Mastercard Inc

Previous wording

Central banks and similar regulatory bodies have increasingly established or further expanded their authority over certain aspects of payments systems such as ours, including obligations or restrictions with respect to the types of products and services that we may offer, the countries in which our products and services may be used, the way we structure and operate our business and the types of consumers and merchants who can obtain or accept our products or services. Similarly, jurisdictions that regulate a particular product may consider extending their jurisdiction to other products. For example, debit regulations could lead to regulation of credit products. Moreover, several jurisdictions are demonstrating increased interest about the network fees we charge to our customers (in some cases as part of broader market reviews of retail payments), which could in the future lead to regulation of our network fees. In several jurisdictions, we have been designated as a “systemically important payment system”, with other regulators considering similar designations. This type of regulation and oversight is related to switching activities (authorization, clearing and settlement), and includes policies, procedures and requirements related to risk management, collateral, participant default, timely switching of financial transactions, and capital and financial resources. Parts of our business have also been deemed as a “specified service provider” or considered “critical infrastructure”. The impact to our business created by any new law, regulation or designation is magnified by the potential it has to be replicated in, or conflict with, other jurisdictions, or involve other products within any particular jurisdiction.

Current wording

Central banks and similar regulatory bodies have increasingly established or further expanded their authority over certain aspects of payments systems such as ours, including obligations or restrictions with respect to the types of products and services that we may offer, the countries in which our products and services may be used, the way we structure and operate our business and the types of consumers and merchants who can obtain or accept our products or services. Similarly, jurisdictions that regulate a particular product may consider extending their jurisdiction to other products. For example, debit regulations could lead to regulation of credit products. Moreover, several jurisdictions are demonstrating increased interest about the network fees we charge to our customers (in some cases as part of broader market reviews of retail payments), which could in the future lead to regulation relating to our network fees. In several jurisdictions, we have been designated as a “systemically important payment system”, with other regulators considering similar designations. This type of regulation and oversight is related to switching activities, and includes policies, procedures and requirements related to risk management, collateral, participant default, timely switching of financial transactions, and capital and financial resources. Parts of our business have also been deemed as a “specified service provider” or considered “critical infrastructure”. The impact to our business created by any new law, regulation or designation is magnified by the potential it has to be replicated in, or conflict with, other jurisdictions, or involve other products within any particular jurisdiction.

Previous wording

The expansion of our products and services as part of our multi-rail strategy has also created the need for us to obtain new types and increasing numbers of regulatory licenses, resulting in increased supervision and additional compliance burdens distinct from those imposed on our core payment network activities. For example, certain of our subsidiaries maintain money transfer licenses to support certain activities. These licenses typically impose supervisory and examination requirements, as well as capital, safeguarding, risk management and other business obligations.

Current wording

Our strategic expansion of our products and services has also created the need for us to obtain new types and increasing numbers of regulatory licenses, resulting in increased supervision and additional compliance burdens distinct from those imposed on our payment network activities. For example, certain of our subsidiaries maintain money transfer licenses that typically impose supervisory and examination requirements, as well as capital, safeguarding, risk management and other business obligations.

Previous wording

Increased regulation and oversight of payments systems, as well as increased exposure to regulation resulting from changes to our products and services, have resulted and may continue to result in significant compliance and governance burdens or otherwise increase our costs. As a result, customers could be less willing to participate in our payments system and/or use our other products or services, reduce the benefits offered in connection with the use of our products (making our products less desirable to consumers), reduce the volume of domestic and cross-border transactions or other operational metrics, disintermediate us, impact our profitability and/or limit our ability to innovate or offer differentiated products and services, all of which could materially and adversely impact our financial performance. In addition, any regulation that is enacted related to the type and level of network fees

Current wording

Increased regulation and oversight of payments systems, as well as increased exposure to regulation resulting from changes to our products and services, have resulted and may continue to result in significant compliance and governance burdens or otherwise increase our costs. As a result, customers could be less willing to participate in our payments system and/or use our other products or services, reduce the benefits offered in connection with the use of our products (making our products less desirable to consumers), reduce the volume of domestic and cross-border transactions or other operational metrics, disintermediate us, impact our profitability and/or limit our ability to innovate or offer differentiated products and services, all of which could materially and adversely impact our financial performance. In addition, any regulation that is enacted related to the type and level of network fees we charge our customers could also materially and adversely impact our results of operations. Regulators could also require us to obtain prior approval for changes to our system rules, procedures or operations, or could require customization with regard to such

Previous wording

we charge our customers could also materially and adversely impact our results of operations. Regulators could also require us to obtain prior approval for changes to our system rules, procedures or operations, or could require customization with regard to such changes, which could negatively impact us. Moreover, failure to comply with the laws and regulations to which we are subject could result in fines, sanctions, civil damages or other penalties, which could materially and adversely affect our overall business and results of operations, as well as have an impact on our brand and reputation.

Current wording

changes, which could negatively impact us. Moreover, failure to comply with the laws and regulations to which we are subject could result in fines, sanctions, civil damages or other penalties, which could materially and adversely affect our overall business and results of operations, as well as have an impact on our brand and reputation.

Previous wording

Increased regulatory, legislative and litigation activity with respect to interchange rates could have an adverse impact on our business.

Current wording

Increased activity with respect to interchange rates could have an adverse impact on our business.

Previous wording

Interchange rates are a significant component of the costs that merchants pay in connection with the acceptance of products associated with our core payment network. Although we do not earn revenues from interchange, interchange rates can impact the volume of transactions we see on our payment products. If interchange rates are too high, merchants may stop accepting our products or route transactions away from our network. If interchange rates are too low, issuers may stop promoting our products and services, eliminate or reduce loyalty rewards programs or other account holder benefits (e.g., free checking or low interest rates on balances), or charge fees to account holders (e.g., annual fees or late payment fees).

Current wording

Interchange rates are a significant component of the costs that merchants pay in connection with the acceptance of products associated with our payment network. Although we do not earn revenues from interchange, interchange rates can impact the volume of transactions we see on our payment products. If interchange rates are too high, merchants may stop accepting our products or route transactions away from our network. If interchange rates are too low, issuers may stop promoting our products and services, eliminate or reduce loyalty rewards programs or other account holder benefits (e.g., free checking or low interest rates on balances), or charge fees to account holders (e.g., annual fees or late payment fees).

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

Preferential and protective government actions related to domestic payment services could adversely affect our ability to maintain or increase our revenues.

Current wording

Preferential or protective government actions related to domestic payment services could adversely affect our ability to maintain or increase our revenues.

Previous wording

Governments in some countries have acted, or in the future may act, to provide resources, preferential treatment or other protection to selected national payment and switching providers, or have created, or may in the future create, their own national provider. This action may displace us from, prevent us from entering into, or substantially restrict us from participating in, particular geographies, and may prevent us from competing effectively against those providers. For example:

Current wording

Governments in some countries have acted, or in the future may act, to provide resources, preferential treatment or other protection to selected national or domestic payment and switching providers, or have created, or may in the future create, their own national provider. These actions may displace us from, prevent us from entering into, or substantially restrict us from participating in, particular geographies, and may prevent us from competing effectively against those providers. For example:

Previous wording

•Some jurisdictions have implemented, or are considering, requirements to collect, store and/or process data within their borders, as well as prohibitions on the transfer of data abroad, leading to technological and operational implications as well as increased compliance burdens and other costs.

Current wording

•Some jurisdictions have implemented, or are considering implementing, requirements to collect, store and/or process data within their borders, as well as prohibitions on the transfer of data abroad, leading to technological and operational implications as well as increased compliance burdens and other costs.

Previous wording

•Geopolitical events (such as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine) and resulting OFAC sanctions, adverse trade policies, enforcement of U.S. laws related to countering the financing of terrorism, economic sanctions and anti-corruption, or other types of government actions could lead affected or other jurisdictions to take actions in response that could adversely affect our business. Moreover, given our decision to suspend business operations in Russia, other separate jurisdictions may decide to begin to or increase their focus on growing local payment networks and other solutions.

Current wording

•Geopolitical events and any resulting OFAC sanctions, adverse trade policies, enforcement of U.S. laws related to countering the financing of terrorism, economic sanctions and anti-corruption, or other types of government actions could lead affected or other jurisdictions to take actions in response that could adversely affect our business. Moreover, because of various concerns

Previous wording

•Governments have been increasingly creating and expanding local payments structures (such as the Brazilian Instant Payment System-PIX, FedNow in the U.S. and UPI in India), which are increasingly being considered as alternatives to traditional domestic payment solutions and schemes such as ours.

Current wording

•Governments have been increasingly creating and expanding local payments structures, which are increasingly being considered as alternatives to traditional domestic payment solutions and schemes such as ours.

Previous wording

We are subject to increasingly complex, fragmented and divergent laws and regulations related to privacy and data protection, data use and governance, AI and information security in the jurisdictions in which we do business. While policymakers around the globe look to the EU and the GDPR when adopting new or updated privacy and data protection laws, divergences have occurred and continue to occur. As a result, new or updated privacy and data protection and information security laws and regulations have led, and may continue to lead, to similar, stricter or at times conflicting requirements, creating an uncertain regulatory environment. For example, some jurisdictions have implemented or are otherwise considering requirements to collect, store and/or process data within their borders, as well as prohibitions on the transfer of data abroad, leading to technological and operational implications. Other jurisdictions have adopted or are otherwise considering adopting sector-specific regulations for the payments industry and other industries in which we participate, including forced data sharing requirements or additional verification requirements. In addition, laws and regulations on AI, data governance and credit decisioning may overlap or conflict with, or diverge from, general privacy rules. Overall, these myriad laws and regulations may require us to modify our data processing practices and policies, incur substantial compliance-related costs and expenses, and otherwise suffer adverse impacts on our business. Failure to comply with any of these laws, regulations and requirements could result in fines, sanctions or other enforcement actions or penalties, which could materially and adversely affect our results of operations and overall business, as well as have an impact on our reputation.

Current wording

We are subject to increasingly complex, fragmented and divergent laws and regulations related to privacy and data protection, data use and governance, AI and information security in the jurisdictions in which we do business. While policymakers around the globe often look to the EU and the GDPR when adopting new or updated privacy and data protection laws, divergences have occurred and continue to occur. As a result, new or updated privacy and data protection and information security laws and regulations have led, and may continue to lead, to similar, stricter or at times conflicting requirements, creating an uncertain regulatory environment. For example, some jurisdictions have implemented or are otherwise considering requirements to collect, store and/or process data within their borders, as well as prohibitions on the transfer of data abroad, leading to technological and operational implications. Other jurisdictions have adopted or are otherwise considering adopting sector-specific regulations for the payments industry and other industries in which we participate, including forced data sharing requirements or additional verification requirements. In addition, laws and regulations on AI, data governance and credit decisioning may overlap or conflict with, or diverge from, general privacy rules. Overall, these myriad laws and regulations may require us to modify or limit our data processing practices and policies, incur substantial compliance-related costs and expenses, and otherwise suffer adverse impacts on our business. Failure to comply with any of these laws, regulations and requirements (including as a result of conflicting regulations) could result in fines, sanctions or other enforcement actions or penalties, which could materially and adversely affect our results of operations and overall business, as well as have an impact on our reputation.

Previous wording

As a user and deployer of AI technology, we are also subject to increasing and evolving laws and regulations related to AI governance and new applications of existing laws and regulations to AI. How our use and deployment of AI will be regulated remains uncertain given the uncertainty that exists as to how AI technology will develop. In addition, the use of AI creates or amplifies risks that are challenging to fully prevent or mitigate. In particular, AI algorithms may generate inaccurate, unintended, unfair or discriminatory outcomes, which may not be easily detectable or explainable, and may inadvertently breach intellectual property, privacy or other rights, as well as confidential information. Our implementation of robust AI governance and risk management frameworks aimed at complying with emerging laws and regulations may not be sufficient protection against these emerging risks.

Current wording

As a user and deployer of AI technology, we are also subject to increasing and evolving laws and regulations related to AI governance, including the EU AI Act, and new applications of existing laws and regulations to AI. How our use and deployment of AI will be regulated is still developing as policymakers around the world consider how to regulate AI, and uncertainty remains as to how AI technology will continue to advance. In addition, the use of AI creates or amplifies risks that are challenging to fully prevent or mitigate. In particular, AI algorithms may generate inaccurate, unintended, unfair, biased or discriminatory outcomes (which may not be easily detectable or explainable) and may inadvertently disclose confidential information and/or breach intellectual property, privacy or other rights. Our implementation of robust AI governance and risk management frameworks aimed at complying with emerging laws and regulations may not be sufficient protection against these emerging risks.

Previous wording

Further, as we acquire new companies and develop integrated and personalized products and services to meet the needs of a changing marketplace, we have expanded our data profile through additional data types and sources, across multiple channels, and involving new partners. This expansion has amplified the impact of these various laws and regulations on our business. As a result, we are required to constantly monitor our data practices and potentially change them when necessary or appropriate. We also need to provide increased care in our data management, governance and quality practices, particularly as it relates to the use of data in products leveraging AI.

Current wording

Further, as we acquire new companies and develop integrated and personalized products and services to meet the needs of a changing marketplace, we have expanded and may further expand our data profile through additional data types and sources, across multiple channels, and involving new partners. This expansion has amplified and may continue to amplify the impact of these various laws and regulations on our business or subject us to new laws and regulations. For example, our acquisition of Recorded Future, a global threat intelligence company, increases our exposure to certain laws and regulations, including global cybercrime and other laws and regulations in various jurisdictions. As a result, we are required to constantly monitor our data practices and potentially change them when necessary or appropriate. We also need to provide increased care in our data management, governance and quality practices, particularly as it relates to the use of data in products leveraging AI.

Previous wording

New requirements or changing interpretations of existing requirements in these areas, or the development of new regulatory schemes related to the digital economy in general, may also increase our costs and/or restrict our ability to leverage data or use AI for innovation. This could impact the products and services we offer and other aspects of our business, such as fraud monitoring, the need for improved data management, governance and quality practices, the development of information-based products and solutions, and technology operations. In addition, these requirements may increase the costs to our customers of issuing payment

Current wording

New requirements and rules, or changing interpretations of existing requirements in these areas, or the development of new regulatory schemes related to the digital economy in general, may also increase our costs and/or restrict our ability to leverage data or use AI for innovation. This could impact the products and services we offer and other aspects of our business, such as fraud monitoring, the need for improved data management, governance and quality practices, the development of information-based products and solutions, and technology operations. In addition, these requirements may increase the costs to our customers of

Previous wording

products or using information products, which may, in turn, decrease the number of our products that they offer. While we intend to comply with all regulatory requirements, innovate responsibly and deploy Privacy by Design, Data by Design and AI Governance approaches to all of our product development, the speed and pace of changes in laws (as well as stakeholder interests) may not allow us to meet rapidly evolving regulatory and stakeholder expectations. Any of these developments could materially and adversely affect our overall business and results of operations.

Current wording

issuing payment products or using information products, which may, in turn, decrease the number of our products that they offer. While we intend to comply with all regulatory requirements, innovate responsibly and deploy Privacy by Design, Data by Design and AI Governance approaches to all of our product development, the speed and pace of changes in laws (as well as stakeholder interests) may not allow us to meet rapidly evolving regulatory and stakeholder expectations. Any of these developments could materially and adversely affect our overall business and results of operations.

Previous wording

•Issuer and Acquirer Practices Legislation and Regulation - Certain regulations (such as PSD2 in the EEA) may impact various aspects of our business. For example, PSD2’s strong authentication requirement could increase the number of transactions that consumers abandon if we are unable to secure a frictionless authentication experience under these standards. An increase in the rate of abandoned transactions could adversely impact our volumes or other operational metrics.

Current wording

•Issuer and Acquirer Practices Legislation and Regulation. Certain regulations that impact our issuers and acquirers may impact various aspects of our business. For example, strong authentication requirements within the EU’s Payment Services Directive in the EEA could increase the number of transactions consumers abandon if we are unable to secure a frictionless authentication experience under these standards. Such an increase could adversely impact our volumes or other operational metrics.

Previous wording

Increased regulatory focus on us has resulted and may continue to result in significant compliance and governance burdens or otherwise increase our costs. Similarly, increased regulatory focus on our customers may cause such customers to reduce the volume of transactions processed through our systems, or may otherwise impact the competitiveness of our products. Actions by regulators could influence other organizations around the world to enact or consider adopting similar measures, amplifying any potential compliance burden. Additionally, our compliance with new economic sanctions and related laws with respect to particular jurisdictions or customers could result in a loss of business, which could be significant. Moreover, while our risk-based compliance program obligates issuers and acquirers to comply with U.S., EU and local sanctions programs (among other obligations), the failure of those issuers and acquirers to identify potential non-compliance issues either during or after their customer onboarding processes could ultimately impact our compliance with economic sanctions and related laws. Finally, failure to comply with the laws and regulations discussed above to which we are subject could result in fines, sanctions or other penalties. In particular, a violation and subsequent judgment or settlement against us, or those with whom we may be associated, under economic sanctions and AML, CFT, and anti-corruption laws could subject us to substantial monetary penalties, damages, and/or have a significant reputational impact. Each instance may individually or collectively materially and adversely affect our financial performance and/or our overall business and results of operations, as well as have an impact on our reputation.

Current wording

Increased regulatory focus on us has resulted and may continue to result in significant compliance and governance burdens or otherwise increase our costs. Similarly, increased regulatory focus on our customers and other stakeholders may cause them to reduce the volume of transactions processed through our systems, or may otherwise impact the competitiveness of our products. Actions by regulators could influence other organizations around the world to enact or consider adopting similar measures, amplifying any potential compliance burden. Additionally, our compliance with new economic sanctions and related laws with respect to particular jurisdictions or customers could result in a loss of business, which could be significant. Moreover, while our risk-based compliance program obligates issuers and acquirers to comply with U.S., EU and local sanctions programs (among other obligations), the failure of those issuers and acquirers to identify potential non-compliance issues either during or after their customer onboarding processes could ultimately impact our compliance with economic sanctions and related laws. Finally, failure to comply with the laws and regulations discussed above to which we are subject could result in fines, sanctions or other penalties. In particular, a violation and subsequent judgment or settlement against us, or those with whom we may be associated, under economic sanctions and AML, CFT, and anti-corruption laws could subject us to substantial monetary penalties, damages, and/or have a significant reputational impact. Each instance may individually or collectively materially and adversely affect our financial performance and/or our overall business and results of operations, as well as have an impact on our reputation.

Previous wording

We are subject to tax laws and regulations of the U.S. federal, state and local governments as well as various non-U.S. jurisdictions. Current and potential future changes in existing tax laws, including regulatory guidance, are continuously being considered and have been or may be enacted (such as guidelines issued by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) which impact how multinational enterprises are taxed on their global profits). These changes have and in the future may continue to have an impact on our effective income tax rate and tax payments. Similarly, changes in tax laws and regulations that impact our customers and counterparties, or the economy generally, have impacted and may continue to impact us as well.

Current wording

We are subject to tax laws and regulations of the U.S. federal, state and local governments as well as various non-U.S. jurisdictions. Current and potential future changes in existing tax laws, including regulatory guidance, are continuously being considered and have been or may be enacted (such as guidelines issued by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) which impact how multinational enterprises are taxed on their global profits). These changes have and in the future may continue to have an impact on our effective income tax rate and tax payments. Similarly, changes in tax laws and regulations that impact our customers and counterparties, or the economy generally, have impacted and may continue to impact us.

Previous wording

Certain limitations have been placed on our business in recent years because of litigation and litigation settlements, such as changes to our no-surcharge rule in the U.S. and Canada. Any future limitations on our business resulting from the outcomes of any litigation or regulatory proceeding, including any changes to our rules or business practices, could impact our relationships with our customers, including reducing the volume of business that we do with them, which may materially and adversely affect our overall business and results of operations.

Current wording

Certain limitations have been placed on our business because of litigation and litigation settlements, such as changes to our no-surcharge rule in the U.S. and Canada. Any future limitations resulting from the outcomes of any litigation or regulatory proceeding, including any changes to our rules or business practices, could impact our relationships with our customers, including reducing the volume of business that we do with them, which may materially and adversely affect our overall business and results of operations.

Previous wording

The global payments industry is highly competitive. Our payment programs compete against competitors both within and outside of the global payments industry and compete in all payment categories, including paper-based payments and all forms of electronic payments. We compete against general purpose payments networks, debit and local networks, ACH and real-time account-based payments systems, digital wallets and other fintechs (focused on online activity across various channels and processing payments using in-house capabilities), government-backed networks and digital currencies. We also face competition from companies that provide alternatives to our value-added services and new adjacent network capabilities (including open banking and digital identity).

Current wording

The global payments industry is highly competitive. Our payment programs compete against competitors both within and outside of the global payments industry and compete in all payment categories, including paper-based payments and all forms of electronic payments. We compete against general purpose payments networks, debit and local networks, ACH and real-time account-based payments systems, digital wallets and other fintechs (focused on online activity across various channels and processing payments using in-house capabilities), digital public infrastructure and other government-backed solutions and digital currencies. We also face competition from companies that provide alternatives to our services and other solutions.

Previous wording

Our traditional competitors may have substantially greater financial and other resources than we have, may offer a wider range of programs, services, and payment capabilities than we offer or may use more effective advertising and marketing strategies to achieve broader brand recognition and merchant acceptance than we have. They may also introduce their own innovative programs, value-added services and capabilities that adversely impact our growth.

Current wording

Our traditional competitors may have substantially greater financial and other resources than we have, may offer a wider range of programs, services, and payment capabilities than we offer or may use more effective advertising and marketing strategies to achieve broader brand recognition and merchant acceptance than we have. They may also introduce their own innovative programs, services and capabilities that adversely impact our growth.

Previous wording

Certain of our competitors to our core payment network operate three-party payments systems with direct connections to both merchants and consumers, potentially providing competitive advantages. If we continue to attract more regulatory scrutiny than these competitors because we operate a four-party system, or we are regulated because of the system we operate in a way in which our competitors are not, we could lose business to these competitors. See “Business - Competition” in Part I, Item 1.

Current wording

Certain of our competitors to our payment network operate three-party payments systems with direct connections to both merchants and consumers, potentially providing competitive advantages. If we continue to attract more regulatory scrutiny than these competitors because we operate a four-party system, or we are regulated because of the system we operate in a way in which our competitors are not, we could lose business to these competitors. See “Business - Competition” in Part I, Item 1.

Previous wording

Certain of our competitors have developed alternative payments systems, e-commerce payments systems and payments systems for mobile devices, as well as physical store locations. A number of these competitors rely principally on technology to support their services that provides cost advantages, and as a result may enjoy lower costs than we do. Many of these competitors are also able to use existing payment networks without being subject to many of the associated costs. Moreover, these competitors also occupy various roles in the payments ecosystem that enable them to influence payment choice of other participants. Any of these factors could put us at a competitive disadvantage.

Current wording

Certain of our competitors have developed alternative, e-commerce and/or mobile device payments systems, as well as physical store locations. A number of these competitors rely principally on technology to support their services that provides cost advantages, and as a result may benefit from lower costs than we do. Many of these competitors are also able to use existing payment networks without being subject to many of the associated costs. Moreover, these competitors also occupy various roles in the payments ecosystem that enable them to influence payment choice of other participants. With respect to government-backed solutions, including those involving DPI, government participation in structures could prevent us from entering into, or substantially restrict us from participating in, particular geographies. Any of these factors could put us at a competitive disadvantage.

Previous wording

As the payments industry continues to develop and change, we face disintermediation and related risks, including:

Current wording

As the payments industry continues to develop and change, we face disintermediation and related risks, including the following:

Previous wording

•Parties that process our transactions in certain countries may try to eliminate our position as an intermediary in the payment process. For example, merchants could switch (and in some cases are switching) transactions directly with issuers. Additionally, processors could process transactions directly between issuers and acquirers. Large scale consolidation within processors could result in these processors developing bilateral agreements or in some cases switching the entire transaction on their own network, thereby disintermediating us.

Current wording

•Parties that process our transactions in certain countries (such as merchants and third-party payment processors) may try to eliminate our position as an intermediary in the payment process by switching transactions directly with issuers or processing transactions directly between issuers and acquirers.

Previous wording

•Competitors, customers, fintechs, technology companies, governments and other industry participants may develop products that compete with or replace products and services we currently provide to support our switched transaction and payments offerings. These products could either replace, or force us to change our pricing or practices, for these offerings. In addition, governments that develop or encourage the creation of national or international payments platforms may promote their platforms in such a way that could put us at a competitive disadvantage in those markets, or require us to compete differently.

Current wording

•Payments industry participants may develop their own products and services to support our switched transaction and payments offerings, forcing us to change our pricing or practices for our own offerings in order to compete. In addition, governments may promote their own national or international payments platforms, potentially putting us at a competitive disadvantage in those markets, or requiring us to compete differently. Moreover, as central banks experiment with CBDCs, policies and design considerations that governments adopt could impact the extent of our role in facilitating CBDC-based payment transactions, potentially impacting the transactions that we may process over our network.

Previous wording

•Industry participants continue to invest in and develop alternative capabilities, such as account-based payments, which could facilitate P2M transactions that compete with both our core payment network and our additional payment capabilities.

Current wording

•Payments industry participants continue to invest in and develop alternative capabilities, such as account-based payments, which could facilitate P2M transactions that compete with both our payment network and our additional payments capabilities.

Previous wording

•Although we partner with fintechs and technology companies (such as digital players and mobile providers) that leverage our technology, platforms and networks to deliver their products, they could develop platforms or networks that disintermediate us from digital payments and impact our ability to compete in the digital economy. These companies may also develop products or services that compete with our customers within the payments ecosystem and, as a result, could diminish demand for our products and services. When we do partner with fintechs and technology companies, we face a heightened risk when we share data as part of those relationships. While we share this data in a controlled manner subject to applicable anonymization and privacy and data standards, sharing this data without proper oversight could provide partners with a competitive advantage.

Current wording

•Fintechs and technology companies could develop platforms or networks that disintermediate us from digital payments as well as develop products or services that compete with our customers and could diminish demand for our products and services. In addition, we face a heightened risk that data we share with these companies as part of our products and services could be used in a way that could put us at a competitive disadvantage.

Previous wording

•Participants in the payments industry may merge, create joint ventures or form other business combinations that may strengthen their existing business services or create new payment products and services that compete with our products and services.

Current wording

•Payments industry participants may merge, create joint ventures or form other business combinations that may strengthen their existing business services, leverage other business models to create a competitive edge over us or create new payment products and services that compete with our products and services.

Previous wording

•Regulation (such as PSD2 in the EEA) may disintermediate issuers by enabling third-party providers opportunities to route payment transactions away from our network and products and towards other forms of payment by offering account information or payment initiation services directly to those who currently use our products. Such regulation may also provide these processors with the opportunity to commoditize the data that are included in the transactions they are servicing. If our customers are disintermediated in their business, we could face diminished demand for our products and services.

Current wording

•Regulation may disintermediate issuers by enabling third-party providers opportunities to route payment transactions toward their own forms of payment by offering account information or payment initiation services directly to our product users. Such regulation may also provide these processors with the opportunity to commoditize the data that are included in the transactions they are servicing. Disintermediation of our customers’ business could diminish demand for our products and services.

Previous wording

In order to increase transaction volumes, enter new markets and expand our products and services, we seek to enter into business agreements with customers through which we offer incentives, pricing discounts and other support that promote our products. In order to stay competitive, we may have to increase the amount of these incentives and pricing discounts so as to meet customer demand for better pricing arrangements and greater rebates and incentives, which moderates our growth. Our inability to switch additional transaction volumes or to provide additional services to our customers at levels sufficient to compensate for such lower fees or increased costs in the future could materially and adversely affect our overall business and results of operations. In addition, increased pressure on prices increases the importance of cost containment and productivity initiatives in areas other than those relating to customer incentives.

Current wording

In order to increase transaction volumes, enter new markets and expand our products and services, we seek to enter into business agreements with customers through which we offer incentives, pricing discounts and other support that promote our products. In order to stay competitive, we may have to increase the amount of these incentives and pricing discounts so as to meet customer demand for better pricing arrangements and greater rebates and incentives. As a result, we may not be able to grow our volume and/or services enough to compensate for the additional costs related to these increased incentives and pricing discounts. In addition, increased pressure on prices increases the importance of cost containment and productivity initiatives in areas other than those relating to customer incentives.

Previous wording

In the future, we may not be able to enter into agreements with our customers if they require terms that we are unable or unwilling to offer, and we may be required to modify existing agreements in order to maintain relationships and to compete with others in the industry. Some of our competitors are larger with greater financial resources and accordingly may be able to charge lower prices to our customers. In addition, to the extent that we offer discounts or incentives under such agreements, we will need to further increase transaction volumes or the amount of services provided in order to benefit from such agreements and to increase revenue and profit, and we may not be successful in doing so, particularly in the current regulatory environment. Our customers also may implement cost reduction initiatives that reduce or eliminate payment product marketing or increase requests for greater incentives or greater cost stability. These factors could have a material adverse impact on our overall business and results of operations.

Current wording

In the future, we may not be able to enter into agreements with our customers if they require terms that we are unable or unwilling to offer, and we may be required to modify existing agreements in order to maintain relationships and compete with others in the industry. Some of our competitors are larger with greater financial resources and accordingly may be able to charge lower prices. In addition, to the extent that we offer discounts or incentives under such agreements, we will need to further increase transaction volumes or the amount of services provided in order to benefit from such agreements and to increase revenue and profit, and we may not be successful in doing so, particularly in the current regulatory environment. Our customers also may implement cost reduction initiatives that reduce or eliminate payment product marketing or increase requests for greater incentives or greater cost stability. In addition to decisions made by competitors and customers, we also face pressure from pricing regulation and litigation.

Previous wording

Additionally, we face pricing pressure related to real-time account-based payment schemes and cross-border payments (including the increased use of domestic real-time account-based payment schemes offering increasingly lower or subsidized pricing for P2M transactions as well as continued downward pressure on pricing for cross-border payments resulting from competition from real-time account-based payment schemes and from initiatives to lower the cost of cross-border payments to end users (such as the G20

Current wording

Additionally, we face pricing pressure related to real-time account-based payment schemes. These pressures impact both domestic pricing (such as the increased use of schemes that offer increasingly lower or subsidized P2M pricing) and cross-border pricing (including from both competing schemes and global initiatives to lower the cost of cross-border payments to end users).

Previous wording

•Technological changes (including continuing developments of technologies in the areas of smart cards and devices, contactless and mobile payments, e-commerce, cryptocurrency and blockchain, AI, machine learning, privacy enhancement and cybersecurity) could result in new technologies that may be superior to, or render obsolete, the technologies we currently use in our programs and services. Moreover, these changes could result in new and innovative payment methods, products and services that could place us at a competitive disadvantage and that could reduce the use of our products and services.

Current wording

The payments industry is subject to rapid and significant technological changes, including new technologies and changes to existing technologies (such as cryptocurrency and blockchain, AI, machine learning, privacy enhancement and cybersecurity). These changes could result in new technologies that may be superior to, or render obsolete, the technologies we currently use in our programs and services. They may also result in new and innovative payment methods, products and services.

Previous wording

•Our ability to develop and adopt new services and technologies may be inhibited by industry-wide solutions and standards (such as those related to EMV, tokenization or other safety and security technologies), and by resistance from customers or merchants to such changes.

Current wording

patent infringement or demanding significant license fees; the scope of, as well as customer and merchant resistance to, industry-wide solutions and standards (such as those related to tokenization or other safety and security technologies); any difficulty we may experience in attracting and retaining employees with technology expertise; and the need to invest resources for new technologies, which could lead to further additional expenses. Any of these developments could impact our ability to develop and adopt new technologies, as well as improve and keep pace with current technologies and reflect such technology in our payments offerings.

Previous wording

•Regulatory or government requirements have and could continue to require us to host and deliver certain products and services on-soil in certain markets, requiring us to alter our technology and delivery model, potentially resulting in additional expenses.

Current wording

Moreover, regulatory or government requirements could continue to require us to host and deliver certain products and services on-soil in certain markets. As a result, we may need to alter our technology and delivery model, potentially resulting in additional expenses and/or other operational impacts.

Previous wording

We cannot predict the effect of future technological changes on our business, and our future success will depend, in part, on our ability to anticipate, develop or adapt to technological changes and evolving industry standards. Failure to keep pace with these technological developments or otherwise bring to market products that reflect these technologies could lead to a decline in the use of our products, which could have a material adverse impact on our overall business and results of operations.

Current wording

Our future success will depend, in part, on our ability to anticipate, develop or adapt to technological changes and evolving industry standards. If we fail to sufficiently develop and adopt new technologies, or improve and keep pace with current technologies and reflect such technology in our payments offerings, our payments offerings could be negatively impacted and/or we could be put at a competitive disadvantage. This could impact our ability to compete with new technologies and products, as well as encourage customers that use our technology to enhance and deliver their payment-related products and services (including fintechs and technology companies) to use their own technology to compete against us. These developments could lead to a decline in the use of our technology, products and services, which could have a material adverse impact on our overall business and results of operations.

Previous wording

U.K. regulators have designated Vocalink, our real-time account-based payments network platform, to be a “specified service provider” and regulators in other countries may in the future expand their regulatory oversight of real-time account-based payments systems in similar ways. In addition, any prolonged service outage on this network could result in quickly escalating impacts, including potential intervention by the Bank of England and significant reputational risk to Vocalink and us. For a discussion of the regulatory risks related to our real-time account-based payments platform and oversight by regulators, see our risk factor in “Risk Factors - Payments Industry Regulation” in this Part I, Item 1A. Furthermore, the complexity of this payment technology requires careful management to address information security vulnerabilities that are different from those faced on our core payment network. Operational difficulties, such as the temporary unavailability of our services or products, or information security breaches on our real-time account-based payments network could cause a loss of business for these products and services, result in potential liability for us and adversely affect our reputation.

Current wording

U.K. regulators have designated Vocalink, our real-time account-based payments network platform, to be a “specified service provider” and regulators in other countries may in the future expand their regulatory oversight of real-time account-based payments systems in similar ways. Any prolonged service outage on this network could result in quickly escalating impacts, including potential intervention by the Bank of England and significant reputational risk to Vocalink and us. For a discussion of related regulatory risks, see our risk factor in “Risk Factors - Payments Industry Regulation” in this Part I, Item 1A. Furthermore, the complexity of this payment technology requires careful management to address information security vulnerabilities that are different from those faced on our payment network. Operational difficulties, such as the temporary unavailability of our services or products, or information security breaches on our real-time account-based payments network could cause a loss of business for these products and services, result in potential liability for us and adversely affect our reputation.