS may make to the RADV audit methodology for these years, and combination of these expanded auditing efforts with the application of the Final RADV Rule, could each have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, or cash flows.

Previous wording

On September 1, 2023, Humana Inc. and Humana Benefit Plan of Texas, Inc. filed suit against the United States Department of Health and Human Services, and Xavier Becerra in his official capacity as Secretary, in the United States District Court, Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division seeking a determination that the Final RADV Rule violates the APA and should be set aside. We remain committed to working alongside CMS to promote the integrity of the MA program as well as affordability and cost certainty for our members. It is critical that MA plans are paid accurately and that payment model principles, including the application of a FFS Adjuster, are in accordance with the requirements of the

Current wording

On September 1, 2023, Humana Inc. and Humana Benefit Plan of Texas, Inc. filed suit against the United States Department of Health and Human Services, and Xavier Becerra in his official capacity as Secretary, in the United States District Court, Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division seeking a determination that the Final RADV Rule violates the APA and should be set aside. On September 25, 2025, the Court granted our motion for summary judgment and vacated the Final RADV Rule, finding that the Final RADV Rule was procedurally invalid under the APA because it was not a “logical outgrowth” of the Proposed RADV Rule. On November 21, 2025, the government notified the court of its appeal of that decision, which is now pending at the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and captioned Humana v Kennedy. There can be no assurances as to the final disposition of this lawsuit. We remain committed to working alongside CMS to promote the integrity of the MA program as well as affordability and cost certainty for our members. It is critical that MA plans are paid accurately and that payment model principles, including the application of a FFS Adjuster, are in accordance with the requirements of the Social Security Act, which, if not implemented correctly could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, or cash flows.

Previous wording

CMS’s risk adjustment model that may apply to our primary care business through its contracts with third-party payors. It is reasonably possible that such changes in reimbursement rates or changes to the Medicare programs in which our primary care and home health business participate may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, or cash flows.

Current wording

•Our primary care and home solutions businesses derive a substantial portion of their revenues from third-party payors and directly from the federal and state governments through participation in fee-for-service Medicare. This concentration of revenues subjects these businesses to reductions in Medicare reimbursement rates or changes in the rules governing the Medicare program, including changes to CMS’s risk adjustment model that may apply to our primary care business through its contracts with third-party payors. It is reasonably possible that such changes in reimbursement rates or changes to the Medicare programs in which our primary care and home health business participate may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, or cash flows.

Previous wording

It is reasonably possible that these laws and regulations, as well as other current or future legislative, judicial or regulatory changes, including restrictions on our ability to manage our provider network, market and sell our products, or otherwise operate our business, or restrictions on profitability, including reviews by regulatory bodies that may compare our Medicare Advantage business profitability to our non-Medicare Advantage business profitability, or compare the profitability of various products within our Medicare Advantage business, and require that they remain within certain ranges of each other, increases in member benefits or changes to member eligibility criteria without corresponding increases in premium payments to us, further restrictions on service arrangements and fee payments between intercompany or vertically-integrated assets, increases in regulation of our prescription drug benefit businesses, or changes to the Part D prescription drug benefit design (and uncertainty arising from the implementation of these changes) may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations (including restricting revenue, enrollment and premium growth in certain products and market segments, restricting our ability to expand into new markets, increasing our medical and operating costs, further lowering our Medicare payment rates and increasing our expenses associated with assessments); our financial position (including our ability to maintain the value of our goodwill); and our cash flows.

Current wording

It is reasonably possible that these laws and regulations, as well as other current or future legislative, judicial or regulatory changes, including restrictions on our ability to manage our provider network, market and sell our products, or otherwise operate our business, or restrictions on profitability, increases in member benefits or changes to member eligibility criteria without corresponding increases in premium payments to us, further restrictions on service arrangements and fee payments between intercompany or vertically-integrated assets, increases in regulation of our prescription drug benefit businesses, or changes to the Part D prescription drug benefit design (and uncertainty arising from the implementation of these changes) may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations (including restricting revenue, enrollment and premium growth in certain products and market segments, restricting our ability to expand into new markets, increasing our medical and operating costs, further lowering our

Previous wording

Laws in each of the states (and Puerto Rico) in which we operate our HMOs, PPOs and other health insurance-related services regulate our operations including: capital adequacy and other licensing requirements, policy language describing benefits, mandated benefits and processes, entry, withdrawal or re-entry into a state or market, rate increases, delivery systems, utilization review procedures, quality assurance, complaint systems, enrollment requirements, claim payments, marketing, and advertising. The HMO, PPO, and other health insurance-related products we offer are sold under licenses issued by the applicable insurance regulators.

Current wording

Laws in each of the states in which we operate our HMOs, PPOs and other health insurance-related services regulate our operations including: capital adequacy and other licensing requirements, policy language describing benefits, mandated benefits and processes, entry, withdrawal or re-entry into a state or market, rate increases, delivery systems, utilization review procedures, quality assurance, complaint systems, enrollment requirements, claim payments, marketing, and advertising. The HMO, PPO, and other health insurance-related products we offer are sold under licenses issued by the applicable insurance regulators.

Previous wording

To the extent that we require a CON or other similar approvals to expand our operations, our expansion could be adversely affected by our inability to obtain the necessary approval. To the extent laws in these CON states change, including the elimination of the CON requirement, the intangible value associated with these CONs may be impaired.

Current wording

Certain of our healthcare services businesses require a Certificate of Need, or CON, to operate in certain states. These states restrict the entry of new providers or services and the expansion of existing providers or services in their state through a CON process, which is periodically evaluated and updated as required by applicable state law. To the extent that we require a CON or other similar approvals to expand our operations, our expansion could be adversely affected by our inability to obtain the necessary approval. To the extent laws in these CON states change, including the elimination of the CON requirement, the intangible value associated with these CONs may be impaired.

Previous wording

Our pharmacy business is highly competitive and subjects us to regulations and distribution and supply chain risks in addition to those we face with our core health benefits businesses.

Current wording

Our pharmacy solutions business is highly competitive and subjects us to regulations and distribution and supply chain risks in addition to those we face with our core health benefits businesses.

Previous wording

Our pharmacy business also subjects us to extensive federal, state, and local regulation. The practice of pharmacy is generally regulated at the state level by state boards of pharmacy. Many of the states where we deliver pharmaceuticals, including controlled substances, have laws and regulations that require out-of-state mail-order pharmacies to register with that state’s board of pharmacy. Federal agencies further regulate our pharmacy operations, requiring registration with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and individual state controlled substance authorities in order to dispense controlled substances. In addition, the FDA inspects facilities in connection with procedures to effect recalls of prescription drugs. The Federal Trade Commission also has requirements for mail-order sellers of goods. The U.S. Postal Service, or USPS, has statutory authority to restrict the transmission of drugs and medicines through the mail to a degree that may have an adverse effect on our mail-order operations. The USPS historically has exercised this statutory authority only with respect to controlled substances. If the USPS restricts our ability to deliver drugs through the mail, alternative means of delivery could be significantly more expensive. The U.S. Department of Transportation has regulatory authority to impose restrictions on drugs inserted in the stream of commerce. These regulations generally do not apply to the USPS and its operations. In addition, we are subject to CMS rules regarding the administration of our PDP plans and intercompany pricing between our PDP plans and our pharmacy business.

Current wording

Our pharmacy solutions business also subjects us to extensive federal, state, and local regulation. The practice of pharmacy is generally regulated at the state level by state boards of pharmacy. Many of the states where we deliver pharmaceuticals, including controlled substances, have laws and regulations that require out-of-state mail-order pharmacies to register with that state’s board of pharmacy. Federal agencies further regulate our pharmacy operations, requiring registration with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and individual state controlled substance authorities in order to dispense controlled substances. In addition, the FDA inspects facilities in connection with procedures to effect recalls of prescription drugs. The Federal Trade Commission also has requirements for mail-order sellers of goods. The U.S. Postal Service, or USPS, has statutory authority to restrict the transmission of drugs and medicines through the mail to a degree that may have an adverse effect on our mail-order operations. The USPS historically has exercised this statutory authority only with respect to controlled substances. If the USPS restricts our ability to deliver drugs through the mail, alternative means of delivery could be significantly more expensive. The U.S. Department of Transportation has regulatory authority to impose restrictions on drugs inserted in the stream of commerce. These regulations generally do not apply to the USPS and its operations. In addition, we are subject to CMS rules regarding the administration of our PDP plans and intercompany pricing between our PDP plans and our pharmacy business.