PBF Energy (PBF) Risk Analysis

Beginning in 2022, record refining industry profits raised the concern of many public policy experts and federal and state policymakers, who have questioned whether these profits were justified, or whether they constituted a "windfall" to the industry and have proposed legislation that if enacted could adversely affect our profitability. In September 2022, California adopted Senate Bill No. 1322 ("SB 1322"), which requires refineries in California to report monthly on the volume and cost of the crude oil they buy, the quantity and price of the wholesale gasoline they sell, and the gross gasoline margin per barrel, among other information. The provisions of SB 1322 were effective January 2023. In March 2023, California adopted Senate Bill No. 2 (such statute, together with any regulations contemplated or issued thereunder, "SBx 1-2"), which, among other things, (i) authorized the establishment of a maximum gross gasoline refining margin and the imposition of a financial penalty for profits above a maximum gross gasoline refining margin, (ii) significantly expanded the reporting obligations under SB 1322 and the Petroleum Industry Information Reporting Act of 1980, which include reporting requirements to the California Energy Commission ("CEC") for all participants in the petroleum industry supply chain in California (e.g., refiners, marketers, importers, transporters, terminals, producers, renewables producers, pipelines, and ports), (iii) created the Division of Petroleum Market Oversight within the CEC to analyze the data provided under SBx 1-2, and (iv) authorized the CEC to regulate the timing and other aspects of refinery turnaround and maintenance activities in certain instances. SBx 1-2 imposes increased and substantial reporting requirements, which include daily, weekly, monthly, and annual reporting of detailed operational and financial data on all aspects of our operations in California. The operational data includes any plans for turnaround and maintenance activities at our two California refineries and the way we expect to address the potential impacts on feedstock and product inventories in California as a result of such turnaround and maintenance activities. The provisions of SBx 1-2 became effective June 26, 2023. In September 2023, the Governor of the State of California directed the CEC to begin the regulatory processes concerning (i) potential penalties for exceeding a maximum gross gasoline refining margin and (ii) the timing of refinery turnarounds and maintenance. Consequently, the CEC adopted an order requiring an informational proceeding on a maximum gross gasoline refining margin and penalty under SBx 1-2. It also adopted an order initiating rulemaking activity under SBx 1-2 that will be focused on refinery maintenance and turnarounds. Following the adoption of SBx 1-2, in October 2024, California adopted Assembly Bill No. 1 (such statute, together with any regulations contemplated or issued thereunder, "ABx 2-1") which authorizes the CEC to consider the effects of refiners' inventories of fuel and feedstocks and blending components on the price of transportation fuels in California. The bill further authorizes the CEC, by regulation, to develop and impose requirements for refiners operating in the state to maintain minimum levels of inventories of refined transportation fuels meeting California specifications, including any feedstocks and blending components, as specified. Specifically, the bill provides that the CEC: (i) may establish criteria that refiners must meet before commencing a turnaround or maintenance event, including requiring California's petroleum refiners to have resupply plans and arrangements to cover their loss in production, as specified; (ii) is authorized to develop and impose requirements on California refiners to maintain minimum levels of inventories of refined transportation fuels meeting California specifications; (iii) is prohibited from adopting minimum inventory regulations unless it finds that the benefits outweigh the potential costs to consumers; and (iv) is required to annually re-evaluate these factors and provide a report to the Legislature concluding whether the regulation meets the cost effectiveness test. To the extent that the CEC establishes a maximum gross gasoline refining margin and imposes a financial penalty for profits above such maximum gross gasoline refining margin, inventory requirements, or timing of turnaround schedules our financial results and profitability could be adversely affected. Our results of operations and our financial performance could also be adversely impacted to the extent that restrictions on turnaround and maintenance activities are imposed by the CEC. We cannot reasonably predict the impact that the full implementation of SBx 1-2 or ABx 2-1 will have on our California operations or our Company nor can we predict the impact that similarly focused legislation or actions in other jurisdictions in which we operate our refineries may have. The recently adopted legislation in California, and the future enactment of similar legislation in any of the other jurisdictions could adversely impact our business, results of operations, profitability and cash.

PBF Energy is party to a Tax Receivable Agreement that provides for the payment from time to time by PBF Energy to the current and former holders of PBF LLC Series A Units and PBF LLC Series B Units, or other permitted assignees, of 85% of the benefits, if any, that PBF Energy is deemed to realize as a result of (i) the increases in tax basis resulting from its acquisitions of PBF LLC Series A Units, including such acquisitions in connection with its prior offerings or in the future and (ii) certain other tax benefits related to its entering into the Tax Receivable Agreement, including tax benefits attributable to payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement. See "Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence." PBF Energy has recognized, as of December 31, 2024, a total liability for the Tax Receivable Agreement of $293.6 million, of which $125.4 million is recorded as a current liability and was paid in January 2025 related to the 2023 tax year. As future taxable income is recorded, increases in our Tax Receivable Agreement liability may be necessary in conjunction with the revaluation of deferred tax assets. If PBF Energy does not have taxable income, PBF Energy generally is not required (absent a change of control or circumstances requiring an early termination payment) to make payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement for that taxable year because no benefit will have been actually realized. However, any tax benefits that do not result in realized benefits in a given tax year will likely generate tax attributes that may be utilized to generate benefits in previous or future tax years. The utilization of such tax attributes will result in payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement. The foregoing are merely estimates based on assumptions that are subject to change due to various factors, including, among other factors, the timing of exchanges of PBF LLC Series A Units for shares of PBF Energy Class A common stock as contemplated by the Tax Receivable Agreement, the price of PBF Energy Class A common stock at the time of such exchanges, the extent to which such exchanges are taxable, and the amount and timing of PBF Energy's income. The actual payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement could differ materially. It is possible that future transactions or events could increase the actual tax benefits realized and the corresponding Tax Receivable Agreement payments. There may be a material negative effect on our liquidity if, as a result of timing discrepancies or otherwise, (i) the payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement exceed the actual benefits PBF Energy realizes in respect of the tax attributes subject to the Tax Receivable Agreement, and/or (ii) distributions to PBF Energy by PBF LLC are not sufficient to permit PBF Energy, after it has paid its taxes and other obligations, to make payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement. The payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement are not conditioned upon any recipient's continued ownership of us.

The Tax Receivable Agreement provides that upon certain changes of control, or if, at any time, PBF Energy elects an early termination of the Tax Receivable Agreement, PBF Energy's (or its successor's) obligations with respect to exchanged or acquired PBF LLC Series A Units (whether exchanged or acquired before or after such transaction) would be based on certain assumptions, including (i) that PBF Energy would have sufficient taxable income to fully utilize the deductions arising from the increased tax deductions and tax basis and other benefits related to entering into the Tax Receivable Agreement and (ii) that the subsidiaries of PBF LLC will sell certain nonamortizable assets (and realize certain related tax benefits) no later than a specified date. Moreover, in each of these instances, PBF Energy would be required to make an immediate payment equal to the present value (at a discount rate equal to LIBOR plus 100 basis points) of the anticipated future tax benefits (based on the foregoing assumptions). Accordingly, payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement may be made years in advance of the actual realization, if any, of the anticipated future tax benefits and may be significantly greater than the actual benefits PBF Energy realizes in respect of the tax attributes subject to the Tax Receivable Agreement. In these situations, PBF Energy's obligations under the Tax Receivable Agreement could have a substantial negative impact on our liquidity. PBF Energy may not be able to finance its obligations under the Tax Receivable Agreement and its existing indebtedness may limit its subsidiaries' ability to make distributions to PBF Energy to pay these obligations. In the case of certain changes of control, payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement will be accelerated and may significantly exceed the actual benefits we realize in respect of the tax attributes subject to the Tax Receivable Agreement. We expect that the payments that we may make under the Tax Receivable Agreement in the event of a change of control will be substantial. As a result, our accelerated payment obligations and/or the assumptions adopted under the Tax Receivable Agreement in the case of a change of control may deter a potential sale of our Company to a third-party and may otherwise make it less likely that a third-party would enter into a change of control transaction with us or negatively impact the value received by owners of our Class A common stock in a change of control transaction. Moreover, payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement will be based on the tax reporting positions that PBF Energy determines in accordance with the Tax Receivable Agreement. PBF Energy will not be reimbursed for any payments previously made under the Tax Receivable Agreement if the IRS subsequently disallows part or all of the tax benefits that gave rise to such prior payments. As a result, in certain circumstances, payments could be made under the Tax Receivable Agreement that are significantly in excess of the benefits that PBF Energy actually realized in respect of (i) the increases in tax basis resulting from our purchases or exchanges of PBF LLC Series A Units and (ii) certain other tax benefits related to PBF Energy entering into the Tax Receivable Agreement, including tax benefits attributable to payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement.

Both houses of Congress have actively considered legislation to reduce emissions of GHGs, such as carbon dioxide and methane, including proposals to: (i) establish a cap and trade system, (ii) create a federal renewable energy or "clean" energy standard requiring electric utilities to provide a certain percentage of power from such sources, and (iii) create enhanced incentives for use of renewable energy and increased efficiency in energy supply and use. In addition, EPA has taken steps to regulate GHGs under the existing federal Clean Air Act. EPA has adopted regulations limiting GHG emissions for light- and medium-duty vehicles and heavy-duty highway vehicles. EPA has also adopted regulations addressing the permitting of GHG emissions from stationary sources, and requiring the reporting of GHG emissions from specified large GHG emission sources, including refineries. These and similar regulations could require us to incur costs to monitor and report GHG emissions or reduce emissions of GHGs associated with our operations. In addition, various states, individually as well as in some cases on a regional basis, have taken steps to control GHG emissions, including adoption of GHG reporting requirements, cap and trade systems and renewable portfolio standards (such as AB 32). On September 23, 2020 the Governor of California issued an executive order effectively banning the sale of new gasoline-powered passenger cars and trucks by 2035 and requiring zero-emission medium to heavy duty vehicles by 2045 everywhere feasible. The executive order requires state agencies to build out sufficient electric vehicle charging infrastructure. It is not possible at this time to predict the ultimate form, timing or extent of federal or state regulation. In the event we do incur increased costs as a result of increased efforts to control GHG emissions, we may not be able to pass on any of these costs to our customers. Regulatory requirements also could adversely affect demand for the refined products that we produce. Any increased costs or reduced demand could materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations. Requirements to reduce emissions could result in increased costs to operate and maintain our facilities as well as implement and manage new emission controls and programs put in place. For example, in September 2016, the state of California enacted Senate Bill 32, which further reduces greenhouse gas emissions targets to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. Two regulations implemented to achieve these goals are Cap-and-Trade and the LCFS. In 2012, CARB implemented Cap-and-Trade. This program currently places a cap on GHGs and we are required to acquire a sufficient number of credits to cover emissions from our refineries and our in-state sales of gasoline and diesel. In 2009, CARB adopted the LCFS, which required a 10% reduction in the carbon intensity of gasoline and diesel by 2020. In 2022, California enacted Assembly Bill 1279 which requires the state to achieve a GHG reduction target of 85 percent below 1990 levels by 2045 and overall carbon neutrality by 2045. CARB also amended the LCFS in 2024, which requires a 30 percent reduction by 2030 and 90 percent reduction by 2045 in the carbon intensity of transportation fuels (compared to a 2010 baseline). Compliance is achieved through blending lower carbon intensity biofuels into gasoline and diesel or by purchasing credits. Compliance with each of these programs is facilitated through a market-based credit system. If sufficient credits are unavailable for purchase or we are unable to pass through costs to our customers, we have to pay a higher price for credits or if we are otherwise unable to meet our compliance obligations, our financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected. As noted above, on September 23, 2020, the California Governor issued Executive Order N-79-20 ("N-79-20 Order") intended to further reduce GHGs within the state. The N-79-20 Order sets a 2035 goal of no sale of internal combustion engines for passenger cars and pickup trucks within California, and a 2045 goal of no sale of internal combustion engine medium- and heavy-duty trucks, and off-road vehicles and equipment. However, the N-79-20 Order would still allow used internal combustion engine vehicles to be used and sold after these dates. In an effort to accomplish the 2035 goal, on August 25, 2022, CARB voted unanimously to adopt the Advanced Clean Cars II ("ACCII") regulations. According to CARB, the ACCII regulations will rapidly scale down light-duty passenger car, truck, and SUV emissions starting with the 2026 model year through 2035. The regulations are two-pronged. First, they amend the California Zero-emission Vehicle Regulation to require an increasing number of zero-emission vehicles, and rely on advanced vehicle technologies, including battery-electric, hydrogen fuel cell electric, and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, to meet air quality and climate change emissions standards. Second, the regulations amend the California Low-emission Vehicle Regulations to include increasingly stringent standards for gasoline cars and heavier passenger trucks to continue to reduce smog-forming emissions while the sector transitions toward 100% electrification by 2035. Similar to the ACCII, on April 28, 2023, CARB voted unanimously to adopt the Advanced Clean Fleet ("ACF") regulations with the goal of achieving a zero-emission truck and bus fleet by 2045 everywhere feasible, and significantly earlier for certain market segments such as last mile delivery and drayage applications. The initial focus of ACF is on high-priority fleets with vehicles that are suitable for early electrification, their subhaulers, and entities that hire them. As to the 2045 goal, it is currently uncertain how the N-79-20 Order may be ultimately implemented by various California regulatory agencies. In the event we do incur increased costs as a result of increased efforts to control GHG emissions through future adopted regulatory requirements, we may not be able to pass these costs to our customers. These future regulatory requirements also could adversely affect demand for the refined products that we produce. Any increased costs or reduced demand could materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations.

Our operations require numerous permits and authorizations under various laws and regulations. These authorizations and permits are subject to revocation, renewal or modification and can require operational changes to limit impacts or potential impacts on the environment and/or health and safety. A violation of authorization or permit conditions or other legal or regulatory requirements could result in substantial fines, criminal sanctions, permit revocations, injunctions, and/or facility shutdowns. In addition, major modifications of our operations could require modifications to our existing permits or upgrades to our existing pollution control equipment. Any or all of these matters could have a negative effect on our business, results of operations and cash flows. We may incur significant liabilities under, or costs and capital expenditures to comply with, health, safety, environmental and other laws and regulations, which are complex and change frequently. Our operations are subject to federal, state and local laws regulating, among other things, the handling of petroleum and other regulated materials, the emission and discharge of materials into the environment, waste management, and remediation of discharges of petroleum and petroleum products, characteristics and composition of gasoline and distillates and other matters otherwise relating to the protection of the environment. Our operations are also subject to extensive laws and regulations relating to occupational health and safety, in addition to laws and regulations affecting the transportation of crude oil by rail in North America. We cannot predict what additional environmental, health and safety legislation or regulations may be adopted in the future, or how existing or future laws or regulations may be administered or interpreted with respect to our operations. Many of these laws and regulations are becoming increasingly stringent, and the cost of compliance with these requirements can be expected to increase over time. Certain environmental laws impose strict, and in certain circumstances joint and several liability for, costs of investigation and cleanup of such spills, discharges or releases on owners and operators of, as well as persons who arrange for treatment or disposal of regulated materials at contaminated sites. Under these laws, we may incur liability or be required to pay penalties for past contamination, and third parties may assert claims against us for damages allegedly arising out of any past or future contamination. The potential penalties and clean-up costs for past or future releases or spills, the failure of prior owners of our facilities to complete their clean-up obligations, the liability to third parties for damage to their property, or the need to address newly-discovered information or conditions that may require a response could be significant, and the payment of these amounts could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may be subject to liability for the investigation and clean-up of environmental contamination at each of the properties that we own, lease, occupy or operate and at off-site locations where we arrange for the treatment or disposal of regulated materials. We may become involved in litigation or other proceedings related to the foregoing. If we were to be held responsible for damages in any such litigation or proceedings, such costs may not be covered by insurance and may be material. Historical soil and groundwater contamination has been identified at our refineries. Currently, remediation projects for such contamination are underway in accordance with regulatory requirements at our refineries. In connection with the acquisitions of certain of our refineries and logistics assets, the prior owners have retained certain liabilities or indemnified us for certain liabilities, including those relating to pre-acquisition soil and groundwater conditions, and in some instances we have assumed certain liabilities and environmental obligations, including certain existing and potential remediation obligations. If the prior owners fail to satisfy their obligations for any reason, or if significant liabilities arise in the areas in which we assumed liability, we may become responsible for remediation expenses and other environmental liabilities, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flow. As a result, in addition to making capital expenditures or incurring other costs to comply with environmental laws, we also may be liable for significant environmental litigation or for investigation and remediation costs and other liabilities arising from the ownership or operation of these assets by prior owners, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flow. See "Item 1. Business-Environmental, Health and Safety Matters" and "Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations-Material Cash Requirements". We may also face liability arising from current or future claims alleging personal injury or property damage due to exposure to chemicals or other regulated materials, such as various perfluorinated compounds, including perfluorooctanoate, perfluorooctane sulfonate, perfluorohexane sulfonate, or other per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (collectively, "PFAS"), asbestos, benzene, silica dust and petroleum hydrocarbons, at or from our facilities. We may also face liability for personal injury, property damage, natural resource damage or clean-up costs for the alleged migration of contamination from our properties. A significant increase in the number or success of these claims could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flow. Recently, we have been voluntarily cooperating with various local, state and federal agencies in their review of the environmental and health effects of PFAS and additional PFAS-related laws may be developed at the local, state and federal level that could lead to our incurring liability for damages or other costs, civil or criminal proceedings, the imposition of fines and penalties, or other remedies or otherwise affect our business. Governmental inquiries or lawsuits involving PFAS could lead to our incurring liability for damages or other costs, civil or criminal proceedings, the imposition of fines and penalties, or other remedies, as well as restrictions on or added costs for our business operations going forward, including in the form of restrictions on discharges at our manufacturing facilities or otherwise. We may be subject to asserted or unasserted claims and governmental regulatory proceedings and inquiries related to the use of PFAS in a variety of jurisdictions. Changes in law or interpretation of settled law and changes in policy, including with respect to climate change, other environmental regulations or regulations mandating efficiency standards or the use of alternative fuels or uncompetitive fuel components, could adversely affect our operations and results by increasing our cost of compliance, delaying or eliminating available business opportunities and/or preventing or limiting existing operations. Our operations also may give rise to federal, state or local government enforcement proceedings alleging non-compliance with applicable laws or regulations. We operate in jurisdictions where very large and unpredictable punitive damage awards may occur in the context of litigation. Private plaintiffs may also initiate legal action against us for alleged environmental impacts. These parties may attempt to use the legal system to promote public policy agendas (including seeking to reduce the production and sale of hydrocarbon products through litigation targeting the company or other industry participants), gain political notoriety, or obtain monetary awards from the company. For example, in recent years, private litigation has been increasingly initiated against oil and gas companies by local and state agencies and private parties alleging climate change impacts arising from their operations and seeking damages and equitable relief. We have not had any climate change litigation initiated against us to date and we cannot reasonably predict whether any such litigation will be initiated against us or, if initiated, what the outcome would be. If any such litigation were to be initiated against us, at a minimum, we would incur legal and other expenses to defend such lawsuits, which amounts could be significant. If we failed to prevail in any such litigation and were required to pay significant damages and/or materially alter the manner in which we conduct our business, there could be a material adverse impact on our operations, financial condition or results of operations.

Our profitability, cash flows and liquidity from operations depend primarily on the margin above operating expenses (including the cost of refinery feedstocks, such as crude oil, intermediate partially refined products, and natural gas liquids that are processed and blended into refined products) at which we are able to sell refined products. Refining is primarily a margin-based business and, to increase profitability, it is important to maximize the yields of high value finished products while minimizing the costs of feedstock and operating expenses. When the margin between refined product prices and crude oil and other feedstock costs contracts, our earnings, profitability and cash flows are negatively affected. Historically, refining margins have been volatile, and are likely to continue to be volatile, as a result of a variety of factors, including fluctuations in the prices of crude oil, other feedstocks, refined products and fuel and utility services. An increase or decrease in the price of crude oil will likely result in a similar increase or decrease in prices for refined products; however, there may be a time lag in the realization, or no such realization, of the similar increase or decrease in prices for refined products. The effect of changes in crude oil prices on our refining margins therefore depends in part on how quickly and how fully refined product prices adjust to reflect these changes. The nature of our business has required us to maintain substantial crude oil, feedstock and refined product inventories. Because crude oil, feedstock and refined products are commodities, we have no control over the changing market value of these inventories. Our crude oil, feedstock and refined product inventories are valued at the LCM value under the last-in-first-out ("LIFO") inventory valuation methodology. At December 31, 2024 and December 31, 2023, the replacement value of inventories exceeded the LIFO carrying value, therefore no LCM inventory reserve was recorded. If the market value of our crude oil, feedstock and refined product inventory declines to an amount less than our LIFO cost, we would record a write-down of inventory and a non-cash impact to cost of products and other. Prices of crude oil, other feedstocks, blendstocks, and refined products depend on numerous factors beyond our control, including the supply of and demand for crude oil, other feedstocks, gasoline, diesel, ethanol, asphalt and other refined products. Such supply and demand are affected by a variety of economic, market, environmental and political conditions. Our direct operating expense structure also impacts our profitability. Our major direct operating expenses include employee and contract labor, maintenance and energy. Our predominant variable direct operating cost is energy, which is comprised primarily of fuel and other utility services. The volatility in costs of fuel, principally natural gas, and other utility services, principally electricity, used by our refineries and other operations affect our operating costs. Fuel and utility prices have been, and will continue to be, affected by factors outside our control, such as supply and demand for fuel and utility services in both local and regional markets. Natural gas prices have historically been volatile and, typically, electricity prices fluctuate with natural gas prices. Future increases in fuel and utility prices may have a negative effect on our refining margins, profitability and cash flows. In addition, the operations, profitability and cash flows of SBR may similarly be impacted by volatility of renewable feedstock costs and operating expenses, which may negatively impact the anticipated benefits and operating synergies from the Renewable Diesel Facility or our equity method investment in SBR. See "We may not be able to successfully realize the anticipated benefits of our investment in SBR or meet our obligations to SBR" risk factor below.

Payment terms for our crude oil purchases are typically longer than those terms we extend to our customers for sales of refined products. Additionally, reductions in crude oil purchases tend to lag demand decreases for our refined products. As a result of this timing differential, the payables for our crude oil purchases are generally proportionally larger than the receivables for our refined product sales. As we are normally in a net payables position, a decrease in commodity prices generally results in a use of working capital. Given we process a significant volume of crude oil, the impact can materially affect our working capital, cash flows and liquidity.

A significant portion of our profitability is derived from the ability to purchase and process crude oil feedstocks that historically have been less expensive than benchmark crude oils, such as the heavy, sour crude oils processed at our Delaware City, Paulsboro, Chalmette, Torrance and Martinez refineries. For our Toledo refinery, aside from recent crude differential volatility, purchased crude prices have historically been above the WTI benchmark, however, such crude slate typically results in favorable refinery production yield. For all locations, these crude oil differentials can vary significantly from quarter to quarter depending on overall economic conditions and trends and conditions within the markets for crude oil and refined products. Any change in these crude oil differentials may have an impact on our earnings. Our rail investment and strategy to acquire cost advantaged Mid-Continent and Canadian crude, which are priced based on WTI, could be adversely affected when the WTI/Dated Brent or related differentials narrow. A narrowing of the WTI/Dated Brent differential may result in our Toledo refinery losing a portion of its crude oil price advantage over certain of our competitors, which negatively impacts our profitability. In addition, imbalances between the production and capacity to export crude in Canada may continue to result in price volatility and the narrowing of the WTI/WCS differential, which is a proxy for the difference between light U.S. and heavy Canadian crude oil, and may reduce our refining margins and adversely affect our profitability and earnings. Divergent views have been expressed as to the expected magnitude of changes to these crude differentials in future periods. Any continued or further narrowing of these differentials could have a material adverse effect on our business and profitability. Additionally, governmental and regulatory actions, including continued resolutions by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries to restrict crude oil production levels and executive actions by the new U.S. presidential administration to advance certain energy infrastructure projects such as the Keystone XL pipeline or Enbridge's Line 5 pipeline, may continue to impact crude oil prices and crude oil differentials. Any increase in crude oil prices or unfavorable movements in crude oil differentials due to such actions or changing regulatory environment may negatively impact our ability to acquire crude oil at economical prices and could have a material adverse effect on our business and profitability.

Business closings and layoffs in the markets we operate may adversely affect demand for our refined products. Deterioration of general economic conditions or weak demand levels could require additional actions on our part to lower our operating costs, including temporarily or permanently ceasing to operate units at our facilities. There may be significant incremental costs associated with such actions. Deterioration of global and regional economic conditions may harm our liquidity and ability to repay our outstanding debt and the trading price of PBF Energy's Class A common stock.