COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS CORP

Note 8 — Income Taxes

Our effective income tax rates were as follows:

Our effective tax rate for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2024, benefited from discrete items, which decreased our effective tax rate in those periods. During the three months ended September 30, 2024, we recognized a $40 million deferred tax asset related to foreign tax credits. Additionally, during the nine months ended September 30, 2024, we recognized a discrete benefit related to U.S. state income taxes.

During the nine months ended September 30, 2023, we reached a settlement related to U.S. state income taxes, and reached an agreement with the IRS, settling tax years 2017 and 2018, both of which decreased our effective tax rate in that period.

We are involved in two separate ongoing disputes with the ITD in connection with previously disclosed share repurchase transactions undertaken by CTS India in 2013 and 2016 to repurchase shares from its shareholders (non-Indian Cognizant entities) valued at $523 million and $2.8 billion, respectively.

The 2016 transaction was undertaken pursuant to a plan approved by the High Court in Chennai, India, and resulted in the payment of $135 million in Indian income taxes - an amount we believe includes all the applicable taxes owed for this transaction under Indian law. In March 2018, the ITD asserted that it is owed an additional 33 billion Indian rupees ($394 million at the September 30, 2024 exchange rate) on the 2016 transaction. We deposited 5 billion Indian rupees, representing 15% of the disputed tax amount related to the 2016 transaction, with the ITD. Additionally, certain time deposits of CTS India were placed under lien in favor of the ITD, representing the remainder of the disputed tax amount. As of December 31, 2023, the balance of deposits under lien was 30 billion Indian rupees, including previously earned interest, or $355 million, was presented in "Long-term investments".

In April 2020, we received a formal assessment from the ITD on the 2016 transaction, which is consistent with the ITD's previous assertions. Our appeal was ruled unfavorably by the CITA in March 2022 and by the ITAT in September 2023. We filed an appeal against the order of the ITAT with the High Court. On January 8, 2024, the SCI ruled that, in order to proceed with the appeal, we must deposit 30 billion Indian rupees ($355 million at the December 31, 2023 exchange rate), representing the time deposits of CTS India under lien, on the condition that, if CTS India prevails at the High Court, the amount deposited will be returned to CTS India, along with interest accrued, within four weeks of the judgment. We made the required deposit in January 2024 and, in April 2024, the case commenced before the High Court.

As of September 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, the deposit with the ITD was $412 million and $60 million, respectively at September 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023 exchange rates, respectively presented in "Other noncurrent assets". As of December 31, 2023, $96 million of the $355 million in deposits under lien were held in time deposits with a maturity of less than 30 days qualifying as cash equivalent instruments and thus were considered restricted cash equivalents as of December 31, 2023.

The dispute in relation to the 2013 share repurchase transaction is also in litigation. At this time, the ITD has not made specific demands with regards to the 2013 transaction.

We continue to believe we have paid all applicable taxes owed on both the 2016 and the 2013 transactions and we continue to defend our positions with respect to both matters. Accordingly, we have not recorded any reserves for these matters as of September 30, 2024.

Note 9 — Derivative Financial Instruments

In the normal course of business, we use foreign exchange forward and option contracts to manage foreign currency exchange rate risk. Derivatives may give rise to credit risk from the possible non-performance by counterparties. Credit risk is limited to the fair value of those contracts that are favorable to us. We have limited our credit risk by limi ting the amount of credit exposure with any one financial institution and conducting ongoing evaluation of the creditworthiness of the financial institutions with which we do business. In addition, all the assets and liabilities related to the foreign exchange derivative contracts set forth in the table below are subject to master netting arrangements, such as the International Swaps and Derivatives Association Master Agreement, with each individual counterparty. These master netting arrangements generally provide for net settlement of all outstanding contracts with the counterparty in the case of an event of default or a termination event. We have presented all the assets and liabilities related to the foreign exchange derivative contracts, as applicable, on a gross basis, with no offsets, in our unaudited consolidated statements of financial position. There is no financial collateral (including cash collateral) posted or received by us related to the foreign exchange derivative contracts.

The following table provides information on the location and fair values of derivative financial instruments included in our unaudited consolidated statements of financial position as of:

Cash Flow Hedges

We have entered and continue to enter into a series of foreign exchange derivative contracts that are designated as cash flow hedges of Indian rupee denominated payments in India. These contracts are intended to partially offset the impact of movement of the Indian rupee against the U.S. dollar on future operating costs and are scheduled to mature each month during the remainder of 2024, 2025 and the first nine months of 2026. The changes in fair value of these contracts are initially reported in "Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)" in our unaudited consolidated statements of financial position and are subsequently reclassified to earnings within "Cost of revenues" and "Selling, general and administrative expenses" in our unaudited consolidated statements of operations in the same period that the forecasted Indian rupee denominated payments are recorded in earnings. As of September 30, 2024, we estimate that$14 million, net of tax, of net gains related to derivatives designated as cash flow hedges reported in "Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)" in our unaudited consolidated statements of financial position is expected to be reclassified into earnings within the next 12 months.

The notional value of the outstanding contracts by year of maturity was as follows:

(1)Includes $25 million and $45 million notional value of option contracts as of September 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively, with the remaining notional value related to forward contracts.

The following table provides information on the location and amounts of pre-tax gains and losses on our cash flow hedges for the three months ended September 30:

The following table provides information on the location and amounts of pre-tax gains and losses on our cash flow hedges for the nine months ended September 30:

The activity related to the change in net unrealized gains and losses on the cash flow hedges included in "Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)" in our unaudited consolidated statements of stockholders' equity is presented in Note 11.

Other Derivatives

We use foreign exchange forward contracts to provide an economic hedge against balance sheet exposures to certain monetary assets and liabilities denominated in currencies other than the functional currency of our foreign subsidiaries. We entered into foreign exchange forward contracts that are scheduled to mature in the fourth quarter of 2024. Realized gains or losses and changes in the estimated fair value of these derivative financial instruments are recorded in the caption "Foreign currency exchange gains (losses), net" in our unaudited consolidated statements of operations.

Additional information related to the outstanding foreign exchange forward contracts not designated as hedging instruments was as follows:

The following table provides information on the location and amounts of realized and unrealized pre-tax gains and losses on the other derivative financial instruments for the three and nine months ended September 30:

The related cash flow impacts of all the derivative activities are reflected as cash flows from operating activities.

Note 10 — Fair Value Measurements

We measure our cash equivalents, certain investments, contingent consideration liabilities and foreign exchange forward and option contracts at fair value. Fair value is the exit price, or the amount that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants as of the measurement date. The fair value hierarchy is based on inputs to valuation techniques that are used to measure fair value that are either observable or unobservable. Observable inputs reflect assumptions market participants would use in pricing an asset or liability based on market data obtained from independent sources while unobservable inputs reflect a reporting entity’s pricing based upon their own market assumptions.

The fair value hierarchy consists of the following three levels:

•Level 1 – Inputs are quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.

•Level 2 – Inputs are quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in an active market, quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active, inputs other than quoted prices that are observable and market-corroborated inputs which are derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data.

•Level 3 – Inputs are derived from valuation techniques in which one or more significant inputs or value drivers are unobservable.

The following table summarizes the financial assets and (liabilities) measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of September 30, 2024:

The following table summarizes the financial assets and (liabilities) measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of December 31, 2023:

(1)See Note 8.

The following table summarizes the changes in Level 3 contingent consideration liabilitiesfor thenine months ended:

We measure the fair value of money market funds based on quoted prices in active markets for identical assets and measure the fair value of our equity investment security based on the published daily net asset value at which investors can freely subscribe to or redeem from the fund. The carrying value of the time deposits approximated fair value as of September 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023.

We estimate the fair value of each foreign exchange forward contract by using a present value of expected cash flows model. This model calculates the difference between the current market forward price and the contracted forward price for each foreign exchange forward contract and applies the difference in the rates to each outstanding contract. The market forward rates include a discount and credit risk factor. We estimate the fair value of each foreign exchange option contract by using a variant of the Black-Scholes model. This model uses present value techniques and reflects the time value and intrinsic value based on observable market rates.

We estimate the fair value of contingent consideration liabilities associated with acquisitions using a variation of the income approach, which utilizes one or more significant inputs that are unobservable. This approach calculates the fair value of such liabilities based on the probability-weighted expected performance of the acquired entity against the target performance metric, discounted to present value when appropriate.

During the nine months ended September 30, 2024 and the year ended December 31, 2023, there were no transfers among Level 1, Level 2 or Level 3 financial assets and liabilities.

Note 11 — Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)

Changes in "Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)" by component were as follows for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2024:

Changes in "Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)" by component were as follows for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2023:

Note 12— Commitments and Contingencies

We are involved in various claims and legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. We accrue a liability when a loss is considered probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. When a material loss contingency is reasonably possible but not probable, we do not record a liability, but instead disclose the nature and the amount of the claim, and an estimate of the loss or range of loss, if such an estimate can be made. Legal fees are expensed as incurred. While we do not expect that the ultimate resolution of any existing claims and proceedings (other than the specific matters described below, if decided adversely), individually or in the aggregate, will have a material adverse effect on our financial position, an unfavorable outcome in some or all of these proceedings could have a material adverse impact on results of operations or cash flows for a particular period. This assessment is based on our current understanding of relevant facts and circumstances. As such, our view of these matters is subject to inherent uncertainties and may change in the future.

On January 15, 2015, Syntel sued TriZetto and Cognizant in the USDC-SDNY. Syntel’s complaint alleged breach of contract against TriZetto, and tortious interference and misappropriation of trade secrets against Cognizant and TriZetto, stemming from Cognizant’s hiring of certain former Syntel employees. Cognizant and TriZetto countersued on March 23, 2015, for breach of contract, misappropriation of trade secrets and tortious interference, based on Syntel’s misuse of TriZetto confidential information and abandonment of contractual obligations. Cognizant and TriZetto subsequently added federal DTSAand copyright infringement claims for Syntel’s misuse of TriZetto’s proprietary technology. The parties’ claims were narrowed by the court and the case was tried before a jury, which on October 27, 2020 returned a verdict in favor of Cognizant in the amount of $855 million, including $570 million in punitive damages. On April 20, 2021, the USDC-SDNY issued a post-trial order that, among other things, affirmed the jury’s award of $285 million in actual damages, but reduced the award of punitive damages from $570 million to $285 million, thereby reducing the overall damages award from $855 million to $570 million. The USDC-SDNY subsequently issued a final judgment consistent with the April 20 th order. On May 26, 2021, Syntel filed a notice of appeal to the Second Circuit, and on June 3, 2021 the USDC-SDNY stayed execution of judgment pending appeal. On May 25, 2023, the Second Circuit issued an opinion affirming in part and vacating in part the judgment of the USDC-SDNY and remanding the case for further proceedings consistent with its opinion. The Second Circuit affirmed the judgment in all respects on liability but vacated the $570 million award that had been based on avoided development costs under the DTSA, and it remanded the case to the USDC-SDNY for further evaluation of damages. On June 23, 2023, the Second Circuit issued its mandate returning the case to the USDC-SDNY. On March 13, 2024, the USDC-SDNY issued a ruling that vacates the alternate compensatory damages awards that were within the scope of the Second Circuit’s remand and awards TriZetto and Cognizant approximately $15 million in attorney’s fees. On October 23, 2024, the USDC-SDNY granted TriZetto and Cognizant’s motion for a new trial on the amount of compensatory damages owed to TriZetto and Cognizant. TriZetto and Cognizant will continue to vigorously pursue our claims against Syntel. We will not record any gain in our financial statements until it becomes realizable.

On February 28, 2019, a ruling of the SCI interpreting the India Defined Contribution Obligation altered historical understandings of the obligation, extending it to cover additional portions of the employee’s income. As a result, the ongoing contributions of our affected employees and the Company were required to be increased. In the first quarter of 2019, weaccrued$117 million with respect to prior periods, assuming retroactive application of the SCI’s ruling, in "Selling, general and administrative expenses" in our unaudited consolidated statement of operations. There is significant uncertainty as to how the liability should be calculated as it is impacted by multiple variables, including the period of assessment, the application with respect to certain current and former employees and whether interest and penalties may be assessed. Since the ruling, a variety of trade associations and industry groups have advocated to the Indian government, highlighting the harm to the information technology sector, other industries and job growth in India that would result from a retroactive application of the ruling. It is possible the Indian government will review the matter and there is a substantial question as to whether the Indian government will apply the SCI’s ruling on a retroactive basis. As such, the ultimate amount of our obligation may be materially different from the amount accrued.

On October 31, 2016, November 15, 2016 and November 18, 2016, three putative shareholder derivative complaints were filed in New Jersey Superior Court, Bergen County, naming us, all of our then current directors and certain of our current and former officers at that time as defendants. These actions were consolidated in an order dated January 24, 2017. The complaints assert claims for breach of fiduciary duty, corporate waste, unjust enrichment, abuse of control, mismanagement, and/or insider selling by defendants. On April 26, 2017, the New Jersey Superior Court deferred further proceedings by dismissing the consolidated putative shareholder derivative litigation without prejudice but permitting the parties to file a motion to vacate the dismissal in the future.

On February 22, 2017, April 7, 2017, May 10, 2017 and March 11, 2019, four additional putative shareholder derivative complaints were filed in the USDC-NJ, naming us and certain of our current and former directors and officers at that time as defendants. These actions were consolidated in an order dated May 14, 2019. On August 3, 2020, lead plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint. The consolidated amended complaint asserts claims similar to those in the previously-filed

putative shareholder derivative actions. On February 14, 2022, we and certain of our current and former directors and officers moved to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint. On September 27, 2022, the USDC-NJ granted those motions and dismissed the consolidated amended complaint in its entirety with prejudice. Plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal on October 27, 2022. On May 3, 2024, the Third Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the consolidated amended complaint.

On June 1, 2021, an eighth putative shareholder derivative complaint was filed in the USDC-NJ, naming us and certain of our current and former directors and officers at that time as defendants. The complaint asserts claims similar to those in the previously-filed putative shareholder derivative actions. On March 31, 2022, we and certain of our current and former directors and officers moved to dismiss the complaint. On November 30, 2022, the USDC-NJ denied without prejudice those motions. The USDC-NJ ordered the parties to conduct limited discovery related to the issue of whether our board of directors wrongfully refused the plaintiff’s earlier litigation demand and, after the conclusion of such limited discovery, to file targeted motions for summary judgment on the issue of wrongful refusal.

We are presently unable to predict the duration, scope or result of the single putative shareholder derivative action that has not been dismissed. Although the Company continues to defend that putative shareholder derivative action vigorously, it is subject to inherent uncertainties, the actual cost of such litigation will depend upon many unknown factors and the outcome of the litigation is necessarily uncertain.

We have indemnification and expense advancement obligations pursuant to our bylaws and indemnification agreements with respect to certain current and former members of senior management and the Company’s board of directors. In connection with the matters that were the subject of our previously disclosed internal investigation, the DOJ and SEC investigations and the related litigation, we have received and expect to continue to receive requests under such indemnification agreements and our bylaws to provide funds for legal fees and other expenses. There are no amounts remaining available to us under applicable insurance policies for our ongoing indemnification and advancement obligations with respect to certain of our current and former officers and directors or incremental legal fees and other expenses related to the above matters.

See Note 8 for information relating to the ITD Dispute.

On September 18, 2017, three former employees filed suit against Cognizant in the USDC-CDCA, alleging that they and similarly situated employees suffered disparate treatment on the basis of race in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981. Plaintiffs subsequently amended their complaint three times, adding a fourth former employee plaintiff and claims for both disparate treatment and disparate impact on the basis of race and national origin under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000eet seq. and disparate treatment and disparate impact on the basis of race and national origin under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000eet seq.. Plaintiffs filed the operative Third Amended Complaint-Corrected on January 19, 2021; Cognizant filed its answer on January 29, 2021.

On May 13, 2022, plaintiffs filed a motion requesting that the USDC-CDCA certify the case as a class action for two putative classes of plaintiffs consisting of: (1) all individuals who are not of South Asian race or Indian national origin who applied to Cognizant in the U.S. and were not hired since September 2013 (the “hiring class”); and (2) all individuals who are not of South Asian race or Indian national origin who have been terminated in the U.S. since September 2013 (the “terminations class”). Cognizant opposed. On October 27, 2022, the court denied certification for the hiring class and the terminations class. However, the court granted certification for a sub-set of the terminations class limited to approximately 2,300 former employees whose employment had been terminated from the “bench,” a designation for employees who are not allocated to an active project. On November 10, 2022, Cognizant filed a petition with the Ninth Circuit requesting permission to appeal the class certification order as to the bench terminations class. The Ninth Circuit denied the petition on January 26, 2023.

From June 13, 2023 to June 26, 2023, the USDC-CDCA held a class action jury trial on the first phase of plaintiffs’ Section 1981 claim and Title VII disparate treatment claim. The questions presented were whether Cognizant engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination against non-South Asian and non-Indian employees with respect to bench terminations, and if so, whether punitive damages are available for class members who prevail on their claims. The jury deadlocked, and the court declared a mistrial.

The case proceeded to a retrial on September 24, 2024, and on October 4, 2024, the jury returned a verdict in favor of plaintiffs. The case will now proceed to the second phase to determine individualized liability and damages, if any, for each class member. As a result of the verdict, each non-South Asian and non-Indian class member who pursues claims in the second phase will be entitled to a rebuttable presumption that all termination decisions were discriminatory and to the possibility of recovering punitive damages if they prevail. The USDC-CDCA will also consider plaintiffs’ claim that Cognizant policies had a disparate impact on non-South Asian and non-Indian employees. We believe that class certification was improper, and that the second phase of the case will confirm that individualized issues should have precluded class certification. Cognizant will continue to vigorously defend itself in the second phase of this case and to pursue all available appellate arguments concerning

class certification and the September 24, 2024 trial at the appropriate time. Because we cannot predict the number of individual plaintiffs who will proceed to the second phase, or the outcome of those cases, and in view of the appellate arguments regarding class certification, we are unable to reasonably estimate a possible loss or range of loss. We have not recorded any accruals related to this matter.

Many of our engagements involve projects that are critical to the operations of our clients’ business and provide benefits that are difficult to quantify. Any failure in a client’s systems or our failure to meet our contractual obligations to our clients, including any breach involving a client’s confidential information or sensitive data, or our obligations under applicable laws or regulations could result in a claim for substantial damages against us, regardless of our responsibility for such failure. Although we attempt to contractually limit our liability for damages arising from negligent acts, errors, mistakes, or omissions in rendering our services, there can be no assurance that the limitations of liability set forth in our contracts will be enforceable in all instances or will otherwise protect us from liability for damages. Although we have general liability insurance coverage, including coverage for errors or omiss ions, we retain a significant portion of risk through our insurance deductibles and there can be no assurance that such coverage will cover all types of claims, continue to be available on reasonable terms or will be available in sufficient amounts to cover one or more large claims, or that the insurer will not disclaim coverage as to any future claim. The successful assertion of one or more large claims against us that exceed or are not covered by our insurance coverage or changes in our insurance policies, including premium increases or the imposition of large deductible or co-insurance requirements, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial position and cash flows for a particular period.

In the normal course of business and in conjunction with certain client engagements, we have entered into contractual arrangements through which we may be obligated to indemnify clients or other parties with whom we conduct business with respect to certain matters. These arrangements can include provisions whereby we agree to hold the indemnified party and certain of their affiliated entities harmless with respect to third-party claims related to such matters as our breach of certain representations or covenants, our intellectual property infringement, our gross negligence or willful misconduct or certain other claims made against certain parties. Payments by us under any of these arrangements are generally conditioned on the client making a claim and providing us with full control over the defense and settlement of such claim. It is not possible to determine the maximum potential liability under these indemnification agreements due to the unique facts and circumstances involved in each particular agreement. Historically, we have not made material payments under these indemnification agreements and therefore they have not had a material impact on our operating results, financial position, or cash flows. However, if events arise requiring us to make payment for indemnification claims under our indemnification obligations in contracts we have entered, such payments could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial position and cash flows for a particular period.

Note 13 — Segment Information

We have seven industry-based operating segments, which are aggregated into four reportable business segments:

•Financial Services, which consists of the banking and insurance operating segments;

•Health Sciences, which consists of a single operating segment of the same name;

•Products and Resources, which consists of the retail and consumer goods; manufacturing, logistics, energy, and utilities; and travel and hospitality operating segments; and

•Communications, Media and Technology, which consists of a single operating segment of the same name.

Our segments are industry-based, and as such, we report revenue from clients in the segment with which our clients are most closely aligned. Our client partners, account executives and client relationship managers are aligned in accordance with the specific industries they serve. Our CODM evaluates the Company's performance and allocates resources based on segment revenues and operating profit. Segment operating profit is defined as income from operations before unallocated costs. Generally, operating expenses for each operating segment have similar characteristics and are subject to the same factors, pressures and challenges. However, the economic environment and its effects on industries served by the operating segments may affect revenues and operating expenses to differing degrees.

Corporate expenses, expenses related to our NextGen program, a portion of depreciation and amortization and the impact of the settlements of the cash flow hedges are not allocated to individual segments in internal management reports used by the CODM. Accordingly, such expenses are excluded from segment operating profit and are included below as “unallocated costs” and adjusted against our total income from operations. Additionally, we do not disclose assets by segment as a significant portion of the assets is used interchangeably among the segments and the CODM does not review such information.

For revenues by reportable segment and geographic area, see Note 2.

Segment operating profits by reportable segment were as follows for the three and nine months ended September 30:

Geographic Area Information

Long-lived assets by geographic area are as follows:

(1)Long-lived assets include property and equipment, net of accumulated depreciation and amortization.

(2)Substantially all relates to the United States.

(3)Substantially all relates to India.

Note 14 — Subsequent Events

Dividend

On October 29, 2024, the Board of Directors approved the Company's declaration of a $0.30 per share dividend with a record date of November 19, 2024 and a payment date of November 27, 2024.