JETBLUE AIRWAYS CORP

We could be adversely affected by an outbreak or resurgence of a disease or an environmental disaster that significantly affects travel behavior.

Any outbreak or resurgence of a disease, which affect travel behavior, travel demand, or travel restrictions, or a similar public health threat, or fear of such an event could have a material adverse impact on airlines. In addition, outbreaks of disease could result in quarantines of our crewmembers, business partners and their suppliers, or an inability to access facilities or our aircraft, which could adversely affect our operations. Certain environmental disasters may be caused or adversely exacerbated by the physical impacts of climate change. For more information, please see our risk factor titled "Our results of operations fluctuate due to seasonality, weather, and other factors."

The extent, duration, and magnitude of an outbreak or resurgence of a disease will depend on various factors, all of which are highly uncertain, difficult to predict and not controlled by us. In addition, we cannot predict whether business travel for in-person meetings will return to pre-COVID-19 levels over the long-term due to technological advancements in, and consumer acceptance and adaptation to, virtual meetings and/or changes in customer preferences.

Similarly, if an environmental disaster were to occur and adversely impact any of our destination cities, travel behavior could be affected and in turn, could materially adversely impact our business, operating results, liquidity and financial condition.

Compliance with environmental laws and regulations may cause us to incur substantial costs.

Many aspects of airlines' operations are subject to increasingly stringent environmental regulations and enforcement policies, and growing concerns about climate change and other matters, including an evolving set of previously unregulated substances, may result in the imposition of additional regulation. Compliance with environmental laws and regulations can require significant expenditures, and violations can lead to significant fines and penalties, as well as civil liability.

Environmental laws and regulations may require us to investigate and remediate soil or groundwater. Under many environmental laws, generators of waste materials, and current and former owners or operators of facilities, can be subject to liability for investigation and remediation costs at locations that have been identified as contaminated. Liability under these laws may be retroactive, strict, joint and several, meaning that we could be liable for the costs of cleaning up environmental contamination regardless of when it occurred, fault or the amount of waste directly attributable to us.

Governmental authorities in the U.S. and abroad are increasingly focused on potential contamination resulting from the use of certain chemicals, most notably per- and polyfluoroalkyl, substances ("PFAS"). Products containing PFAS have been used in manufacturing, industrial, and consumer applications over many decades, including those related to aviation. In April 2024, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("USEPA") published for public comment a new rulemaking that would designate two PFAS substances (perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid) as hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. With this final rule and the introduction of any additional state or federal regulations or enforcement policies, we may incur costs in connection with reporting obligations and costs related to historic usage of PFAS-containing materials, transitioning away from the usage of PFAS-containing products, disposing of PFAS-containing waste or remediating any residual environmental impacts.

Under our leases and related contracts for our airport facilities, we may be responsible for a share of the airport's or other operators' costs in meeting new or upgraded regulatory requirements including, for example, implementation of USEPA and state stormwater regulations that require building or reconfiguring airport de-icing facilities to capture and treat discharges of de-icing and anti-icing chemicals. In addition, USEPA is proposing to add PFAS stormwater monitoring requirements from industrial facilities in areas where USEPA is the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permitting authority.

Additionally, regulatory, market, and other changes to respond to climate change may adversely impact our business, financial condition, or results of operations. For example, there have been significant U.S. and international legislative and regulatory efforts to limit GHG emissions, including our aircraft and ground operations emissions. In October 2016, the ICAO passed a resolution adopting CORSIA, which is a global, market-based emissions offset program to encourage carbon-neutral growth in international aviation. Annual international emissions reporting is required via CORSIA as of the 2019 reporting year, and offsetting compliance is scheduled to be implemented through multiple phases that began in 2021. ICAO continues to develop details regarding implementation and, while we expect compliance with CORSIA will increase our operating costs, the anticipated cost of compliance with CORSIA is uncertain due to a number of factors, including the volatility in demand for international air travel and the uncertainty in the supply and price of eligible carbon offsets or low-carbon aircraft fuels. The USEPA has also adopted rules implementing the ICAO aircraft engine GHG emission standards. Pursuant to the Clean Air Act, the FAA issued a final rule in February 2024 to implement these standards, introducing new fuel efficiency certification regulations. These regulations took effect in April 2024 and will apply to larger business and commercial jet aircraft with either new design types (not previously certified by the FAA) or existing design types that are in production as of January 1, 2028. Under the current presidential administration, steps have been taken to withdraw from international agreements targeting climate change and rolling back USEPA regulation of GHG emissions under the Clean Air Act. Although the U.S. continues to participate in ICAO, the outcome of these developments cannot be predicted.

There are also growing initiatives to mandate use of SAF or otherwise reduce GHG emissions associated with various aircraft design types. For example, the EU adopted a regulation that entered into force 2024 imposing a SAF blending standard starting at 2% in 2025 and rising to 70% in 2050. Other countries, including the UK, have adopted or are considering adopting similar SAF requirements. In the U.S., USEPA issues annual regulations under the Renewable Fuel Standard ("RFS") program that require the national pool of transportation fuel to contain a certain percentage of alternative fuels such as SAF. These programs, in addition to our own and other airlines' commitments to increase use of SAF, may result in a competitive market for available SAF inventories or result in our inability to procure SAF at prices we find acceptable. Any regulatory uncertainty on the treatment of SAF may also impact the availability or price of SAF. Until SAF production increases, we may need to pay a significant premium for SAF above the cost of traditional fuel.

The potential impacts to our business are not known at this time, but additional costs and regulatory instability can be expected. In addition, climate change-related litigation and investigations have increased in recent years and any claims or investigations against us could be costly to defend and our business could be adversely affected by the outcome.

Since the domestic airline industry is increasingly price sensitive, we may not be able to recover the cost of compliance with new or more stringent environmental laws and regulations from our customers, which could adversely affect our business and financial results. Although we do not expect the costs of complying with current environmental regulations will have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations, or cash flows, no assurance can be made that the costs of complying with environmental regulations in the future will not have such an effect.

Increasing scrutiny of, and evolving expectations regarding, environmental matters may impact our business and reputation.

Companies across industries are facing increasing scrutiny from a variety of stakeholders, including states attorneys general, related to their environmental and sustainability practices. Expectations regarding voluntary sustainability initiatives and disclosures may result in increased costs (including but not limited to increased costs related to compliance, stakeholder engagement, contracting and insurance), changes in demand for certain product or service offerings, enhanced compliance or disclosure obligations, or other impacts to our business, financial condition, or results of operations.

While we have in the past engaged, and expect in future to continue to engage, in voluntary initiatives (such as voluntary disclosures, certifications, or goals) to improve the profile of our Company and/or offerings or to respond to stakeholder expectations, such initiatives may be costly and may not have the desired effect. Expectations around a company's management of such matters continues to evolve rapidly, in many instances due to factors that are out of our control. For example, we may ultimately be unable to complete certain initiatives or targets, either on the timelines initially announced or at all, due to technological, legal, cost, or other constraints, which may be within or outside of our control. Moreover, actions or statements that we may take based on expectations, assumptions, or third-party information that we currently believe to be reasonable may subsequently be determined to be erroneous, be subject to misinterpretation, or be out of alignment with policymaker or other stakeholder expectations. If we fail, or are perceived to fail, to comply with or advance certain environmental initiatives (including the timeline and manner in which we complete such initiatives), we may be subject to various adverse impacts, including reputational damage and potential stakeholder engagement and/or litigation, even if such initiatives are currently voluntary.

Reporting expectations are also increasing, with a variety of customers, capital providers, and regulators seeking increased information on climate-related risks and impacts. Various policymakers, such as the European Union, and the State of California, have adopted or are considering adopting, requirements for companies to provide significantly expanded climate-related disclosures, adopt specific policies or procedures, or take other climate-related actions. Such requirements are not uniform across jurisdictions, and may be inconsistently applied, which can increase the complexity and cost of compliance, and increase the risk of enforcement or litigation relating to our disclosures and initiatives. All of these risks may also impact our suppliers, business partners or customers, which may indirectly impact our business, financial condition, or results of operations.

Certain market participants, including major institutional investors and capital providers, use third-party benchmarks and scores to assess companies' profiles in making investment or voting decisions. Unfavorable ratings could lead to increased negative investor sentiment towards us or our industry, which could negatively impact our share price as well as our access to and cost of capital. To the extent sustainability matters negatively impact our reputation, it may also impede our ability to compete as effectively to attract and retain employees or customers, which may adversely impact our operations. For more information, please see our risk factor titled "Compliance with environmental laws and regulations may cause us to incur substantial costs." Additionally, many of our customers, business partners, and suppliers may be subject to similar expectations, which may augment or create additional risks, including risks that may not be known to us.

Federal government shutdowns, federal budget constraints or federally imposed furloughs due to budget negotiation deadlocks may adversely affect our industry, business, results of operations and financial position.

Many of our airline operations are regulated by governmental agencies, including, but not limited to, the DOT, FAA, CBP, and the TSA. Federal government shutdowns, including the disruptive shutdowns experienced in 2025, federal budget constraints or federally imposed furloughs resulting from budget negotiation deadlocks may adversely affect the ability of these agencies to perform critical functions. If the federal government were to continue experiencing issues in reaching budgetary consensus in the future, resulting in mandatory furloughs and/or other budget constraints, or if a government shutdown were to continue for an extended period of time, our operations and results of operations could be materially negatively impacted. The travel behaviors of the flying public could also be affected, which may materially adversely impact our industry and our business.

Changes in laws and government regulations that impose additional requirements and restrictions on our operations could increase our operating costs and result in service delays and disruptions.

Airlines are subject to extensive regulatory and legal requirements, both domestically and internationally, involving significant compliance costs. These requirements may adversely impact our business, operating results and financial condition. For example, in January 2025, the DOT assessed a civil penalty against us in connection with flights determined to be chronically delayed in 2022 and 2023. In recent years, Congress has passed laws and the agencies of the federal government, including, but not limited to, the DOT, FAA, CBP, and the TSA, have issued regulations relating to the operation of airlines that have required significant expenditures. We expect to continue to incur expenses in connection with complying with government regulations. Additional laws including executive orders, regulations, tax laws, and airport rates and charges have been proposed from time to time that could significantly increase the cost of or otherwise constrain airline operations or reduce the demand for air travel. For example, legislative and regulatory bodies have examined the manner in which airlines have "unbundled" the pricing in respect of certain products and services, and new rules or taxes in respect of these different revenue sources could potentially have an adverse effect on our business. If adopted or materially amended, these measures could have the effect of raising ticket prices, which in turn could affect the perception of the airline industry, reduce air travel demand and/or revenue, and increase costs. We cannot be assured that these and other laws, including executive orders, regulations, tariffs or tax laws, enacted in the future, or other changes in the political landscape, will not harm our business.

A future act of terrorism, the threat of such acts or escalation of U.S. military involvement overseas could adversely affect our industry.

Acts of terrorism, the threat of such acts or escalation of U.S. military involvement overseas could have an adverse effect on the airline industry. In the event of an act of terrorism, whether or not successful, the airline industry would likely experience increased security requirements and significantly reduced demand. In addition, the escalation of U.S. military involvement, including in regions in which we operate or through which we transit, as well as regional political instability or hostilities, could lead to the suspension, redirection or longer routings of flights, airspace closures, increased operating costs, or service disruptions in the impacted regions. We cannot be assured that these actions, or consequences resulting from these actions, will not harm our business or the industry.

The airline industry is particularly sensitive to changes in economic conditions.

Fundamental and permanent changes in the domestic airline industry have occurred over time as a result of several years of repeated losses, among other reasons. These losses resulted in airlines renegotiating or attempting to renegotiate labor contracts, reconfiguring flight schedules, furloughing, or terminating crewmembers, as well as considering other efficiency and cost-cutting measures. Despite these actions, several airlines have reorganized under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code to permit them to reduce labor rates, restructure debt, terminate pension plans, and generally reduce their cost structure. Since 2005, the U.S. airline industry has experienced significant consolidation and liquidations. A global economic recession and related unfavorable general economic conditions, such as higher unemployment rates, debt and equity market fluctuations, a constrained credit market, housing-related pressures, rising interest rates and increased business operating costs can reduce spending for both leisure and business travel and otherwise impact booking practices. Unfavorable economic conditions could also impact an airline's ability to raise fares to counteract increased fuel, labor, and other costs. It is possible that further airline reorganizations, consolidation, bankruptcies, or liquidations may occur in the current global economic environment, the effects of which we are unable to predict. We cannot be assured that the occurrence of these events, or potential changes resulting from these events, will not harm our business or the industry.

In recent years the global credit and financial markets have experienced extreme volatility and disruptions, including severely diminished liquidity and credit availability, declines in consumer confidence, declines in economic growth, increases in unemployment rates and uncertainty about economic stability. The financial markets and the global economy may also be adversely affected by the current or anticipated impact of military conflict, terrorism or other geopolitical events. Sanctions or tariffs imposed by the United States and other countries in response to such conflicts may also adversely impact the financial markets and the global economy, and any economic countermeasures by the affected countries or others could exacerbate market and economic instability. There can be no assurance that further deterioration in credit and financial markets and confidence in economic conditions will not occur.

Furthermore, the United States economy recently encountered a material level of inflation. Increases in inflation may raise our costs for labor, materials and services, and other costs required to operate our business, and failure to secure these on reasonable terms may adversely impact our financial condition.