Crown Holdings (CCK) Risk Factors

The ability of the Company's subsidiaries and joint ventures to pay dividends, make distributions, provide loans or make other payments to the Company may be restricted by applicable state and foreign laws, potentially adverse tax consequences and their agreements, including agreements governing their debt. In addition, the equity interests of the Company's joint venture partners or other shareholders in the Company's non-wholly owned subsidiaries in any dividend or other distribution made by these entities would need to be satisfied on a proportionate basis with the Company. As a result, the Company may not be able to access a portion of its cash flow to service the Company's debt.

Crown Cork & Seal Company, Inc. (Crown Cork), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company, is one of many defendants in a substantial number of lawsuits filed throughout the United States by persons alleging bodily injury as a result of exposure to asbestos. In 1963, Crown Cork acquired a subsidiary that had two operating businesses, one of which is alleged to have manufactured asbestos-containing insulation products. Crown Cork believes that the business ceased manufacturing such products in 1963. As of December 31, 2019, Crown Cork's accrual for pending and future asbestos-related claims and related legal costs was $273 million, including $232 million for unasserted claims. The Company determines its accrual without limitation to a specific time period. Assumptions underlying the accrual include that claims for exposure to asbestos that occurred after the sale of the subsidiary's insulation business in 1964 would not be entitled to settlement payouts and that state statutes described under Note O to the Company's audited consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report, including Texas and Pennsylvania statutes, are expected to have a highly favorable impact on Crown Cork's ability to settle or defend against asbestos-related claims in those states and other states where Pennsylvania law may apply. During the year ended December 31, 2019, Crown Cork received approximately 2,000 new claims, settled or dismissed approximately 2,000 claims, and had approximately 56,000 claims outstanding at the end of the period. Of these outstanding claims, approximately 16,500 claims relate to claimants alleging first exposure to asbestos after 1964 and approximately 39,500 relate to claimants alleging first exposure to asbestos before or during 1964, of which approximately 13,000 were filed in Texas, 1,500 were filed in Pennsylvania, 6,000 were filed in other states that have enacted asbestos legislation and 19,000 were filed in other states. The outstanding claims at December 31, 2019 also exclude approximately 19,000 inactive claims. Due to the passage of time, the Company considers it unlikely that the plaintiffs in these cases will pursue further action. The exclusion of these inactive claims had no effect on the calculation of the Company's accrual as the claims were filed in states where the Company's liability is limited by statute. The Company devotes significant time and expense to defend against these various claims, complaints and proceedings, and there can be no assurance that the expenses or distractions from operating the Company's businesses arising from these defenses will not increase materially. On October 22, 2010, the Texas Supreme Court, in a 6-2 decision, reversed a lower court decision, Barbara Robinson v. Crown Cork & Seal Company, Inc., No. 14-04-00658-CV, Fourteenth Court of Appeals, Texas, which had upheld the dismissal of an asbestos-related case against Crown Cork. The Texas Supreme Court held that the Texas legislation was unconstitutional under the Texas Constitution when applied to asbestos-related claims pending against Crown Cork when the legislation was enacted in June of 2003. The Company believes that the decision of the Texas Supreme Court is limited to retroactive application of the Texas legislation to asbestos-related cases that were pending against Crown Cork in Texas on June 11, 2003 and therefore continues to assign no value to claims filed after June 11, 2003. Crown Cork made cash payments of $22 million, $21 million and $30 million in 2019, 2018 and 2017 for asbestos-related claims including settlement payments and legal fees. These payments and any such future payments will reduce the cash flow available to Crown Cork for its business operations and debt payments. Asbestos-related payments including defense costs may be significantly higher than those estimated by Crown Cork because the outcome of this type of litigation (and, therefore, Crown Cork's reserve) is subject to a number of assumptions and uncertainties, such as the number or size of asbestos-related claims or settlements, the number of financially viable responsible parties, the extent to which state statutes relating to asbestos liability are upheld and/or applied by the courts, Crown Cork's ability to obtain resolution without payment of asbestos-related claims by persons alleging first exposure to asbestos after 1964, and the potential impact of any pending or future asbestos-related legislation. Accordingly, Crown Cork may be required to make payments for claims substantially in excess of its accrual, which could reduce the Company's cash flow and impair its ability to satisfy its obligations. As a result of the uncertainties regarding its asbestos-related liabilities and its reduced cash flow, the ability of the Company to raise new money in the capital markets is more difficult and more costly, and the Company may not be able to access the capital markets in the future. Further information regarding Crown's Cork's asbestos-related liabilities is presented within "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" under the headings, "Provision for Asbestos" and "Critical Accounting Policies" and under Note O to the Company's audited consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report.

Public health and government officials have become increasingly concerned about the health consequences associated with over-consumption of certain types of beverages, such as sugar-sweetened beverages and including those sold by certain of the Company's significant customers. Possible new federal, state or local taxes, increases to current taxes or other governmental regulations specifically targeted to decrease the consumption of these beverages may significantly reduce demand for the beverages of the Company's customers, which could in turn affect demand of the Company's customers for the Company's products. For example, taxes on certain sugar-sweetened beverages have been enacted in France, the United Kingdom, and Mexico. France has also imposed taxes on energy drinks using certain amounts of taurine and caffeine. Some state and local governments are also considering similar taxes, and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (where the Company's Americas and Corporate headquarters were located prior to September 2018), Cook County, Illinois (where the Company's Transit Packaging headquarters is located), and several cities in California have enacted taxes on certain sugar-sweetened beverages. The imposition of such taxes may decrease the demand for certain soft drinks and beverages that the Company's customers produce, which may cause the Company's customers to respond by decreasing their purchases from the Company. Consumer tax legislation and future attempts to tax sugar-sweetened or energy drinks by other jurisdictions could reduce the demand for the Company's products, adversely affect the Company's profitability and materially adversely affect the Company's business and financial results.

The Company sponsors various pension plans worldwide, with the largest funded plans in the U.K., U.S. and Canada. In 2019, 2018 and 2017, the Company contributed $23 million, $20 million and $294 million to its pension plans. Pension expense was $66 million, including settlement charges of $44 million and a curtailment gain of $14 million, in 2019 and is expected to be $22 million in 2020, using foreign currency exchange rates in effect at December 31, 2019. In addition, the Company may trigger additional settlement charges in 2020 of approximately $30 million. A 0.25% change in the 2020 expected rate of return assumptions would change 2020 pension expense by approximately $12 million. A 0.25% change in the discount rates assumptions as of December 31, 2019 would change 2019 pension expense by approximately $2 million. The Company may be required to accelerate the timing of its contributions under its pension plans. The actual impact of any accelerated funding will depend upon the interest rates required for determining the plan liabilities and the investment performance of plan assets. An acceleration in the timing of pension plan contributions could decrease the Company's cash available to pay its outstanding obligations and its net income and increase the Company's outstanding indebtedness. Based on current assumptions, the Company expects to make pension contributions of $21 million in 2020, $52 million in 2021, $37 million in 2022, $69 million in 2023 and $115 million in 2024. Future changes in the factors used to determine pension contributions, including investment performance of plan assets, could have a significant impact on the Company's future contributions and its cash flow available for debt reduction, capital expenditures or other purposes. The difference between pension plan obligations and assets, or the funded status of the plans, significantly affects the net periodic benefit costs of the Company's pension plans and the ongoing funding requirements of those plans. Among other factors, significant volatility in the equity markets and in the value of illiquid alternative investments, changes in discount rates, investment returns and the market value of plan assets can substantially increase the Company's future pension plan funding requirements and could have a negative impact on the Company's results of operations and profitability. See Note R to the Company's audited consolidated financial statements in this Annual Report. As long as the Company continues to maintain its various pension plans, the Company will continue to incur additional pension obligations. The Company's pension plan assets consist primarily of common stocks and fixed income securities and also include alternative investments such as interests in private equity and hedge funds. If the performance of plan assets does not meet the Company's assumptions or discount rates decline, the underfunding of the pension plans may increase and the Company may have to contribute additional funds to the pension plans, and the Company's pension expense may increase. In addition, the Company's supplemental executive retirement plan and retiree medical plans are unfunded. The Company's U.S. funded pension plan is subject to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, or ERISA. Under ERISA, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, or PBGC, has the authority to terminate an underfunded plan under certain circumstances. In the event its U.S. pension plan is terminated for any reason while the plan is underfunded, the Company will incur a liability to the PBGC that may be equal to the entire amount of the underfunding, which under certain circumstances may be senior to the notes. In addition, as of December 31, 2019 the unfunded accumulated postretirement benefit obligation, as calculated in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, for retiree medical benefits was approximately $164 million, based on assumptions set forth under Note R to the Company's audited consolidated financial statements in this Annual Report.

Laws and regulations relating to environmental protection and health and safety may increase the Company's costs of operating and reduce its profitability. The Company's operations are subject to numerous U.S. federal and state and non-U.S. laws and regulations governing the protection of the environment, including those relating to operating permits, treatment, storage and disposal of waste, the use of chemicals in the Company's products and manufacturing process, discharges into water, emissions into the atmosphere, remediation of soil and groundwater contamination and protection of employee health and safety. Future regulations may impose stricter environmental or employee safety requirements affecting the Company's operations or may impose additional requirements regarding consumer health and safety, such as potential restrictions on the use of bisphenol-A, a starting material used to produce internal and external coatings for some food, beverage, and aerosol containers and metal closures. Although the U.S. FDA currently permits the use of bisphenol-A in food packaging materials and confirmed in a January 2010 update that studies employing standardized toxicity tests have supported the safety of current low levels of human exposure to bisphenol-A, the FDA in that January 2010 update noted that more research was needed, and further suggested reasonable steps to reduce exposure to bisphenol-A. The FDA subsequently entered into a consent decree under which it agreed to issue, by March 31, 2012,a final decision on a citizen's petition requesting the agency take further regulatory steps with regard to bisphenol-A. On March 30, 2012, the FDA denied the request, responding, in part, that the appropriate course of action was to continue scientific study and review of all new evidence regarding the safety of bisphenol-A. In March 2010, the EPA issued an action plan for bisphenol-A, which includes, among other things, consideration of whether to add bisphenol-A to the chemical concern list on the basis of potential environmental effects and use of the EPA's Design for the Environment program to encourage reductions in bisphenol-A manufacturing and use. Moreover, certain U.S. Congressional bodies, states and municipalities, as well as certain foreign nations and some member states of the European Union, such as Denmark, Belgium and France, have considered, proposed or already passed legislation banning or suspending the use of bisphenol-A in certain products or requiring warnings regarding bisphenol-A. In July 2012, the FDA banned the use of bisphenol-A in baby bottles and children's drinking cups, and in July 2013, the FDA banned the use of bisphenol-A in epoxy resins that coat infant formula cans. In France, the production, importation, exportation and the placement on the market of baby bottles containing bisphenol-A was suspended by a law of 2010. This suspension was extended in 2013 to packaging and utensils for food intended for children under 3 and in 2015 to packaging and utensils for all other foods. Following a decision of the French Constitutional Court, the suspension is currently limited to the importation and the placement on the market of those packaging and utensils containing bisphenol-A. The law also includes certain product labeling requirements. More generally, France is very attentive to the issue of endocrine disruptors and food safety (e.g. Food Conference in 2017 (Etats généraux de l'alimentation)). In the first quarter of 2014, the European Food Safety Authority recommended that the tolerable daily intake of bisphenol-A be lowered. Further, the U.S. or additional international, federal, state or other regulatory authorities could restrict or prohibit the use of bisphenol-A in the future. For example, in 2015, the State of California declared bisphenol-A a reproductive system hazard and listed BPA as a hazardous chemical under California's Safe Water and Toxic Environment Act, which may trigger a requirement to include warning labels on consumer items containing bisphenol-A. In addition, recent public reports, litigation and other allegations regarding the potential health hazards of bisphenol-A could contribute to a perceived safety risk about the Company's products and adversely impact sales or otherwise disrupt the Company's business. While the Company is exploring various alternatives to the use of bisphenol-A and conversion to alternatives is underway in some applications, there can be no assurance the Company will be completely successful in its efforts or that the alternatives will not be more costly to the Company. Also, for example, future restrictions in some jurisdictions on air emissions of volatile organic compounds and the use of certain paint and lacquering ingredients may require the Company to employ additional control equipment or process modifications. The Company's operations and properties, both in the United States and abroad, must comply with these laws and regulations. In addition, a number of governmental authorities in the United States and abroad have introduced or are contemplating enacting legal requirements, including emissions limitations, cap and trade systems or mandated changes in energy consumption, in response to the potential impacts of climate change. Given the wide range of potential future climate change regulations in the jurisdictions in which the Company operates, the potential impact to the Company's operations is uncertain. In addition, the potential impact of climate change on the Company's operations is highly uncertain. The impact of climate change may vary by geographic location and other circumstances, including weather patterns and any impact to natural resources such as water. A number of governmental authorities both in the U.S. and abroad also have enacted, or are considering, legal requirements relating to product stewardship, including mandating recycling, the use of recycled materials and/or limitations on certain kinds of packaging materials such as plastics. In addition, some companies with packaging needs have responded to such developments, and/or to perceived environmental concerns of consumers, by using containers made in whole or in part of recycled materials. Such developments may reduce the demand for some of the Company's products, and/or increase its costs.

The United Kingdom has ceased to be a member of the European Union ("E.U.") on January 31, 2020, with a transition period through December 31, 2020 (commonly referred to as "Brexit"). During such period, the United Kingdom continues to apply E.U. law and is treated for all material purposes as part of the E.U. There is uncertainty as to the scope, nature and terms of the relationship between the United Kingdom and the E.U. after Brexit as negotiations for the terms of the Brexit continue. The uncertainty could continue to adversely affect economic and market conditions in the United Kingdom, in the E.U. and its member states and elsewhere, and also contribute to uncertainty and instability in global financial markets. In particular, Brexit significantly impacts volatility, liquidity and/or the market value of securities. Accordingly, Brexit could adversely affect the Company's business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

The Company is subject to substantial competition from producers of alternative packaging made from glass, paper, flexible materials and plastic. The Company's sales depend heavily on the volumes of sales by the Company's customers in the food and beverage markets. Changes in preferences for products and packaging by consumers of prepackaged food and beverage cans significantly influence the Company's sales. Changes in packaging by the Company's customers may require the Company to re-tool manufacturing operations, which could require material expenditures. In addition, a decrease in the costs of, or a further increase in consumer demand for, alternative packaging could result in lower profits and reduced cash flows for the Company. For example, increases in the price of aluminum and steel and decreases in the price of plastic resin, which is a petrochemical product and may fluctuate with prices in the oil and gas market, may increase substitution of plastic food and beverage containers for metal containers or increases in the price of steel may increase substitution of aluminum packaging for aerosol products. Moreover, due to its high percentage of fixed costs, the Company may be unable to maintain its gross margin at past levels if it is not able to achieve high capacity utilization rates for its production equipment. In periods of low worldwide demand for its products or in situations where industry expansion created excess capacity, the Company experiences relatively low capacity utilization rates in its operations, which can lead to reduced margins during that period and can have an adverse effect on the Company's business. The Transit Packaging Division also faces substantial competition from many regional and local competitors of various sizes in the manufacture, distribution and sale of its products. Its products compete, to some extent, with various other packaging materials,including other products made of paper, plastics, wood and various types of metal. Although the division has long-term relationships with many of its customers, these relationships are typically not contractual. As a result, its customers may unilaterally reduce the purchase of its products and the division may not be able to quickly replace the revenue source, which could harm the Company's financial results.

Unanticipated acceleration and deceleration of customer demand for the Company's products may result in constraints or inefficiencies related to the Company's manufacturing, sales force, implementation resources and administrative infrastructure, particularly in emerging markets where the Company is seeking to expand production. Such constraints or inefficiencies may adversely affect the Company as a result of delays, lost potential product sales or loss of current or potential customers due to their dissatisfaction. Similarly, over-expansion, including as a result of overcapacity due to expansion by the Company's competitors, or investments in anticipation of growth that does not materialize, or develops more slowly than the Company expects, could harm the Company's financial results and result in overcapacity. To manage the Company's anticipated future growth effectively, the Company must continue to enhance its manufacturing capabilities and operations, information technology infrastructure, and financial and accounting systems and controls. Organizational growth and scale-up of operations could strain its existing managerial, operational, financial and other resources. The Company's growth requires significant capital expenditures and may divert financial resources from other projects, such as the development of new products or enhancements of existing products or reduction of the Company's outstanding indebtedness. If the Company's management is unable to effectively manage the Company's growth, its expenses may increase more than expected, its revenue could grow more slowly than expected and it may not be able to achieve its research and development and production goals. The Company's failure to manage its anticipated growth effectively could have a material effect on its business, operating results or financial condition.

The Company's ability to develop new product offerings for a diverse group of global customers with differing preferences, while maintaining functionality and spurring innovation, is critical to its success. This requires a thorough understanding of the Company's existing and potential customers on a global basis, particularly in potential high developing markets, including South America, Eastern Europe and Asia (including India). Failure to deliver quality products that meet customer needs ahead of competitors could have a significant adverse effect on the Company's business.