Canadian Solar (CSIQ) Risk Analysis

We are a corporation organized under the laws of British Columbia, Canada and a substantial portion of our assets are located outside of the U.S. A substantial portion of our current business operations is conducted in the PRC. In addition, a majority of our directors and officers are nationals and residents of countries other than the U.S. and a substantial portion of the assets of these persons are located outside the U.S. As a result, it may be difficult for you to effect service of process within the U.S. upon these persons. It may also be difficult for you to enforce judgments obtained in U.S. courts based on the civil liability provisions of the U.S. federal securities laws against us and our officers and directors. In addition, there is uncertainty as to whether the courts of Canada or the PRC would recognize or enforce judgments of U.S. courts against us or such persons predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the securities laws of the U.S. or any state. In addition, it is uncertain whether such Canadian or PRC courts would be competent to hear original actions brought in Canada or the PRC against us or such persons predicated upon the securities laws of the U.S. or any state.

Sales of our common shares in the public market, or the perception that such sales could occur, could cause the market price of our common shares to decline. As of December 31, 2020, we had 59,820,384 common shares outstanding. The number of common shares outstanding and available for sale will increase when our employees and former employees who are holders of restricted share units and options to acquire our common shares become entitled to the underlying shares under the terms of their units or options. In the past, in connection with debt financing, we have issued warrants and convertible notes, and may issue additional warrants to purchase our common shares and convertible notes that can be converted to our common shares. To the extent these warrants and conversion features are exercised, and the common shares sold into the market, the market price of our common shares could decline. Your right to participate in any future rights offerings may be limited, which may cause dilution to your holdings. We may from time to time distribute rights to our shareholders, including rights to acquire our securities. However, we cannot make these rights available in the U.S. unless we register the rights and the securities to which the rights relate under the Securities Act of 1933, or the Securities Act, or an exemption from the registration requirements is available. We are under no obligation to file a registration statement with respect to any such rights or securities or to endeavor to cause a registration statement to be declared effective. Moreover, we may not be able to establish an exemption from registration under the Securities Act. Accordingly, you may be unable to participate in our rights offerings and may experience dilution in your holdings.

The market price for our common shares has been highly volatile and subject to wide fluctuations. During the period from November 9, 2006, the first day on which our common shares were listed on Nasdaq, until December 31, 2020, the market price of our common shares ranged from $1.95 to $56.42 per share. From January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2020, the market price of our common shares ranged from $12.00 to $56.42 per share. The closing market price of our common shares on December 31, 2020 was $51.24 per share. The market price of our common shares may continue to be volatile and subject to wide fluctuations in response to a wide variety of factors, including the following: ? announcements of technological or competitive developments; ? regulatory developments in our target markets affecting us, our customers or our competitors; ? actual, projected or anticipated fluctuations in our quarterly operating results; ? changes in financial estimates by securities research analysts; ? changes in the economic performance or market valuations of other solar power companies; ? the departure of executive officers and key research personnel; ? patent litigation and other intellectual property disputes; ? litigation and other disputes with our long-term suppliers; ? fluctuations in the exchange rates between the U.S. dollars, Euros, Japanese yen, Canadian dollars, Renminbi, Brazilian reals and Thailand Bhat; ? the release or expiration of lock-up or other transfer restrictions on our outstanding common shares; ? sales or anticipated sales of additional common shares; and ? share repurchase program. In addition, the securities market has from time to time experienced significant price and volume fluctuations that are not related to the operating performance of particular companies. These market fluctuations may also have a material and adverse effect on the price of our common shares.

We may issue additional equity, equity-linked or debt securities for a number of reasons, including to finance our operations and business strategy (including in connection with acquisitions, strategic collaborations or other transactions), to satisfy our obligations for the repayment of existing indebtedness, to adjust our ratio of debt to equity, to satisfy our obligations upon the exercise of outstanding warrants or options or for other reasons. Any future issuances of equity securities or equity-linked securities could substantially dilute the interests of our existing shareholders and may materially and adversely affect the price of our common shares. We cannot predict the timing or size of any future issuances or sales of equity, equity-linked or debt securities, or the effect, if any, that such issuances or sales, may have on the market price of our common shares. Market conditions could require us to accept less favorable terms for the issuance of our securities in the future.

Under the EIT Law and its implementation regulations, dividends paid to a non-PRC investor are generally subject to a 10% PRC withholding tax, if such dividends are derived from sources within China and the non-PRC investor is considered to be a non-resident enterprise without any establishment or place within China or if the dividends paid have no connection with the non-PRC investor’s establishment or place within China, unless such tax is eliminated or reduced under an applicable tax treaty. Similarly, any gain realized on the transfer of shares by such investor is also subject to a 10% PRC withholding tax if such gain is regarded as income derived from sources within China, unless such tax is eliminated or reduced under an applicable tax treaty. The implementation regulations of the EIT Law provide that (a) if the enterprise that distributes dividends is domiciled in the PRC, or (b) if gains are realized from transferring equity interests of enterprises domiciled in the PRC, then such dividends or capital gains shall be treated as China-sourced income. Currently there are no detailed rules applicable to us that govern the procedures and specific criteria for determining the meaning of being “domiciled” in the PRC. As a result, it is not clear how the concept of domicile will be interpreted under the EIT Law. Domicile may be interpreted as the jurisdiction where the enterprise is incorporated or where the enterprise is a tax resident. As a result, if we are considered a PRC “resident enterprise” for tax purposes, it is possible that the dividends we pay with respect to our common shares to non-PRC enterprises, or the gain non-PRC enterprises may realize from the transfer of our common shares or our convertible notes, would be treated as income derived from sources within China and be subject to the PRC tax at a rate of 10% (which in the case of dividends will be withheld at source). Under the Law of the People’s Republic of China on Individual Income Tax, or the IIT Law, individual income tax is payable on PRC-source dividend income. The implementation regulations of the IIT Law provide that income from dividends derived from companies, enterprises and other economic organizations in China as well as income realized from transfer of properties in China is considered derived from sources inside China, regardless of whether the place of payment was inside China. Therefore, if we are treated as a PRC tax resident enterprise for purposes of the IIT Law, any dividends we pay to our non-PRC individual shareholders as well as any gains realized by our non-PRC individual shareholders or our non-PRC individual note holders from the transfer of our common shares or our convertible notes may be regarded as PRC-sourced income and, consequently, be subject to PRC tax at a rate of up to 20% (which in the case of dividends will be withheld at source). Such PRC taxes may be reduced by an applicable tax treaty, but it is unclear whether in practice our non-PRC noteholders and shareholders would be able to obtain the benefits of any tax treaties between their country of tax residence and the PRC in the event that we are treated as a PRC resident enterprise. The investment returns of our non-PRC investors may be materially and adversely affected if any dividends we pay, or any gains realized on a transfer of our common shares, are subject to PRC tax.

In late 2012, the SEC commenced administrative proceedings under Rule 102(e) of its Rules of Practice and also under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 against the mainland Chinese affiliates of the “Big Four” accounting firms (including the mainland Chinese affiliate of our independent registered public accounting firm). A first instance trial of the proceedings in July 2013 in the SEC’s internal administrative court resulted in an adverse judgment against the firms. The administrative law judge proposed penalties on the Chinese accounting firms including a temporary suspension of their right to practice before the SEC, although that proposed penalty did not take effect pending review by the Commissioners of the SEC. On February 6, 2015, before a review by the Commissioner had taken place, the Chinese accounting firms reached a settlement with the SEC whereby the proceedings were stayed. Under the settlement, the SEC accepted that future requests by the SEC for the production of documents would normally be made to the CSRC. The Chinese accounting firms would receive requests matching those under Section 106 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and would be required to abide by a detailed set of procedures with respect to such requests, which in substance would require them to facilitate production via the CSRC. The CSRC for its part initiated a procedure whereby, under its supervision and subject to its approval, requested classes of documents held by the accounting firms could be sanitized of problematic and sensitive content so as to render them capable of being made available by the CSRC to US regulators. Under the terms of the settlement, the underlying proceeding against the four PRC-based accounting firms was deemed dismissed with prejudice at the end of four years starting from the settlement date, which was on February 6, 2019. Despite the final ending of the proceedings, the presumption is that all parties will continue to apply the same procedures: i.e. the SEC will continue to make its requests for the production of documents to the CSRC, and the CSRC will normally process those requests applying the sanitization procedure. We cannot predict whether, in cases where the CSRC does not authorize production of requested documents to the SEC, the SEC will further challenge the four PRC-based accounting firms’ compliance with U.S. law. If additional challenges are imposed on the Chinese affiliates of the “big four” accounting firms, we could be unable to timely file future financial statements in compliance with the requirements of the Exchange Act. In the event that the SEC restarts administrative proceedings, depending upon the final outcome, listed companies in the U.S. with major PRC operations may find it difficult or impossible to retain auditors in respect of their operations in the PRC, which could result in their financial statements being determined to not be in compliance with the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, including possible delisting. Moreover, any negative news about any such future proceedings against the firms may cause investor uncertainty regarding China-based, U.S.-listed companies and the market price of their shares may be adversely affected. If our independent registered public accounting firm was denied, even temporarily, the ability to practice before the SEC and we were unable to timely find another registered public accounting firm to audit and issue an opinion on our financial statements, our financial statements could be determined not to be in compliance with the requirements of the Exchange Act. Such a determination could ultimately lead to the delisting of our common shares from Nasdaq, or deregistration from the SEC, or both, which would substantially reduce or effectively terminate the trading of our common shares in the U.S.

The independent registered public accounting firm that issues the audit reports included in our annual reports filed with the SEC, as auditors of companies that are traded publicly in the U.S. and a firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), or the PCAOB, is required by the laws of the U.S. to undergo regular inspections by the PCAOB to assess its compliance with the laws of the U.S. and professional standards. According to Article 177 of the PRC Securities Law which became effective in March 2020, no overseas securities regulator is allowed to directly conduct investigation or evidence collection activities within the territory of the PRC. Accordingly, without the consent of the competent PRC securities regulators and relevant authorities, no organization or individual may provide the documents and materials relating to securities business activities to overseas parties. Because we have substantial operations within the PRC and our auditors are located in the PRC, a jurisdiction where the PCAOB is currently unable to conduct inspections without the approval of the Chinese authorities, our independent registered public accounting firm is not currently inspected fully by the PCAOB. This lack of PCAOB inspections in the PRC prevents the PCAOB from regularly evaluating our independent registered public accounting firm’s audits and its quality control procedures. As a result, investors may be deprived of the benefits of PCAOB inspections. On May 24, 2013, PCAOB announced that it had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding on Enforcement Cooperation with the China Securities Regulatory Commission, or the CSRC, and the Ministry of Finance which establishes a cooperative framework between the parties for the production and exchange of audit documents relevant to investigations in the United States and China. On inspection, it appears that the PCAOB continues to be in discussions with the Mainland China regulators CSRC and the Ministry of Finance to permit joint inspections in the PRC of audit firms that are registered with PCAOB in relation to the audit of and audit Chinese companies that trade on U.S. exchanges. On December 7, 2018, the SEC and the PCAOB issued a joint statement highlighting continued challenges faced by the U.S. regulators in their oversight of financial statement audits of U.S.-listed companies with significant operations in China. The joint statement reflects a heightened interest in this issue. However, it remains unclear what further actions the SEC and PCAOB will take and its impact on Chinese companies listed in the U.S. On April 21, 2020, the SEC and the PCAOB issued another joint statement reiterating the greater risk that disclosures will be insufficient in many emerging markets, including China, compared to those made by U.S. domestic companies. In discussing the specific issues related to the greater risk, the statement again highlights the PCAOB’s inability to inspect audit work paper and practices of accounting firms in China, with respect to their audit work of U.S. reporting companies. On June 4, 2020, the U.S. President issued a memorandum ordering the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets to submit a report to the President within 60 days of the memorandum that includes recommendations for actions that can be taken by the executive branch and by the SEC or PCAOB on Chinese companies listed on U.S. stock exchanges and their audit firms, in an effort to protect investors in the United States. However, it remains unclear what further actions the SEC and PCAOB will take and the impact of those actions on Chinese companies listed in the United States. Inspections of other firms that the PCAOB has conducted outside the PRC have identified deficiencies in those firms’ audit procedures and quality control procedures, which may be addressed as part of the inspection process to improve future audit quality. The inability of the PCAOB to conduct full inspections of auditors in the PRC makes it more difficult to evaluate the effectiveness of our independent registered public accounting firm’s audit procedures or quality control procedures as compared to auditors outside the PRC that are subject to PCAOB inspections. Investors may lose confidence in our reported financial information and procedures and the quality of our financial statements. As part of a continued regulatory focus in the United States on access to audit and other information currently protected by national laws, in particular the laws of China, in June 2019, a bipartisan group of lawmakers introduced bills in both houses of the U.S. Congress, which if passed, would require the SEC to maintain a list of issuers for which the PCAOB is not able to inspect or investigate an auditor report issued by a foreign public accounting firm. The proposed Ensuring Quality Information and Transparency for Abroad-Based Listings on our Exchanges (EQUITABLE) Act prescribes increased disclosure requirements for these issuers and, beginning in 2025, the delisting from U.S. national securities exchanges of issuers included on the SEC’s list for three consecutive years. On May 20, 2020, the U.S. Senate passed S. 945, the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act, or the HFCAA. The HFCAA was approved by the U.S. House of Representatives on December 2, 2020. On December 18, 2020, the president of the United States signed into law the HFCAA. In essence, the HFCAA requires the SEC to prohibit foreign companies from listing securities on U.S. securities exchanges if a company retains a foreign accounting firm that cannot be inspected by the PCAOB for three consecutive years, beginning in 2021. In August 2020, the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets, or the PWG, released the Report on Protecting United States Investors from Significant Risks from Chinese Companies. The PWG recommends that the SEC take steps to implement the recommendations outlined in the report. In particular, to address companies from non-cooperating jurisdictions, or NCJs, such as China, that do not provide the PCAOB with sufficient access to fulfill its statutory mandate the PWG recommends enhanced listing standards on U.S. securities exchanges. This would require, as a condition to initial and continued exchange listing, PCAOB access to work papers of the principal audit firm for the audit of the listed company. Companies unable to satisfy this standard as a result of governmental restrictions on access to audit work papers and practices in NCJs may satisfy this standard by providing a co-audit from an audit firm with comparable resources and experience where the PCAOB determines it has sufficient access to audit work papers and practices to conduct an appropriate inspection of the co-audit firm. There is currently no legal process under which such a co-audit may be performed in China. To reduce market disruption, the new listing standards could provide for a transition period until January 1, 2022 for currently listed companies. The other recommendations in the report include, among other things, requiring enhanced and prominent issuer disclosures of the risks of investing in certain NCJs such as China. The measures in the PWG Report are presumably subject to the standard SEC rulemaking process before becoming effective. On August 10, 2020, the SEC announced that SEC Chairman had directed the SEC staff to prepare proposals in response to the PWG Report, and that the SEC was soliciting public comments and information with respect to these proposals. Under the PWG recommendations, if we fail to meet the new listing standards before the deadline specified thereunder due to factors beyond our control, we could face possible de-listing from the Nasdaq Stock Market, deregistration from the SEC, and other risks, which may materially and adversely affect, or effectively terminate, our ADS trading in the United States. It is unclear when the SEC will complete its rulemaking and when such rules will become effective and what, if any, of the PWG recommendations will be adopted. Enactment of the HFCAA and any additional rulemaking efforts to increase U.S. regulatory access to audit information could cause investor uncertainty for affected issuers, including us, the market price of our shares could be adversely affected, and we could be delisted if we are unable to cure the situation to meet the PCAOB inspection requirement in time. It is unclear if and when any of such proposed legislations will be enacted. Furthermore, there have been recent media reports on deliberations within the U.S. government regarding potentially limiting or restricting China-based companies from accessing U.S. capital markets. If any such deliberations were to materialize, the resulting legislation may have a material and adverse impact on the stock performance of China-based issuers listed in the United States.

The following provisions in our articles may deprive our shareholders of the opportunity to sell their shares at a premium over the prevailing market price by delaying or preventing a change of control of our company: ? Our board of directors has the authority, without approval from the shareholders, to issue an unlimited number of preferred shares in one or more series. Subject to the BCBCA, our board of directors may, if none of the shares of that particular series are issued, establish the number of shares to be included in each such series and may fix the designations, preferences, powers and other rights of the shares of a series of preferred shares. ? In accordance with the provisions of the BCBCA, our articles provide that the number of directors on our board of directors is set at the greater of three directors and such number of directors equal to the number of directors most recently elected by ordinary resolution at a meeting of shareholders. However, our articles also provide that between annual meetings of shareholders, our board of directors may appoint one or more additional directors, subject to the limitation that the total number of directors so appointed may not exceed one-third of the number of the corporation’s first directors or the number of directors elected at the previous annual meeting of shareholders. Any director so appointed ceases to hold office immediately before the election of directors at the next annual meeting of shareholders but is eligible for re-election or re-appointment.