JUNIATA VALLEY FINANCIAL CORP

An investment in the Company's common stock involves certain risks, including, among others, the risks described below. In addition to the other information contained in this report, you should carefully consider the following risk factors in analyzing whether to make or to continue an investment in the Company.

RISKS RELATED TO INTEREST RATES AND LIQUIDITY

Fluctuations in market interest rates and relative balances of rate-sensitive assets to rate-sensitive liabilities can negatively impact net interest margin and net interest income.

The operations of financial institutions such as the Company are dependent to a large degree on net interest income, which is the difference between interest income from loans and investments and interest expense on deposits and borrowings.

An institution's net interest income is significantly affected by market rates of interest that, in turn, are affected by prevailing economic conditions, by the fiscal and monetary policies of the federal government and the policies of various regulatory agencies. The FRB regulates the national money supply to manage recessionary and inflationary pressures. In doing so, the FRB may use techniques such as engaging in open market transactions of U.S. Government securities, changing the discount rate and changing reserve requirements against bank deposits. The use of these techniques may also affect interest rates charged on loans and paid on deposits. The interest rate environment, which includes both the level of interest rates and the shape of the U.S. Treasury yield curve, has a significant impact on net interest income.

Like all financial institutions, the Company's consolidated statement of financial condition is affected by fluctuations in interest rates. Volatility in interest rates can also result in disintermediation, which is the flow of deposits away from financial institutions into direct investments, such as U.S. Government and corporate securities and other investment vehicles, including mutual funds, which, because of the absence of federal insurance premiums and reserve requirements, may pay higher rates of return than bank deposit products. See "Item 7: Management's Discussion of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”.

See the section entitled “Interest Rate Risk” in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition, for more information regarding the Company’s interest rate sensitivity.

Capital and liquidity strategies, including the impact of the capital and liquidity requirements implemented by the Basel III standards and future iterations of those standards, may require the Company to maintain higher levels of capital, which could restrict the amount of capital that the Company has available to deploy for income generating and other activities.

Basel III requires Juniata and the Bank to comply with risk-based capital requirements. See previous Capital Regulation discussion. Further changes to Basel III, sometimes referred to as the Basel III “endgame”, have been proposed. Although US proposals implementing the Basel III endgame have primarily focused on larger banking organizations, which would not include Juniata, federal banking agencies may revise, extend or reinterpret capital rules in ways that affect institutions of our size. Any increase in required minimum capital ratios or buffers, changes in the calculation of risk-weighted assets, or more stringent supervisory expectations could require us to raise additional capital, retain earnings, or reduce asset growth.

In addition, if the Company fails to meet applicable capital requirements or maintain sufficient capital to satisfy regulators, it could become subject to heightened supervisory scrutiny, restrictions on our operations, or other regulatory actions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

As of December 31, 2025, the Company believes it meets all capital adequacy requirements to which it is subject. However, the Basel III rules effectively require financial institutions to maintain higher capital levels than previously required. As a result, Juniata may have to maintain capital in the form of assets that contribute less income to Juniata and that are not available for deployment as loans or other interest-income generating assets, funding of capital projects or other growth initiatives.

Competition, including competition on rates of deposit and for loan growth, may negatively impact the Company’s net interest margin.

There is significant competition among banks in the market areas served by the Company. In addition, as a result of deregulation of the financial industry, the Bank also competes with other providers of financial services, such as savings and loan associations, credit unions, consumer finance companies, securities firms, insurance companies, mutual funds, fintech-based loan and deposit providers, full service brokerage firms and discount brokerage firms, some of which are subject to less extensive regulations than the Company with respect to the products and services they provide. Some of the Company’s competitors have greater resources than the Company and, as a result, may have higher lending limits and may offer other products or services not offered by the Company.

Competition may adversely affect the rates the Company pays on deposits and charges on loans, thereby potentially adversely affecting the Company’s profitability. Competition sometimes requires the Company to lower rates charged on loans more than market rates would otherwise indicate. Competition may also require the Company to pay higher rates on deposits than market rates would otherwise indicate. Thus, although loan demand has improved, intense competition among lenders has continued to place downward pressure on loan yields, also impacting the net interest margin.

Changes in interest rates or disruption in liquidity markets may adversely affect the Company’s sources of funding.

The Company must maintain enough sources of liquidity to meet the demands of its depositors and borrowers, support its operations and meet regulatory expectations. The Company’s liquidity practices emphasize core deposits and repayments and maturities of loans and investments as its primary sources of liquidity. These primary sources of liquidity can be supplemented by Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) advances, borrowings from the Federal Reserve Bank, lines of credit from correspondent banks and brokered deposits. Lower-cost, core deposits may be adversely affected by changes in interest rates, and secondary sources of liquidity can be costlier to the Company than funding provided by deposit account balances having similar maturities. In addition, adverse changes in the Company’s results of operations or financial condition, regulatory actions involving the Company, or changes in regulatory, industry or market conditions could lead to increases in the cost of these secondary sources of liquidity, the inability to refinance or replace these secondary funding sources as they mature, or the withdrawal of unused borrowing capacity under these secondary funding sources.

While the Company attempts to manage its liquidity through various techniques, the assumptions and estimates used do not always accurately forecast the impact of changes in customer behavior. For example, the Company may face limitations on its ability to fund loan growth if customers move funds out of the Bank’s deposit accounts in response to increases in interest rates. In a rising rate environment, customers may become more sensitive to interest rates when making deposit decisions and considering alternative opportunities. This increased sensitivity to interest rates could cause customers to move funds into higher-yielding deposit accounts offered by the Company’s bank subsidiary, require the Company’s bank subsidiary to offer higher interest rates on deposit accounts to retain customer deposits or cause customers to move funds into alternative investments or deposits of other banks or non-bank providers. Technology and other factors have also made it more convenient for customers to transfer low-cost deposits into higher-cost deposits or into alternative investments or deposits of other banks or non-bank providers. Such movement of customer deposits could increase the Company’s funding costs, reduce its net interest margin and/or create liquidity challenges.

Market conditions have been negatively impacted by disruptions in the liquidity markets in the past, and such disruptions or an adverse change in the Company's results of operations or financial condition could, in the future, have a negative

impact on secondary sources of liquidity. If the Company is not able to continue to rely primarily on customer deposits to meet its liquidity and funding needs, continue to access secondary, non-deposit funding sources on favorable terms or otherwise fails to manage its liquidity effectively, the Company’s ability to continue to grow may be constrained, and the Company’s liquidity, operating margins, results of operations and financial condition may be materially adversely affected.

Regulators emphasize liquidity planning at both the Bank and Company levels.

Due to regulatory limitations on the Corporation’s ability to rely on short-term borrowings, any significant movements of deposits away from traditional depository accounts which negatively impacts the Corporation’s loan-to-deposit ratio could restrict its ability to achieve growth in loans or require the Corporation to pay higher interest rates on deposit products to retain deposits to fund loans.

Liquidity must also be managed at the holding company level. Banking regulators scrutinize liquidity at the holding company level, in addition to consolidated and bank liquidity levels. For safety and soundness reasons, banking regulations limit the amount of cash that can be transferred from subsidiary banks to the parent company in the form of loans and dividends. Generally, these limitations are based on a subsidiary bank’s regulatory capital levels and net income. These factors have affected some institutions' ability to pay dividends and have required some institutions to establish borrowing facilities at the holding company level.

If market interest rates increase, unrealized losses on the Bank’s available for sale debt securities portfolio can increase. The increase in unrealized losses is reflected in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (“AOCI”) on the balance sheet, which reduces GAAP total stockholders’ equity capital and, therefore, the tangible common equity ratio. Unrealized losses do not affect regulatory capital ratios.

The Bank’s access to liquidity sources could be affected by unrealized losses if investments must be sold at a loss, tangible capital ratios decline from an increase in unrealized losses or realized credit losses, the FHLB or other sources reduce borrowing capacity or bank regulators impose restrictions on the Bank such as a limit on interest rates it may pay on deposits or its ability to access brokered deposits.

COMPLIANCE AND REGULATORY RISKS

The increasing time and expense associated with regulatory compliance and risk management could negatively impact our results of operations.

The time, expense and internal and external resources associated with regulatory compliance continue to increase. Thus, balancing the need to address regulatory changes and effectively manage growth in non-interest expenses has become more challenging than it had been in the past.

The Company and the Bank are extensively regulated under federal and state banking laws and regulations that are primarily intended for the protection of depositors, federal deposit insurance funds and the banking system, instead of for the benefit of shareholders. In general, these laws and regulations establish: the eligible business activities for the Company; certain acquisition and merger restrictions; limitations on intercompany transactions such as loans and dividends; capital adequacy requirements; requirements for anti-money laundering programs; and consumer lending and other compliance requirements. While these statutes and regulations are generally designed to minimize potential loss to depositors and the FDIC insurance funds, they do not eliminate risk, and compliance with such statutes and regulations increases the Company’s expense, requires management’s attention and can be a disadvantage from a competitive standpoint with respect to non-regulated competitors and larger bank competitors.

Compliance with banking statutes and regulations is important to the Company's ability to engage in new activities and to make acquisitions. Bank regulators scrutinize banks through extensive bank examinations in both the safety and soundness and compliance areas. The results of such examinations could result in a delay in receiving required regulatory approvals for potential new activities and transactional matters. If the Company's compliance record is determined to be

unsatisfactory, such approvals may not be able to be obtained. Federal and state banking regulators also possess broad powers to take supervisory actions, as they deem appropriate. These supervisory actions may result in higher capital requirements, higher deposit insurance premiums and limitations on the Company's operations that could have a material adverse effect on its business and profitability.

In addition, the Company is subject to changes in federal and state tax laws as well as changes in banking and credit regulations, accounting principles, governmental economic and monetary policies and collection efforts by taxing authorities.

RISKS RELATED TO OPERATIONS

Cybersecurity incidents could disrupt business operations, result in the loss of critical and confidential information, and adversely impact the Company’s reputation and results of operations.

The Company’s computer systems, software and networks are regularly subject to cyber-attacks, which may result in: unauthorized access; mishandling or misuse of information; loss or destruction of data (including confidential customer information); account takeovers; unavailability of service; computer viruses or other malicious code; disruption or degradation of service; denial of service; and other events. Cyber threats may arise from human error, fraud or malice on the part of employees or third parties, including third party vendors, or may result from accidental technological failure. In addition, the party’s intent on penetrating our systems may also attempt to fraudulently induce employees, customers, third parties or other users of our systems to disclose sensitive information to gain access to the Company’s data or that of the Company’s customers.

Cybersecurity incidents, depending on their nature and scope, could potentially result in the misappropriation, destruction, corruption or unavailability of critical data and confidential or proprietary information (the Company’s own or that of third parties) and the disruption of business operations. The potential consequences of a material cybersecurity incident include reputational damage, litigation with third parties and increased cybersecurity protection and remediation costs, which in turn could adversely affect the Company’s competitiveness and results of operations. The Company carries insurance to partially offset the risk of loss; however, there can be no assurance that the policy limits or policy exclusions would adequately protect the Company from a related loss.

Potential disruption or failure of network and information processing systems and those of third-party vendors may negatively impact the Company’s operations.

The Company's business activities are dependent on its ability to accurately and timely process, record and monitor many transactions. If any of its financial, accounting, network or other information processing systems fail or have other significant shortcomings, the Company could be materially adversely affected. The Company outsources some of it processing and other activities to third party vendors. Third parties with which the Company does business could be sources of operational risk to the Company, including the risk that the third parties' own network and information processing systems could fail. Any of these occurrences could materially diminish the Company's ability to operate one or more of the Company's businesses, or cause the Company to suffer financial loss, a disruption of its business, regulatory sanctions or damage to its reputation, any of which could materially adversely affect the Company.

The Company may be subject to disruptions or failures of the Company's financial, accounting, network and information processing systems arising from events that are wholly or partially beyond the Company's control, which may include, for example, computer viruses or electrical or telecommunications outages, denial of service attacks or hacking targeting the Company's or its vendors’ networks or information processing systems or websites, natural disasters, other damage to property or physical assets or terrorist acts. The Company has developed an emergency recovery program, which includes plans to maintain or resume operations in the event of an emergency and has contingency plans if operations or systems cannot be resumed or restored. The emergency recovery program is periodically reviewed and updated, and components of the emergency recovery program are periodically tested and validated. The Company also reviews and evaluates the emergency recovery programs of vendors which provide certain third-party systems that the Company considers critical. Nevertheless, there is no guarantee that these measures or any other measures can provide absolute security. In addition, because the methods used to cause cyber-attacks change frequently or, in some cases, are not recognized until launched,

the Corporation may be unable to implement effective preventive measures or proactively address these attacks. Resulting disruptions or failures affecting any of the Company’s systems may give rise to interruption in service to customers, damage to the Company's reputation and loss or liability to the Company.

Failure by the Company to keep up with technological advancements in deployment of services and efficiency of operations may make it more vulnerable to competition.

The financial services industry is continually undergoing rapid technological change, with frequent introductions of new technology-driven products and services. The effective use of technology increases efficiency and enables financial institutions to better serve customers and to reduce costs. The Company’s future success depends, in large part, upon its ability to address the needs of its customers by using technology to provide products and services that will satisfy customer demands, as well as to create additional efficiencies in the Company’s operations. Many of the Company’s financial institution competitors have substantially greater resources to invest in technological improvements, and new payment services developed and offered by non-financial institution competitors pose an increasing threat to the traditional payment services offered by financial institutions. The Company may not be able to effectively implement new technology-driven products and services, be successful in marketing these products and services to its customers or effectively deploy new technologies to improve the efficiency of its operations. The Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act (“Genius Act”) established a regulatory framework for payments with stablecoin. Wide acceptance of stablecoin as a payment vehicle could lead to a reduction in deposits, negatively impacting Juniata’s liquidity position. Failure to successfully keep pace with technological change affecting the financial services industry could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

Further, the costs of new technology, including personnel, can be high in both absolute and relative terms. There can be no assurance, given the fast pace of change and innovation, that the Company’s technology, either purchased or developed internally, will meet or continue to meet the needs of the Company and the needs of its customers.

The Company’s potential use of artificial intelligence technologies, and future adoptions of similar technologies, could expose the Company to operational, regulatory, reputational and competitive risks.

Although the Company does not currently make significant use of artificial intelligence (“AI”), machine learning, or similar advanced data analytics technologies in its operations, the financial services industry is increasingly incorporating AI-enabled tools in areas such as credit underwriting, fraud detection, customer service, compliance monitoring, cybersecurity and marketing. As competition and customer expectations evolve, Juniata may determine to expand its use of AI technologies, including through internally developed systems or third-party service providers.

The implementation or expansion of AI technologies could introduce new and complex risks. AI systems may produce inaccurate, biased, or otherwise flawed outputs, including due to errors in design, data inputs, training methodologies, or model governance. If the Company relies on AI systems in credit decisioning, risk management, customer interactions, fraud detection, or other material functions, such systems may result in unintended discriminatory effects, inappropriate credit decisions, regulatory non-compliance, customer harm, or financial loss. In addition, AI systems may be vulnerable to cyberattacks, data manipulation, or other security breaches, including emerging forms of fraud such as deepfake impersonation or automated social engineering.

Even though Juniata does not directly deploy AI technologies, its third-party service providers, including core processors, fintech partners and other vendors, may incorporate AI into the products and services they provide to Juniata. The Company may have limited visibility into, or control over, the development, governance, testing, or regulatory compliance of such systems. Failures, misconduct or deficiencies in third-party AI systems could disrupt our operations, expose Juniata to legal or regulatory liability, or damage our reputation.

The regulatory environment relating to AI is rapidly evolving at the federal and state levels, and supervisory expectations applicable to banking organizations may develop more quickly than formal rulemaking. New or changing laws, regulations, model risk management expectations, consumer protection standards, fair lending requirements, data privacy obligations or guidance concerning AI governance and transparency could increase the Company’s compliance costs,

require changes to its risk management framework, limit its ability to use certain technologies, or subject it to supervisory criticism, enforcement actions or civil liability.

Conversely, if Juniata is slower than competitors in adopting AI technologies or fails to implement them effectively, it may experience competitive disadvantages, including higher operating costs, less effective fraud detection, slower customer service, reduced marketing effectiveness or diminished ability to attract and retain customers and employees. Any of these risks could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

The Company may not be able to attract and retain skilled people.

The Company’s success depends, in large part, on its ability to attract and retain skilled people. The unexpected loss of services of one or more of the Company’s key personnel could have a material adverse impact on the Company's business because of their skills, knowledge of the Company's operations and markets, industry experience and the difficulty of promptly finding qualified replacement personnel. Our ability to attract and retain skilled personnel cost effectively is subject to a variety of external factors, including the limited availability of qualified personnel in the workforce in the local markets in which we operate, unemployment levels within those markets, prevailing wage rates, which have increased significantly, and health and other insurance costs. Furthermore, the complexities introduced into the labor market because of the transition to increased work-from-home arrangements have impacted the competitive landscape in our labor market. Based on current conditions in the labor market, we have experienced some difficulty in retaining and attracting personnel and there is no assurance we will be able to continue to successfully do so.

ECONOMIC AND CREDIT RISKS

General economic conditions may harm the Company’s industry, business and results of operations.

Various aspects of our business could be impacted by general macroeconomic conditions including, among others, inflation, interest rates, supply chain complications and economic uncertainty. These economic uncertainties may be compounded by international conflicts and the related economic volatility could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and liquidity. These unfavorable economic conditions could, among other things, impact the value of our securities portfolio, impact our net interest margin, adversely impact our customers’ ability to make payments on floating rate loans, if interest rates rise, and increase the risk of default by our customers experiencing financial difficulties and business disruptions.

Difficult economic conditions and real estate markets, including protracted periods of low growth and sluggish loan demand, can negatively impact the Company’s income, and result in higher charge-offs as borrowers’ ability to repay is negatively impacted by those conditions.

Lending money is an essential part of the banking business, and the revenues derived from lending activities are the most significant segment of the Company’s income statement. Extended periods of sluggish loan demand can materially affect the composition of the Company’s consolidated statement of financial condition, reducing the ratio of loans to deposits, and the Company’s profitability. Adverse changes in the economy and real estate markets and the duration of economic downturns can negatively affect the solvency of businesses and consumers. Borrowers’ inability to repay loans causes increases in non-performing assets, which may result in elevated collection and carrying costs related to such non-performing assets and increases in loan charge-offs, significantly impacting the credit loss provision charged to earnings to fund the allowance for credit losses. The risk of non-payment is affected by credit risks of the borrower, changes in economic and industry conditions, the duration of the loan and, in the case of a collateralized loan, uncertainties as to the future value of the collateral supporting the loan. Historically, commercial loans have presented a greater risk of non-payment than consumer loans. The application of various federal and state laws, including bankruptcy and insolvency laws, may limit the amount that can be recovered on these loans.

The Company has established an allowance for credit losses that management believes to be adequate to absorb expected losses on the Company’s existing loans. However, there is no precise method of estimating credit losses. The Company determines the appropriate level of the allowance for credit losses based on many quantitative and qualitative factors,

including, but not limited to, the size and composition of the loan portfolio; changes in risk ratings; changes in collateral values; delinquency levels; historical losses; and economic conditions. In addition, as the Company’s loan portfolio grows, it will generally be necessary to increase the allowance for credit losses through additional credit loss provisions, which will impact the Company’s operating results. If the Company’s assumptions and judgments regarding such matters prove to be inaccurate, its allowance for credit losses might not be sufficient, and additional provisions for credit losses might need to be made. Depending on the amount of such provisions for credit losses, the adverse impact on the Company’s earnings could be material. Also, there can be no assurance that any future declines in real estate market conditions, general economic conditions or changes in regulatory policies will not require the Company to increase its allowance for credit losses, through additional credit loss provisions, which could reduce earnings.

Investment securities losses could negatively impact the Company’s results of operations.

Price fluctuations in securities markets, as well as other market events, could have an impact on the Company’s results of operations. As described below, the Company’s holding of certain securities and the revenues the Company earns from its trust and investment management services business are particularly sensitive to those events:

As of December 31, 2025, the Company’s equity investments were comprised primarily of publicly traded financial institutions. The value of the securities in the Company’s equity portfolio may be affected by several factors. General economic conditions and uncertainty surrounding the financial institution sector impacts the value of these securities. Equity investments are stated at fair value with realized and unrealized gains and losses reported in net income. General declines in bank stock values, as well as deterioration in the performance of specific banks, are reflected on the Consolidated Statements of Income.

As of December 31, 2025, the Company had approximately $6.3 million of municipal securities issued by various municipalities in its investment portfolio. Uncertainty with respect to the financial viability of municipal insurers places greater emphasis on the underlying strength of issuers. Increasing pressure on local tax revenues of issuers due to adverse economic conditions could also have a negative impact on the underlying credit quality of issuers.

The Company’s investment management and trust services revenue is also impacted by fluctuations in the securities markets. A portion of this revenue is based on the value of the underlying investment portfolios. If the values of those investment portfolios decrease, whether due to factors influencing U.S. securities markets in general or otherwise, the Company’s revenue could be negatively impacted. In addition, the Company’s ability to sell its brokerage services is dependent, in part, upon consumers’ level of confidence in securities markets.

The Company may be negatively impacted by customer and regulatory reaction to unrelated bank failures.

In 2023, four highly publicized bank failures occurred. These banks had elevated levels of uninsured deposits, which may be less likely to remain at the bank over time and less stable as a source of funding than insured deposits. These failures led to volatility and declines in the market for bank stocks and questions about depositor confidence in depository institutions. As a result of these failures, there continues to be an increased customer and regulatory focus on funding and liquidity at financial institutions, the composition of their deposits, including the number of uninsured deposits, the amount of accumulated other comprehensive losses, capital levels and interest rate risk management. If we are unable to meet the liquidity expectations of our customers and regulatory agencies, it may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

RISKS RELATED TO INVESTMENT IN THE COMPANY’S STOCK

The Company is a holding company and relies on dividends from its subsidiaries for substantially all of its revenue and its ability to make dividends, distributions and other payments.

The Company is a separate and distinct legal entity from the Bank and depends on the payment of dividends from the Bank for substantially all of its revenues. As a result, the Company's ability to make dividend payments on its common stock depends primarily on certain federal and state regulatory considerations and the receipt of dividends and other distributions from its subsidiaries. There are various regulatory and prudential supervisory restrictions, which may change from time to time, that impact the ability of the Bank to pay dividends or make other payments to the Company. There can be no assurance that the Bank will be able to pay dividends at past levels, or at all, in the future. If the Company does not receive enough cash dividends or is unable to borrow from the Bank, then the Company may not have enough funds to pay dividends to its shareholders, repurchase its common stock or service its debt obligations.

"Anti-takeover" provisions may keep shareholders from receiving a premium for their shares.

The Articles of Incorporation of the Company presently contain certain provisions, such as staggered Board of Directors terms and super majority voting requirements for transactions not approved by the Company’s Board of Directors, which may be deemed to be "anti-takeover" in nature. As such, these provisions may deter, discourage or make more difficult the assumption of control of the Company by another company or person through a tender offer, merger, proxy contest or similar transaction or series of transactions. In addition, provisions of Pennsylvania and applicable federal banking laws could similarly make it more difficult for a third party to acquire control of the Company. The overall effects of the "anti-takeover” provisions may be to discourage, make costlier or more difficult, or prevent a future takeover offer, even if shareholders may desire the Company to pursue the takeover offer. These provisions may also increase the possibility that a future bidder for control of the Company will be required to act through arms-length negotiation with the Company’s Board of Directors.

If the Company fails to maintain an effective system of internal controls, it may not be able to accurately report its financial results or prevent fraud. As a result, current and potential shareholders could lose confidence in the Company’s financial reporting, which could harm its business and the trading price of its common stock.

The Company has established a process to document and evaluate its internal controls over financial reporting to satisfy the requirements of Section 404(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and related regulations, which require annual management assessments of the effectiveness of the Company’s internal controls over financial reporting. In this regard, management has dedicated internal resources, engaged outside consultants and adopted a detailed work plan to (i) assess and document the adequacy of internal controls over financial reporting, (ii) take steps to improve control processes, where appropriate, (iii) validate through testing that controls are functioning as documented and (iv) maintain a continuous reporting and improvement process for internal control over financial reporting.

The Company’s efforts to comply with Section 404(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the related regulations regarding the Company’s assessment of its internal controls over financial reporting are likely to continue to result in increased expenses. The Company’s management and audit committee have given the Company’s compliance with Section 404(a) a high priority. The Company cannot be certain that these measures will ensure that the Company implements and maintains adequate controls over its financial processes and reporting in the future. Any failure to implement required new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation, could harm the Company’s operating results or cause the Company to fail to meet its reporting obligations. If the Company fails to correct any issues in the design or operating effectiveness of internal controls over financial reporting or fails to prevent fraud, current and potential shareholders could lose confidence in the Company’s financial reporting, which could harm its business and the trading price of its common stock.