Jazz Pharmaceuticals plc

Previous wording

Political, economic and regulatory influences are subjecting the healthcare industry in the U.S. to fundamental changes, particularly given the current atmosphere of mounting criticism of prescription drug costs in the U.S. We expect there will continue to be legislative and regulatory proposals to change the healthcare system in ways that could impact our ability to sell our products profitably, as governmental oversight and scrutiny of biopharmaceutical companies is increasing. For example, we anticipate that the U.S. Congress, state legislatures, and federal and state regulators may adopt or accelerate adoption of new healthcare policies and reforms intended to curb healthcare costs, such as federal and state controls on reimbursement for drugs (including under Medicare, Medicaid and commercial health plans), new or increased requirements to pay prescription drug rebates and penalties to government health care programs, and additional pharmaceutical cost transparency policies that aim to require drug companies to justify their prices through required disclosures. This includes efforts by individual states in the U.S. to pass legislation and implement regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including by establishing Prescription Drug Affordability Boards (or similar entities) to review high-cost drugs and, in some cases, set upper payment limits and implementing marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures. Further, the IRA, among other things, requires the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary to negotiate, with respect to Medicare units and subject to a specified cap, the price of a set number of certain high Medicare spend drugs and biologicals per year starting in 2026, penalizes manufacturers of certain Medicare Parts B and D drugs for price increases above inflation, and makes several changes to the Medicare Part D benefit, including a limit on annual out-of-pocket costs and a change in manufacturer liability under the program, which could negatively affect our business and financial condition. CMS has issued final guidance implementing the Drug Price Negotiation Program in which it finalized certain policies governing the selection of drugs for negotiation. Among other things, CMS finalized definitions of “qualifying single source drug” and “marketed” that, especially if they persist, could further disincentivize innovation. On April 15, 2025, the current administration issued an executive order directing HHS to make changes to the Drug Price Negotiation Program. In addition, under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, rebates owed by manufacturers are no longer subject to a cap on the rebate amount effective January 1, 2024, which may adversely affect our rebate liability. The foregoing may effectively reduce the prices at which our products are sold, which would have a negative adverse effect on our revenues.

Current wording

Political, economic and regulatory influences are subjecting the healthcare industry in the U.S. to fundamental changes, particularly given the current atmosphere of mounting criticism of prescription drug costs in the U.S. We expect there will continue to be legislative and regulatory proposals to change the healthcare system in ways that could impact our ability to sell our products profitably, as governmental oversight and scrutiny of biopharmaceutical companies is increasing. For example, we anticipate that the U.S. Congress, state legislatures, and federal and state regulators may adopt or accelerate adoption of new healthcare policies and reforms intended to curb healthcare costs, such as federal and state controls on reimbursement for drugs (including under Medicare, Medicaid and commercial health plans), new or increased requirements to pay prescription drug rebates and penalties to government health care programs, and additional pharmaceutical cost transparency policies that aim to require drug companies to justify their prices through required disclosures. This includes efforts by individual states in the U.S. to pass legislation and implement regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including by establishing Prescription Drug Affordability Boards (or similar entities) to review high-cost drugs and, in some cases, set upper payment limits and implementing marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures. Further, the IRA, among other things, requires the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary to negotiate, with respect to Medicare units and subject to a specified cap, the price of a set number of certain high Medicare spend drugs and biologicals per year starting in 2026, penalizes manufacturers of certain Medicare Parts B and D drugs for price increases above inflation, and makes several changes to the Medicare Part D benefit, including a limit on annual out-of-pocket costs and a change in manufacturer liability under the program, which could negatively affect our business and financial condition. CMS has issued final guidance implementing the Drug Price Negotiation Program in which it finalized certain policies governing the selection of drugs for negotiation. Among other things, CMS finalized definitions of “qualifying single source drug” and “marketed” that, especially if they persist, could further disincentivize innovation. In addition, under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, rebates owed by manufacturers are no longer subject to a cap on the rebate amount effective January 1, 2024, which may adversely affect our rebate liability. The foregoing may negatively impact our overall rebate and discount liability, which would have a negative adverse effect on our revenues.

Previous wording

Legislative and regulatory proposals that have recently been considered include, among other things, proposals to limit the terms of patent litigation settlements with generic sponsors, to define certain conduct around patenting and new product development as unfair competition, to address the scope of orphan drug exclusivity and to facilitate the importation of drugs into the U.S. from other countries. Legislative and regulatory proposals to reform the regulation of the pharmaceutical industry and reimbursement for pharmaceutical drugs are continually changing, and all such considerations may adversely affect our business and industry in ways that we cannot accurately predict.

Current wording

Legislative and regulatory proposals that have recently been considered include, among other things, proposals to limit the terms of patent litigation settlements with generic sponsors, to define certain conduct around patenting and new product development as unfair competition, to address the scope of orphan drug exclusivity and to facilitate the importation of drugs into the U.S. from other countries. Moreover, on April 15, 2025, the White House issued an executive order announcing a number of initiatives seeking to lower drug pricing. In addition, there has been recent interest in incorporating so-called Most Favored Nation pricing into the U.S. healthcare system, under which prices for drugs in the United States could be tied to foreign reference prices through a mechanism that is not yet defined, announced in a second executive order dated May 12, 2025. Legislative and regulatory proposals to reform the regulation of the pharmaceutical industry and reimbursement for pharmaceutical drugs are continually changing, and all such considerations may adversely affect our business and industry in ways that we cannot accurately predict.

Previous wording

We expect that legislators, policymakers and healthcare insurance funds in Europe and other international markets will continue to propose and implement cost-containing measures to keep healthcare costs down. These measures could include limitations on the prices we will be able to charge for our products or the level of reimbursement available for these products from governmental authorities or third party payors as well as clawbacks and revenue caps. For example, in the U.K., the cap on NHS spending on branded medicines agreed between the U.K. government and industry for 2019 to 2023 has remained unaltered despite higher than expected growth in NHS use of branded medicines, resulting in significant increases to the industry level revenue clawback rate payable on sales of branded medicines to the NHS. In the EU, a trend in some EU member states is for medicinal products to be reimbursed based on the relative price of competitor products, which may undervalue newer innovative products. On April 26, 2023, the EC adopted proposals for a new Directive and a new Regulation, which revise and replace the existing EU general pharmaceutical legislation. This proposal includes increased transparency on research and development costs or public contributions to these costs with a view to strengthen the negotiating position of national competent authorities of the EU member states responsible for pricing and reimbursement, as well as reinforced cooperation with these authorities on pricing and reimbursement matters. On April 10, 2024, the European Parliament adopted its position on the proposals, whose legislative processes are expected to continue in 2025. Further, an increasing number of European and other foreign countries use prices for medicinal products established in other countries as “reference prices” to help determine the price of the product in their own territory. Consequently, a downward trend in prices of medicinal products in some countries could contribute to similar downward trends elsewhere.

Current wording

We expect that legislators, policymakers and healthcare insurance funds in Europe and other international markets will continue to propose and implement cost-containing measures to keep healthcare costs down. These measures could include limitations on the prices we will be able to charge for our products or the level of reimbursement available for these products from governmental authorities or third party payors as well as clawbacks and revenue caps. For example, in the U.K., the cap on NHS spending on branded medicines agreed between the U.K. government and industry for 2019 to 2023 has remained unaltered despite higher than expected growth in NHS use of branded medicines, resulting in significant increases to the industry level revenue clawback rate payable on sales of branded medicines to the NHS. In the EU, a trend in some EU member states is for medicinal products to be reimbursed based on the relative price of competitor products, which may undervalue newer innovative products. On April 26, 2023, the EC adopted proposals for a new Directive and a new Regulation, which revise and replace the existing EU general pharmaceutical legislation. This proposal includes increased transparency on research and development costs or public contributions to these costs with a view to strengthen the negotiating position of national competent authorities of the EU member states responsible for pricing and reimbursement, as well as reinforced cooperation with these authorities on pricing and reimbursement matters. The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union are currently engaged in interinstitutional negotiations to agree on the final version of the pharmaceutical legislation. Further, an increasing number of European and other foreign countries use prices for medicinal products established in other countries as “reference prices” to help determine the price of the product in their own territory. Consequently, a downward trend in prices of medicinal products in some countries could contribute to similar downward trends elsewhere.

Previous wording

There is inherent risk, based on the complex relationships among the U.S. and the countries in which we conduct our business, that political, diplomatic, and national security factors can lead to global trade restrictions and changes in trade policies and export regulations that may adversely affect our business and operations. Compliance with applicable regulatory requirements regarding the export of our products may create delays in the introduction of our products in international markets or, in some cases, prevent the export of our products to some countries altogether. Furthermore, U.S. export control laws and economic sanctions prohibit the provision of certain products and services to countries, governments and persons targeted by U.S. sanctions. The U.S. and other countries have imposed and may continue to impose new trade restrictions and export regulations, have levied tariffs and taxes on certain goods, and could continue to significantly increase tariffs on a broad array of goods, including pharmaceutical and biological products.

Current wording

There is inherent risk, based on the complex relationships among the U.S. and the countries in which we conduct our business, that political, diplomatic, and national security factors can lead to global trade restrictions and changes in trade policies and export regulations that may adversely affect our business and operations. Compliance with applicable regulatory requirements regarding the export of our products may create delays in the introduction of our products in international markets or, in some cases, prevent the export of our products to some countries altogether. Furthermore, U.S. export control laws and economic sanctions prohibit the provision of certain products and services to countries, governments and persons targeted by

Previous wording

While we are an Irish company headquartered in Dublin, Ireland, we derive the majority of our revenues from sales of our products in the U.S. We conduct business globally and our operations, including third-party suppliers, span numerous countries outside the U.S. In particular, we have a manufacturing and development facility in Athlone, Ireland where we manufacture Xywav and Xyrem, a manufacturing and development facility in Kent Science Park, U.K. where we produce

Current wording

While we are an Irish company headquartered in Dublin, Ireland, we derive the majority of our revenues from sales of our products in the U.S. We conduct business globally and our operations, including third-party suppliers, span numerous countries outside the U.S. In particular, we have a manufacturing and development facility in Athlone, Ireland where we manufacture Xywav and Xyrem, a manufacturing and development facility in Kent Science Park, U.K. where we produce Epidiolex/Epidyolex, and a manufacturing plant in Villa Guardia, Italy where we produce defibrotide drug substance. In addition, we rely on our supplier in China for the manufacture of Ziihera.

Previous wording

As a result of these or other factors, products or product candidates we acquire, or obtain licenses to, may not produce the revenues, earnings or business synergies that we anticipated, may not result in regulatory approvals, and may not perform as expected. For example, in May 2021, we made a substantial investment in Epidiolex and certain other products and technologies acquired in our acquisition of GW. The total consideration paid by us for the entire issued share capital of GW was $7.2 billion. Additionally, in April 2025, we completed our acquisition of Chimerix, a biopharmaceutical company the lead clinical asset of which is dordaviprone, a novel first-in-class small molecule treatment in development for H3 K27M-mutant diffuse glioma, a rare, high-grade brain tumor that most commonly affects children and young adults. The total consideration paid by us for the outstanding shares of Chimerix Common Stock was approximately $935 million. The success of our acquisition of GW and Chimerix will depend, in part, on our ability to realize the anticipated benefits from each of the acquisitions, which benefits may not be realized at the expected levels within the expected timeframe, or at all, or may take longer to realize or cost more than expected, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. In this regard, in the third quarter of 2022, we recorded a $133.6 million asset impairment charge as a result of the decision to discontinue the nabiximols program that we acquired as part of our acquisition of GW. In any event, failure to manage effectively our growth through acquisitions or in-licensing transactions could adversely affect our growth prospects, business, results of operations and financial condition.

Current wording

As a result of these or other factors, products or product candidates we acquire, or obtain licenses to, may not produce the revenues, earnings or business synergies that we anticipated, may not result in regulatory approvals, and may not perform as expected. For example, in May 2021, we made a substantial investment in Epidiolex and certain other products and technologies acquired in our acquisition of GW. The total consideration paid by us for the entire issued share capital of GW was $7.2 billion. Additionally, in April 2025, we completed our acquisition of Chimerix, a biopharmaceutical company the lead clinical asset of which is dordaviprone, a novel first-in-class small molecule treatment in development for H3 K27M-mutant diffuse glioma, a rare, high-grade brain tumor that most commonly affects children and young adults. The total consideration paid by us for the outstanding shares of Chimerix Common Stock was $944.2 million. The success of our acquisition of GW and Chimerix will depend, in part, on our ability to realize the anticipated benefits from each of the acquisitions, which benefits may not be realized at the expected levels within the expected timeframe, or at all, or may take longer to realize or cost more than expected, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. In this regard, in the third quarter of 2022, we recorded a $133.6 million asset impairment charge as a result of the decision to discontinue the nabiximols program that we acquired as part of our acquisition of GW. In any event, failure to manage effectively our growth through acquisitions or in-licensing transactions could adversely affect our growth prospects, business, results of operations and financial condition.

Previous wording

We have settled patent litigation with each of the ten companies seeking to introduce generic versions of Xyrem in the U.S. by granting those companies licenses to launch their generic products (and in certain cases, an AG version of Xyrem) in advance of the expiration of the last of our patents. Notwithstanding our Xyrem patents and settlement agreements, additional third parties may also attempt to introduce generic versions of Xyrem, Xywav or other sodium oxybate products for treatment of cataplexy and/or EDS in narcolepsy that design around our patents or assert that our patents are invalid or otherwise unenforceable. Such third parties could launch a generic or 505(b)(2) product referencing Xyrem before the dates provided in our patents or settlement agreements. For example, we have several methods of use patents listed in the Orange Book, that expire in 2033 that cover treatment methods included in the Xyrem label related to a DDI with divalproex sodium. Although FDA has stated, in granting a Citizen Petition we submitted in 2016, that it would not approve any sodium oxybate ANDA referencing Xyrem that does not include the portions of the currently approved Xyrem label related to the DDI patents, we cannot predict whether a future ANDA filer, or a company that files a Section 505(b)(2) application for a drug referencing Xyrem, may pursue regulatory strategies to avoid infringing our DDI patents notwithstanding FDA’s response to the Citizen Petition, or whether any such strategy would be successful. Likewise, we cannot predict whether we will be able to maintain the validity of these patents or will otherwise obtain a judicial determination that a generic or other sodium oxybate product, its package insert or the generic sodium oxybate REMS or another separate REMS will infringe any of our patents or, if we prevail in proving infringement, whether a court will grant an injunction that prevents a future ANDA filer or other company introducing a different sodium oxybate product from marketing its product, or instead require that party to pay damages in the form of lost profits or a reasonable royalty.

Current wording

We have settled patent litigation with each of the ten companies seeking to introduce generic versions of Xyrem in the U.S. by granting those companies licenses to launch their generic products (and in certain cases, an AG version of Xyrem) in advance of the expiration of the last of our patents. Notwithstanding our Xyrem patents and settlement agreements, additional third parties may also attempt to introduce generic versions of Xyrem, Xywav or other sodium oxybate products for treatment of cataplexy and/or EDS in narcolepsy that design around our patents or assert that our patents are invalid or otherwise unenforceable. Such third parties could launch a generic or 505(b)(2) product referencing Xyrem before the dates provided in our patents or settlement agreements. For example, we have several methods of use patents listed in the Orange Book, that expire in 2033 that cover treatment methods included in the Xyrem label related to a DDI with divalproex sodium. Although FDA has stated, in granting a Citizen Petition we submitted in 2016, that it would not approve any sodium oxybate ANDA referencing Xyrem that does not include the portions of the currently approved Xyrem label related to the DDI patents, we cannot predict whether a future ANDA filer, or a company that files a Section 505(b)(2) application for a drug referencing Xyrem, may pursue regulatory strategies to avoid infringing our DDI patents notwithstanding FDA’s response to the Citizen

Previous wording

The ability of FDA to review and approve new products or review other regulatory submissions can be affected by a variety of factors, including statutory, regulatory and policy changes, inadequate government budget and funding levels, a reduction in FDA’s workforce and its ability to hire and retain key personnel. Disruptions at FDA and other agencies may also increase the time to meet with and receive agency feedback, review and/or approve our submissions, conduct inspections, issue regulatory guidance, or take other actions that facilitate the development, approval and marketing of regulated products, which would adversely affect our business. In addition, government proposals to reduce or eliminate budgetary deficits may include reduced allocations to FDA and other related government agencies. For example, the current President Trump administration recently established the Department of Government Efficiency, which implemented a federal government hiring freeze and announced certain additional efforts to reduce federal government employee headcount, including by eliminating 3,500 employees from FDA. It is unclear how these executive actions or other potential actions by the Trump Administration or other parts of the federal government will impact FDA or other regulatory authorities that oversee our business. The reductions in FDA’s workforce and budgetary pressures could significantly impact the ability of FDA to timely review and process our regulatory submissions or take other actions critical to the marketing of our products which could have a material adverse effect on our business. For example, our recently acquired product candidate dordaviprone has a target PDUFA action date of

Current wording

The ability of FDA to review and approve new products or review other regulatory submissions can be affected by a variety of factors, including statutory, regulatory and policy changes, inadequate government budget and funding levels, a reduction in FDA’s workforce and its ability to hire and retain key personnel. Disruptions at FDA and other agencies may also increase the time to meet with and receive agency feedback, review and/or approve our submissions, conduct inspections, issue regulatory guidance, or take other actions that facilitate the development, approval and marketing of regulated products, which would adversely affect our business. In addition, government proposals to reduce or eliminate budgetary deficits may include reduced allocations to FDA and other related government agencies. For example, the current President Trump administration recently established the Department of Government Efficiency, which implemented a federal government hiring freeze and announced certain additional efforts to reduce federal government employee headcount, including by attempting to eliminate 3,500 employees from FDA. It is unclear how these executive actions or other potential actions by the Trump Administration or other parts of the federal government will impact FDA or other regulatory authorities that oversee our business. The reductions in FDA’s workforce and budgetary pressures could significantly impact the ability of FDA to timely review and process our regulatory submissions or take other actions critical to the marketing of our products which could have a material adverse effect on our business. For example, our recently acquired product candidate dordaviprone has a target PDUFA action date of August 18, 2025. If approval of the dordaviprone NDA is granted by FDA, the approval may not happen on or prior to the target PDUFA action date, including as a result of recent reductions in FDA’s workforce. Any delay in obtaining, or inability to obtain, regulatory approval of the dordaviprone NDA would delay or prevent commercialization of the resulting product and could increase our costs. As a result, the anticipated benefits of the Chimerix acquisition may not be realized fully within the expected timeframe or at all or may take longer to realize or cost more than expected, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Previous wording

On July 31, 2024, we announced that our board of directors had authorized the New Repurchase Program pursuant to which our board of directors authorized us to repurchase our ordinary shares for up to an aggregate purchase price of $500.0 million, exclusive of any brokerage commissions. Under the New Repurchase Program, which has no expiration date, we may repurchase our ordinary shares from time to time by any methods and/or structures permitted by applicable law. During the three months ended March 31, 2025, we did not repurchase any of our ordinary shares. As of March 31, 2025, the remaining amount authorized under the New Repurchase Program was $350.0 million.

Current wording

On July 31, 2024, we announced that our board of directors had authorized the use of up to $500.0 million to repurchase our ordinary shares under the New Repurchase Program. Under the New Repurchase Program, which has no expiration date, we may repurchase ordinary shares from time to time by any methods and/or structures permitted by applicable law. The timing and amount of repurchases will depend on a variety of factors, including the price of our ordinary shares, alternative investment opportunities, restrictions under our outstanding credit agreement and the indenture for our Secured Notes, corporate and regulatory requirements and market conditions. The New Repurchase Program may be modified, suspended or discontinued at any time without our prior notice. The ordinary shares reported in the table above were purchased pursuant to the New Repurchase Program. As of June 30, 2025, the remaining amount authorized for repurchases under the New Repurchase Program was $225.0 million, exclusive of any brokerage commissions.