ContextLogic (LOGC) Risk Factors

Our users can pay for purchases using a variety of methods, including through credit cards or Buy Now, Pay Later solutions through various third-party payment providers, and we pay our merchants through a variety of methods. If these service providers do not perform adequately or if our relationships with these service providers were to terminate, our users' ability to place orders, and our merchants' ability to receive orders or payments could be adversely affected and our business could be harmed. For example, in 2014, PayPal temporarily suspended processing payments on our platform as a result of concerns related to products listed on our platform. If a third-party payment provider suspends service or has significant outages in the future and we do not have alternative payment providers in place or are unable to provide our own solution, our business could be harmed. Likewise, if our third-party payment providers experience a security breach or fraud attack, our merchants and users could be adversely impacted. In addition, if our third-party providers increase the fees they charge us, our margins could decrease. If we respond by increasing the fees we charge to our merchants, some merchants may increase the price of their products, stop listing new items for sale or even close their accounts altogether. The laws and regulations related to payments are complex, evolving, subject to change and vary across different jurisdictions in the United States and globally. Any failure or claim of our failure to comply, or any failure by our third-party payment processors to comply, could cost us substantial resources and could result in liabilities. Further, through our agreements with our third-party payment processors, we are indirectly subject to payment card association operating rules, and certification requirements, including the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard and Visa Network Rules, which are subject to change. Failure to comply with these rules and certification requirements could impact our ability to meet our contractual obligations with our third-party payment processors and could result in potential fines. We are also subject to rules governing electronic funds transfers. Any change in these rules and requirements could make it difficult or impossible for us to comply. In addition, similar to a potential increase in costs from third-party providers described above, any increased costs associated with compliance with payment card association rules could lead to increased fees for our merchants, which may negatively impact our marketplaces.

We believe that maintaining our brand and reputation will be critical to attracting new users and encouraging users to transact on our platform. In addition to targeted online marketing, we spend a considerable amount of resources on promoting our brand and reputation. For example, starting in 2020, we began to invest in additional off-line marketing activities. Our brand promotion activities may not be successful or cost effective, and to the extent that these activities yield increased revenue, the increased revenue may not offset the expenses we incur. If we do not successfully drive brand awareness, we may fail to attract new users or increase engagement with existing users and our business may not grow or may decline, all of which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. Our ability to provide a high-quality user experience is also highly dependent on external factors over which we may have little or no control, including, without limitation, the reliability and performance of our merchants and third-party carriers. If our users are dissatisfied with the quality of the products sold on our platform, the customer service they receive or their overall user experience, or if our merchants or third-party carriers cannot deliver products to our users in a timely manner or at all, our users may stop purchasing products on our platform. Our users may also become dissatisfied with their user experience if they are unable to receive timely customer service, and because we rely in large part on an automated customer service system, it is possible our users could become dissatisfied with our customer service. We also rely on merchants for information, including product characteristics, descriptions, images, and availability that may be inaccurate or misleading. Our failure to provide our users with high-quality products and high-quality user experiences for any reason could substantially harm our reputation and adversely impact our efforts to develop Wish as a trusted brand, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. In addition, we may be subject to unfavorable publicity that would create a public perception that non-authentic, counterfeit, dangerous, illegal, or defective goods are sold on our platform, or that our policies and practices are insufficient to deter or respond to such conduct. Even if these claims are factually incorrect or based on isolated incidents, it could damage our reputation, diminish the value of our brand, draw governmental or regulatory scrutiny or action, undermine our trust and credibility, or have a negative impact on our ability to attract new users, or discourage our existing users from continuing to transact on our platform. We may also be subject to negative media regarding our privacy or cybersecurity practices, terms of service, product quality, litigation or regulatory activity, the sale of illicit or dangerous goods, other unauthorized actions by merchants on our platform, or the actions of other companies that provide similar services to ours, which may adversely affect our reputation, business, and financial results.

Our business and financial performance could be adversely affected by unfavorable changes in or interpretations of existing laws, rules, and regulations or the promulgation of new laws, rules, and regulations applicable to us and our business, including those relating to the internet and ecommerce, internet advertising and price display, consumer protection, anti-corruption, economic and trade sanctions, tax, payments, banking, data security, network and information systems security, data protection and privacy. As a result, regulatory authorities could prevent or temporarily suspend us from carrying on some or all of our activities or otherwise penalize us if our practices were found not to comply with applicable regulatory or licensing requirements or any binding interpretation of such requirements. Unfavorable changes or interpretations could decrease demand for our services, limit marketing methods and capabilities, affect our margins, increase costs or subject us to additional liabilities. For example, as a result of the initial outbreak of COVID-19, consumer protection authorities demanded rapid and decisive changes in the way that Wish screens and handles product listings that potentially violate various laws, including emergency price caps on certain items. We believe we have legal grounds to satisfy current requests or prevail against associated fines and penalties, and we intend to vigorously defend such fines and penalties. Additionally, there are, and will likely continue to be, an increasing number of laws and regulations pertaining to both the internet and ecommerce as well as third-party merchant-seller consumer products, that may relate to liability for information retrieved from or transmitted over the internet, display of certain taxes and fees, online editorial and user-generated content, user privacy, data security, network and information systems security, behavioral targeting and online advertising, taxation, liability for third-party activities, quality of services and consumer protection. For example, the European Digital Services Act ("DSA"), which is expected to take effect in the first half of 2024, intends to impose new legal obligations on online marketplaces operating in Europe in terms of both verifying and ensuring the accuracy and disclosure of required information, as well as the safety and authenticity of products posted by third-party merchants. The DSA also updates the responsibilities and liabilities of digital online services, such as the rules on illegal content, notice-and-takedown, and online targeted advertising, bringing new powers to fine in-scope eligible companies up to 6% of their global annual turnover. In addition, the European Union's Market Surveillance Regulation, which took effect in July 2021, placed new obligations on online marketplaces that perform certain "fulfilment service provider" activities in Europe and was designed to reduce the availability of non-compliant products in Europe when offered by sellers outside of the region that either had or did not have an appointed authorized product compliance representative in Europe. The UK is expected to pass the Online Harms Bill that will require social media platforms to remove illegal adult content expeditiously and to also proactively prevent such listings from being uploaded, which will also impact online marketplace platforms. Denmark has also passed a law placing new obligations on marketplaces and giving its regulators the right to request fines and shutdowns where marketplaces are consistently unsuccessful in screening products that are unsafe or unlawful. Additionally, the U.K. is also expected to introduce its own mandatory conformity marking requirements under the proposed a new UKCA scheme from 2024 (replacing the existing EU CE marking scheme), which is anticipated to require online sellers of certain eligible consumer products to U.K. consumers to visually display evidence of such requisite marks on physical product and/or packaging and on their online product listings. Certain EU-27 Member States, such as France, Germany, Sweden, and Austria, have already updated their own versions of Extended Producer Responsibility ("EPR") schemes under applicable EU Directives that apply to online marketplace platforms, by requiring them to collect, report, and at times publish mandatory registration or other product data from third-party sellers offering certain in-region products or packaging on their platforms. Failure of online marketplace platforms to ensure their merchant-sellers' own primary independent product compliance obligations are satisfied can result in civil penalties to such platforms. These types of product-specific compliance regulations and laws primarily targeting merchant-sellers but secondarily holding online marketplaces responsible and/or liable, are only expected to increase in breadth and number over the coming years. Furthermore, the growth and development of ecommerce may prompt calls for more stringent consumer protection laws and more aggressive enforcement efforts, which may impose additional burdens on online businesses generally. For example, amendments to the EU's Unfair Commercial Practices Directive that took effect May 2022 mandated additional obligations on online platforms and marketplaces that host user-customer reviews regarding third-party products. Such new obligations created greater disclosure, transparency, reactionary reporting, and policy enforcement requirements on online platforms and marketplaces in the area of user reviews, designed to prevent the risks of the reviews being fake, false, or misleading. Likewise, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC"), the U.S. Department of Justice, the U.S. Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Controls, the U.S. Department of State, as well as other foreign regulatory authorities continue to enforce economic and trade regulations and anti-corruption laws, across industries as well as certain regions. U.S. trade sanctions relate to transactions with designated foreign countries and territories, including Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Syria, the Crimea and recently annexed Luhansk and Donetsk regions of Ukraine, as well as specifically targeted individuals and entities that are identified on U.S.'s and other blacklists, and those owned by them or those acting on their behalf. Further, In February 2022, following Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the U.S. and other countries announced sanctions against Russia. The U.S. and other countries could impose wider sanctions and take other actions should the conflict further escalate. While it is difficult to anticipate the impact the sanctions announced to date may have on the Company, any further sanctions imposed or actions taken by the U.S. or other countries, and any retaliatory measures by Russia in response, could have an adverse effect on our business. We have established a trade and screening compliance program designed to increase our compliance with these economic and trade restrictions and export and import control regimes. However, these laws and regulations are complex and subject to frequent change, including with respect to jurisdictions and the lists of sanctioned entities and other regulatory controls. For example, in June 2022, the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA) went into effect in the U.S., which establishes a rebuttable presumption that the importation of any goods, wares, articles, and merchandise mined, produced, or manufactured wholly or in part in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of the PRC, or produced by certain entities, is prohibited by Section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930 and are not entitled to entry to the United States. We may incur significant costs related to laws, regulations, sanctions, embargoes, export controls programs or other restrictions and disclosure requirements, as well as negative publicity, investigations, fines, fees or settlements, which may be difficult to predict. We also could face increased compliance costs and risks as our merchant-base and logistics offerings continue to expand. Similarly, state and federal lawmakers have introduced more robust Know-Your-Customer/Business ("KYC/KYB") regulations to ensure greater transparency for third-party sellers of consumer products online. For example, on June 27, 2023, the INFORM Consumers Act will become effective in the U.S. This law, among other things, directs online marketplaces to collect, verify, and disclose to consumers certain high-volume third-party seller information by authenticating the seller's government ID, tax ID, bank account information, and contact information. Under such law, online marketplaces will also be required to supply a hotline to allow customers to report to the marketplace suspicious marketplace activity, such as the posting of suspected stolen, counterfeit, or dangerous products. We may incur significant costs related to current, new or changing KYC/KYB regulations as well as increased liability risks (including civil penalties) if deemed non-compliant. Anti-corruption laws, including the U.S. FCPA and the U.K. Bribery Act, generally prohibit direct or indirect corrupt payments to government officials and, under certain laws, to private persons to obtain or retain business or an improper business advantage. Similarly, global anti-money laundering laws and regulations generally prohibit exchanging money or assets that were obtained criminally for money or other assets that are clean, including money that is used to fund terrorism. Although we have policies and procedures in place designed to promote compliance with these laws and regulations, our employees, partners, or agents could take actions in contravention of our policies and procedures or violate applicable laws or regulations. In the event our controls should fail, or we are found to be not in compliance for other reasons, we could be subject to monetary damages, civil and criminal monetary penalties, withdrawal of business licenses or permits, litigation and damage to our reputation and the value of our brand. Additionally, the law relating to liability of online service providers is currently unsettled at both a national and global level. Lawmakers and governmental agencies have in the past and could in the future require changes in the way our business is conducted, including with explicit obligations to inspect and screen content and products or implicit obligations that might stem from increased legal liability for online service providers, including online marking and labeling requirements, akin to those traditionally reserved for either manufacturers, suppliers, importers-of-record, and/or distributors of physical consumer goods. Unfavorable regulations, laws, decisions, or interpretations by government or regulatory authorities applying those laws and regulations, or inquiries, investigations, or enforcement actions threatened or initiated by them, could cause us to incur substantial costs, expose us to unanticipated civil and criminal liability or penalties (including substantial monetary fines), increase our cost of doing business, require us to change our business practices in a manner materially adverse to our business, damage our reputation, impede our growth, or otherwise have a material effect on our operations.

We may also be subject to tax controversies in the U.S. and in foreign jurisdictions that can result in tax assessments against us. Developments in an audit, investigation, or other tax controversy can have a material effect on our operating results or cash flows. We regularly assess the likelihood of an adverse outcome resulting from these proceedings to determine the adequacy of our tax accruals and while we believe our tax estimates are reasonable, the final outcome of audits, investigations, and any other tax controversies could be materially different from our historical tax accruals.

We collect personally identifiable information and other data from users and prospective users. We use this information to provide services and relevant products to our users, to support, expand and improve our business, and to tailor our marketing and advertising efforts. We may also share users' personal data with certain third parties as authorized by the user or as described in our privacy policy. As a result, we are subject to governmental regulation and other legal obligations related to the protection of confidential and sensitive data (including personally identifiable information and personal data), privacy, information security and consumer protection in certain countries where we do business and there has been and will continue to be a significant increase globally in such laws that restrict or control the use of personal data. In Europe, where the data privacy and information security regime underwent a significant change in 2018, the legal environment related to personal data continues to evolve and companies like us that process personal data from large numbers of individuals are subject to increasing regulatory scrutiny. The General Data Protection Regulation ("GDPR") implemented more stringent operational requirements for our use of personal data. These more stringent requirements include expanded disclosures to tell our users about how we may use their personal data, increased controls on profiling users and increased rights for users to access, control and delete their personal data. In addition, there are mandatory data breach notification requirements and significantly increased penalties of the greater of €20 million or 4% of global turnover for the preceding financial year. Although there are legal mechanisms to allow for the transfer of personal data from the United Kingdom ("U.K."), EEA and Switzerland to the U.S., uncertainty about compliance with such data protection laws remains and such mechanisms may not be available or applicable with respect to the personal data processing activities necessary to research, develop and market our products and services. For example, legal challenges in Europe to the mechanisms allowing companies to transfer personal data from the EEA to the United States could result in further limitations on the ability to transfer personal data across borders, particularly if governments are unable or unwilling to reach new or maintain existing agreements that support cross-border data transfers, such as the EU-U.S. and Swiss-U.S. Privacy Shield Frameworks. Specifically, on July 16, 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union invalidated Decision 2016/1250 on the adequacy of the protection provided by the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Framework ("Schrems II" decision). To the extent that we or our service providers were to rely on the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Framework, we may not be able to do so in the future, which could increase our costs and limit our ability to process personal data from the European Union. The Schrems II decision also cast doubt on the ability to use one of the primary alternatives to the Privacy Shield, namely, the European Commission's Standard Contractual Clauses, to lawfully transfer personal data from Europe to the U.S. and most other countries. In November 2020, the European Commission released a draft of revised Standard Contractual Clauses, and, in January 2021, the European Data Protection Board and the European Data Protection Supervisor issued a joint opinion regarding these revised Standard Contractual Clauses. These revised Standard Contractual Clauses and related developments, opinions, and guidance from European regulators may significantly increase our liability under, and compliance costs related to, cross-border data transfers and the GDPR, and may impact our ability to operate and deliver services in the EEA. Following its exit from the EU in January 2020, the U.K. implemented legislation referred to as the "U.K.-GDPR" which substantially aligns with requirements and penalties under the EU GDPR. We may face similar costs, risks, and operational impacts in complying with the U.K.-GDPR as we face in complying with the EU GDPR. In recent years, U.S. and European lawmakers and regulators have expressed concern over the use of third-party cookies and similar technologies for online behavioral advertising, and laws in this area are also under reform. In the EU current national laws that implement the ePrivacy Directive will be replaced by an EU regulation known as the ePrivacy Regulation. The draft ePrivacy Regulation retains existing informed consent conditions and also imposes the strict opt-in marketing rules on direct marketing that is "presented" on a web page rather than sent by email, alters rules on third-party cookies and similar technology and significantly increases penalties for breach of the rules. Regulation of cookies and similar technologies may lead to broader restrictions on our marketing and personalization activities and may negatively impact the effectiveness of our marketing. Such regulations may also increase regulatory scrutiny and increase potential civil liability under data protection or consumer protection laws. The ePrivacy Regulations draft also advocates the development of browsers that block cookies by default. These developments could impair our ability to collect user information, including personal data and usage information, that helps us provide more targeted advertising to our current and prospective users, which could adversely affect our business, given our use of cookies and similar technologies to target our marketing and personalize the user experience. We may incur liabilities, expenses, costs, and other operational losses under GDPR and applicable EU Member States and the U.K. privacy laws in connection with any measures we take to comply with them. As interpretation of both the ePrivacy Regulation and GDPR develop, we could incur substantial costs to comply with these regulations. The changes could require significant systems changes, limit the effectiveness of our marketing activities, adversely affect our margins, increase costs and subject us to additional liabilities. In the U.S., federal and various state governments have adopted or are considering, laws, guidelines or rules for the collection, distribution, use and storage of information collected from or about users or their devices. For example, California passed the California Consumer Privacy Act (the "CCPA"), which became effective on January 1, 2020 and introduced substantial changes to privacy law for businesses that collect personal information from California residents. The CCPA creates individual privacy rights for California consumers and increases the privacy and security obligations of entities handling certain personal information. The CCPA provides for civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action for data breaches that is expected to increase data breach litigation. And on November 3, 2020, California passed the California Privacy Rights Act (the "CPRA"). The CPRA, which will not be fully in effect until January 1, 2023, amends and expands the CCPA, including the introduction of sensitive personal information as a new regulated dataset in California that is subject to new disclosure and purpose limitation requirements. Additionally, the Virginia Consumer Data Protection Act (the "VCDPA") will become effective on January 1, 2023. The Colorado Privacy Act and the Connecticut Data Privacy Act will become effective on July 1, 2023, and the Utah Consumer Privacy Act will become effective on December 31, 2023. Other states may decide to adopt similar laws in the future. Additionally, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and many state attorneys general are applying federal and state consumer protection laws, to impose standards for the online collection, use and dissemination of data. Furthermore, these obligations may be interpreted and applied inconsistently from one jurisdiction to another and may conflict with other requirements or our practices. Additionally, new platform liability laws, potential amendments to existing laws, and ongoing regulatory and judicial interpretation of these laws imparting liability for conduct by users of a platform may create costs and uncertainty for our platform at its users. In the U.S., the United States Supreme Court recently agreed to review a matter in which the scope of protections available to online platforms under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, or CDA, is at issue. In parallel, there have also been various Executive and Congressional efforts to restrict the scope of protections available to online platforms under Section 230 of the CDA, and our current protections from liability for third-party content posted on our platform in the United States could decrease or change depending on judicial interpretation and/or content-related legislation. We could incur significant costs investigating and defending such claims and, if we are found liable, significant damages. In September 2021 and November 2021, the PRC made effective its new Data Security Law and Personal Information Protection Law, respectively. While there are many aspects of these laws that are still yet-to-be-defined, they impose complex and far-reaching requirements related to cybersecurity and the processing of personal data, both within China and extraterritorially. Potential penalties under the Personal Information Protection Law are severe, at up to the greater of 5% of global revenue or $7.7 million. The precise scope and impact of these laws is still unclear but they could significantly increase our compliance costs, cause us to suffer monetary penalties, or otherwise adversely impact our business and operations. Many data protection regimes apply based on where a user is located, and as we expand our platform and new laws are enacted or existing laws change, we may be subject to new laws, regulations or standards or new interpretations of existing laws, regulations or standards, including those in the areas of data security, data privacy and regulation of email providers and those that require localization of certain data, which could require us to incur additional costs and restrict our business operations. Any failure or perceived failure by us to comply with rapidly evolving privacy or security laws policies (including our own stated privacy policies), legal obligations or industry standards or any security incident that results in the unauthorized release or transfer of personally identifiable information or other user data may result in governmental enforcement actions, litigation (including user class actions), fines and penalties or adverse publicity and could cause our users to lose trust in us, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition, and prospects.

Companies in the internet and technology industries are frequently subject to litigation based on allegations of infringement or other violations of intellectual property rights. We periodically receive communications that claim we have infringed, misappropriated or misused others' intellectual property rights. To the extent we gain greater public recognition, we may face a higher risk of being the subject of intellectual property claims. Third parties may have intellectual property rights that cover significant aspects of our technologies or business methods and prevent us from expanding our offerings. Any intellectual property claim against us, with or without merit, could be time consuming and expensive to settle or litigate and could divert the attention of our management. Litigation regarding intellectual property rights is inherently uncertain due to the complex issues involved, and we may not be successful in defending ourselves in such matters. In addition, some of our competitors have extensive portfolios of issued patents. In a patent infringement claim against us, we may assert, as a defense, that we do not infringe the relevant patent claims, that the patent is invalid, or both. The strength of our defenses will depend on the patents asserted, the interpretation of these patents, and our ability to invalidate the asserted patents. However, we could be unsuccessful in advancing non-infringement and/or invalidity arguments in our defense. In the United States, issued patents enjoy a presumption of validity, and the party challenging the validity of a patent claim must present clear and convincing evidence of invalidity, which is a high burden of proof. Conversely, the patent owner need only prove infringement by a preponderance of the evidence, which Is a lower burden of proof. We may be unaware of the intellectual property rights that others may claim cover some or all of our technology or services. Because patent applications can take years to issue and are often afforded confidentiality for some period of time, there may currently be pending applications, unknown to us, that later result in issued patents that could cover one or more of our products. Many potential litigants, including some of our competitors and patent holding companies, have the ability to dedicate substantial resources to enforcing their intellectual property rights. Moreover, our patents may provide little or no deterrence in litigation involving patent holding companies or other adverse patent owners that have no relevant product revenue. Any claims successfully brought against us could subject us to significant liability for damages and we may be required to stop using technology or other intellectual property alleged to be in violation of a third-party's rights in jurisdictions where we do business. We also might be required to enter into costly settlement agreements or seek a license for third-party intellectual property. Even if a license is available, we could be required to pay significant royalties or submit to unreasonable terms, which would increase our operating expenses. We may also be required to develop alternative non-infringing technology, which could require significant time and expense. If we cannot license or develop technology for any allegedly infringing aspect of our business, we would be forced to limit our service and may be unable to compete effectively. Any of these results could harm our business.

We calculate and track performance metrics with internal tools, which are not independently verified by any third-party. While we believe our metrics are reasonable estimates of our user or merchant base for the applicable period of measurement, the methodologies used to measure these metrics require significant judgment and may be susceptible to algorithm or other technical errors. For example, user accounts are based on email addresses, and a user could use multiple email addresses to establish multiple accounts, and merchants in many instances will have multiple accounts. As a result, the data we report may not be accurate. Our internal tools and processes we use to identify multiple accounts or fraudulent accounts have a number of limitations, and our methodologies for tracking key metrics may change over time, which could result in unexpected changes to our metrics, including historical metrics. Our ability to recalculate our historical metrics may be impacted by data limitations or other factors that require us to apply different methodologies for such adjustments and we generally do not intend to update previously disclosed metrics for any such changes. Though we regularly review our processes for calculating metrics and may adjust our processes for calculating metrics to improve their accuracy, limitations or errors with respect to how we measure data (or the data that we measure) may affect our understanding of certain details of our business, which could affect our longer term strategies. If our performance metrics are not accurate representations of our business, user or merchant base, or traffic levels; if we discover material inaccuracies in our metrics; or if the metrics we rely on to track our performance do not provide an accurate measurement of our business, user or merchant base or traffic levels, we may not be able to effectively implement our business strategy, our reputation may be harmed, and our operating and financial results could be adversely affected. Our merchants, platform partners, and investors rely on our key metrics as a representation of our performance. If these third parties do not perceive our user metrics to be accurate representations of our user base or user engagement, or if we discover material inaccuracies in our user metrics, our reputation may be harmed and merchants may be less willing to sell on our platform, which could negatively affect our business, financial condition, or results of operations.

Our future performance depends on our employees, including key engineering and product development personnel. Due to competition for key personnel within our industry, we may be unable to successfully attract, integrate, or retain sufficiently qualified key personnel. In making employment decisions, particularly in the internet and high-technology industries, job candidates and current employees often consider the value of the equity awards they would receive in connection with their employment or continued employment and fluctuations in and negative pressure on our stock price may make it more difficult to attract, retain, and motivate employees. Our recent reductions in workforce and the proposed Asset Sale may make it more difficult for us to recruit and retain employees.

We rely on merchants to properly and promptly prepare products ordered by our users for shipment and our logistics program relies on third-party carriers and logistics providers to deliver products as well as third parties to consolidate packages for shipping. Any failure by merchants to timely prepare such products for shipment or any delay by third-party carriers to deliver the products will have an adverse effect on the fulfillment of user orders, which could negatively affect the user experience and harm our business and results of operations. Any increase in shipping costs, any significant shipping difficulties, disruptions or delays, or any failure by merchants on our platform to deliver products in a timely manner or to otherwise adequately serve our users, could damage our reputation and brand, and may harm our business. For example, due to abrupt new value added tax ("VAT") regulations in Colombia (and related evolving interpretations of the same by local regulatory enforcement agencies), the de minimis threshold exception to remitting VAT for certain low-value declared parcels was removed, subjecting any and all parcels (regardless of import value) to VAT payment obligations. Further, there was industry-wide confusion as to whether the exemption from VAT liability applied to items "shipped from" or "originating in" countries with which Colombia has a Free Trade Agreement ("FTA"). This caused certain parcels shipped by Wish merchants to be held up at Colombia customs, causing delays and increasing charges for consumers. Also, during the initial outbreak of COVID-19, our cross-border logistics function was severely impacted in terms of both disrupted processing capabilities and increased costs, which resulted in a decrease in sales due to higher logistics costs and higher refund rates due to poor performance. Our merchants based in China also experienced supply interruptions and delivery delays during the outbreak of COVID-19 and have continued to experience such interruptions and delays, which may continue to have an adverse effect on our users' experience on our platform. Historically, our merchants in China have benefitted from lower shipping costs due to the Universal Postal Union Treaty ("UPU"). Certain expected changes to UPU postal rates that went into effect in July 2020 and other expected changes that will be implemented in the future are likely to increase the shipping rates our merchants incur to ship products from China. Further, the European Commission is considering a legislative proposal from trade industry associations to eliminate de minimis thresholds for customs entry, which if later enacted, would limit packages from several countries from qualifying for tariff-free entry into the EU-27 under existing de minimis laws, thus making importing goods from any country to the European Union ("EU") more complicated and expensive. The actions we have taken in our logistics program to mitigate these increased costs may not be successful over the long term. If there are increases in shipping costs, including rising oil and gas prices, the sales price of products on our platform could increase, which could reduce the volume of transaction activity on our platform to decrease and may consequently have a negative impact on our results of operations.

In 2023, we conducted reductions in force affecting approximately one half of our then global workforce in order to reduce operating costs and consolidate functions. These reductions in force reflect ongoing efforts focused on realigning our organizational structure, eliminating redundancies, and reducing operating costs. However, we may not realize, in full or in part, the anticipated savings due to unanticipated events and/or unexpected costs. These reductions in force have resulted in and may continue to result in unintended consequences and costs, such as the loss of institutional knowledge and expertise, attrition beyond the intended number of employees, decreased morale and productivity among our remaining employees, inability to maintain an effective system of internal controls, and the risk that we may not achieve the anticipated benefits. In addition, while positions have been eliminated, certain functions necessary to our operations remain, and we may be unsuccessful in distributing the duties and obligations of departed employees among our remaining employees. Moreover, reductions in force may also result in increased costs due to associated legal risks, and could distract management and remaining employees. If we are unable to realize the anticipated benefits from the reductions in force, or if we experience significant adverse consequences from the reductions in force, our business, financial condition, and results of operations may be materially adversely affected.

Our merchants source a large percentage of the products we list on our platform from China and other countries outside the U.S. and Europe. Additionally, most of our merchants, and some of our operations, are located in China, making the price and availability of products on our platform susceptible to international trade risks and other international economic conditions. If the U.S. government or other governments impose tariffs or other economic measures that directly or indirectly increase the price of products it imports and that we list on our platform, the increased prices could have a material adverse effect on our financial results and business. The effects of the imposed and proposed tariffs are uncertain because of the dynamic nature of governmental action, relations and responses. Further escalation of trade, economic and geo-political tensions between the United States and its trading partners, especially China, could result in long-term changes to global trade, including retaliatory trade restrictions that restrict the international flow of products. We also cannot predict what actions may ultimately be taken with respect to tariffs or trade relations between the U.S. and China or other countries, what products may be subject to such actions, or what actions may be taken by the other countries in retaliation. Any alterations to our business strategy or operations made in order to adapt to or comply with any such changes would be time-consuming and expensive, and certain of our competitors may be better suited to withstand or react to these changes. Additionally, certain jurisdictions may attempt to restrict the operation and access of certain China-based companies, such as TikTok, WeChat and Alipay in the U.S. In response, government authorities in China, or elsewhere, may seek to restrict access and operation of U.S. companies. Most of our merchants and some of our operations are located in China; if our operations or our merchant's activities were restricted in China, our platform, our business, financial condition, and results of operations would be adversely affected. We are not able to predict future economic policy of the U.S., China, or of any foreign countries in which we operate. The adoption and expansion of restrictions, including restrictions on access to apps and other platforms, cross-border data transfers, tariffs, or other governmental action related to economic policies, has the potential to adversely impact our business, operational results and financial position.

Our user pricing and payments are denominated in the local currencies of the users, primarily in U.S. dollars and Euros, and we make a majority of our payments in Renminbi ("RMB") to the merchants in China for products sold on the Wish platform, which creates exposure to currency rate fluctuations. Additionally, our operating expenses are denominated in the currencies of the countries in which our operations are located, and may be subject to fluctuations due to changes in foreign currency exchange rates, particularly changes in RMB. As part of our currency hedging strategy, we use financial instruments such as forward contracts to hedge our foreign currency exposure in order to reduce the frequency that we need to adjust local currency pricing as well as reduce the short-term impact of foreign currency rate fluctuations on our operating results.