Repligen (RGEN) Risk Analysis

From time to time, we may become involved in litigation or other legal proceedings relating to claims arising from the ordinary course of business. Litigation is subject to inherent risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially from our expectations. If we receive an adverse judgment in any litigation, we could be required to pay substantial damages. With or without merit, litigation can be complex, can extend for a protracted period of time, can be very expensive and the expense can be unpredictable. Litigation initiated by us could also result in counterclaims against us, which could increase the costs associated with the litigation and result in our payment of damages or other judgments against us. In addition, litigation, and any related publicity, may divert the efforts and attention of some of our management and key personnel, which could adversely affect our business.

Section 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, contain rules that limit the ability of a company that undergoes an ownership change, which is generally any change in ownership of more than 50 percentage points of its stock over a three-year period, to utilize its net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards and certain built-in losses recognized in years after the ownership change. These rules generally operate by focusing on ownership changes involving stockholders owning directly or indirectly 5% or more of the stock of a company and any change in ownership arising from a new issuance of stock by the company. Generally, if an ownership change occurs, the yearly taxable income limitation on the use of net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards and certain built-in losses is equal to the product of the applicable long-term, tax-exempt rate and the value of the company’s stock immediately before the ownership change. We may be unable to offset our taxable income with losses, or our tax liability with credits, before such losses and credits expire and therefore would incur larger federal income tax liability. While our most recent Section 382 analysis did not show any current limitations, future transactions or combinations of future transactions may result in a change in control under Section 382 in the future. Federal net operating losses generated after December 31, 2017 are not subject to expiration and generally may not be carried back to prior taxable years except that, under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, net operating losses generated in 2018, 2019 and 2020 may be carried back five taxable years. Additionally, for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2020, the deductibility of such deferral net operating losses is limited to 80% of our taxable income in any future taxable year.

We are subject to data privacy and protection laws and regulations that apply to the collection, transmission, storage and use of proprietary information and personally-identifying information, which among other things, imposes certain requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of certain individually identifiable information. In addition, numerous other federal and state laws, including state security breach notification laws, state health information privacy laws and federal and state consumer protection laws, govern the collection, use, disclosure and security of personal information. These laws continue to change and evolve and are increasing in breadth and impact. For example, California enacted the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”), which went into effect in January 2020 and became enforceable by the California Attorney General in July 2020, and which, among other things, requires companies covered by the legislation to provide new disclosures to California consumers and afford such consumers new rights with respect to their personal information, including the right to request deletion of their personal information, the right to receive the personal information on record for them, the right to know what categories of personal information generally are maintained about them, as well as the right to opt-out of certain sales of personal information. The CCPA provides civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action for certain data breaches that result in the loss of personal information. This private right of action may increase the likelihood of, and risks associated with, data breach litigation. Additionally, a new California ballot initiative, the California Privacy Rights Act (“CPRA”) was passed in November 2020. Effective January 1, 2023, the CPRA imposes additional obligations on companies covered by the legislation and will significantly modify the CCPA by expanding consumers’ rights with respect to certain sensitive personal information, among other things. The CPRA also creates a new state agency that will be vested with authority to implement and enforce the CCPA and the CPRA. The effects of the CCPA and the CPRA are potentially significant and may require us to modify our data collection or processing practices and policies, incur substantial costs and expenses in an effort to comply and increase our potential exposure to regulatory enforcement and/or litigation. Certain other state laws impose similar privacy obligations and we anticipate that more states may enact legislation similar to the CCPA, which provides consumers with new privacy rights and increases the privacy and security obligations of entities handling certain personal information of such consumers. The CCPA has prompted a number of proposals for new federal and state-level privacy legislation. Such proposed legislation, if enacted, may add additional complexity, variation in requirements, restrictions and potential legal risk, require additional investment of resources in compliance programs, impact strategies and the availability of previously useful data and could result in increased compliance costs and/or changes in business practices and policies. The regulatory framework governing the collection, processing, storage, use and sharing of certain information is rapidly evolving and is likely to continue to be subject to uncertainty and varying interpretations. It is possible that these laws may be interpreted and applied in a manner that is inconsistent with our existing data management practices or the features of our services and platform capabilities. Any failure or perceived failure by us, or any third parties with which we do business, to comply with our posted privacy policies, changing consumer expectations, evolving laws, rules and regulations, industry standards, or contractual obligations to which we or such third parties are or may become subject, may result in actions or other claims against us by governmental entities or private actors, the expenditure of substantial costs, time and other resources or the incurrence of significant fines, penalties or other liabilities. In addition, any such action, particularly to the extent we were found to be guilty of violations or otherwise liable for damages, would damage our reputation and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. We cannot yet fully determine the impact these or future laws, rules, regulations and industry standards may have on our business or operations. Any such laws, rules, regulations and industry standards may be inconsistent among different jurisdictions, subject to differing interpretations or may conflict with our current or future practices. Additionally, our customers may be subject to different privacy laws, rules and legislation, which may mean that they require us to be bound by varying contractual requirements applicable to certain other jurisdictions. Adherence to such contractual requirements may impact our collection, use, processing, storage, sharing and disclosure of various types of information including financial information and other personal information, and may mean we become bound by, or voluntarily comply with, self-regulatory or other industry standards relating to these matters that may further change as laws, rules and regulations evolve. Complying with these requirements and changing our policies and practices may be onerous and costly, and we may not be able to respond quickly or effectively to regulatory, legislative and other developments. These changes may in turn impair our ability to offer our existing or planned features, products and services and/or increase our cost of doing business. As we expand our customer base, these requirements may vary from customer to customer, further increasing the cost of compliance and doing business. Various foreign countries also have, or are developing, laws governing the collection, use, disclosure, security, and cross-border transmission of personal information. The legislative and regulatory landscape for privacy and data protection continues to evolve, and there has been an increasing amount of focus on privacy and data protection issues with the potential to affect our business. For example, privacy requirements in the EU govern the transfer of personal information from the European Economic Area to the United States. While we continue to address the implications of changes to the EU data privacy regulations, the area remains an evolving landscape with new regulations coming into effect and continued legal challenges and our efforts to comply with the evolving data protection rules may be unsuccessful. Failure to comply with laws regarding data protection would expose us to risk of enforcement actions taken by data protection authorities in the EU and the potential for significant penalties if we are found to be non-compliant. Similarly, failure to comply with federal and state laws in the United States regarding privacy and security of personal information could expose us to penalties under such laws. Even if we are not determined to have violated these laws, government investigations into these issues typically require the expenditure of significant resources and generate negative publicity, which could harm our business.

The efforts of governmental and third-party payors to contain or reduce the costs of health care may adversely affect the business and financial condition of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, including ours. Specifically, in both the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been a number of legislative and regulatory proposals to change the health care system in ways that could affect our ability to sell our products profitably. For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (together, the “ACA”), was passed, which substantially changes the way health care is financed by both governmental and private insurers and significantly impacts the U.S. life sciences industry. The ACA and other federal and state proposals and health care reforms could limit the prices that can be charged for the products we develop and may limit our commercial opportunity. The ACA subjected biologic products to potential competition by lower-cost biosimilars; addressed a new methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated for drugs that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted or injected; increased the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by most manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program; extended the Medicaid Drug Rebate program to utilization of prescriptions of individuals enrolled in Medicaid-managed care organizations; subjected manufacturers to new annual fees and taxes for certain branded prescription drugs; created a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program, in which manufacturers must agree to offer 50% (increased to 70% pursuant to the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, effective as of January 1, 2019) point-of-sale discounts off negotiated prices of applicable brand drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period, as a condition for the manufacturer’s outpatient drugs to be covered under Medicare Part D; and provided incentives to programs that increase the federal government’s comparative effectiveness research. Recent federal government efforts have been aimed at amending or repealing all or portions of existing health care reform legislation, including the ACA. Changes in existing health care reform measures may result in uncertainty with respect to legislation, regulation and government policy that could significantly impact our business and the life sciences industry. Since its enactment, there have been numerous judicial, administrative, executive, and legislative challenges to certain aspects of the ACA, and we expect there will be additional challenges and amendments to the ACA in the future. Since its enactment, there have been judicial, U.S. Congressional and executive challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. On June 17, 2021, the United States Supreme Court dismissed the most recent judicial challenge to the ACA brought by several states without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA. Prior to the United States Supreme Court’s decision, President Biden issued an executive order to initiate a special enrollment period from February 15, 2021 through August 15, 2021 for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the ACA marketplace. The executive order also instructed certain governmental agencies to review and reconsider their existing policies and rules that limit access to healthcare, including among others, reexamining Medicaid demonstration projects and waiver programs that include work requirements, and policies that create unnecessary barriers to obtaining access to health insurance coverage through Medicaid or the ACA. It is unclear how other healthcare reform measures of the Biden Administration or other efforts, if any, to challenge, repeal or replace the ACA will impact our business. Various portions of the ACA are currently undergoing legal and constitutional challenges in the United States Supreme Court; the former Trump Administration issued various executive orders that eliminated cost sharing subsidies and various provisions that would impose a fiscal burden on states or a cost, fee, tax, penalty or regulatory burden on individuals, healthcare providers, health insurers, or manufacturers of pharmaceuticals or medical devices; and Congress has introduced several pieces of legislation aimed at significantly revising or repealing the ACA. Also, in December 2018, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) issued a final rule permitting further collections and payments to and from certain ACA qualified health plans and health insurance issuers under the ACA risk adjustment program. Since then, the ACA risk adjustment program payment parameters have been updated annually. On December 20, 2019, former President Trump signed into law the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act (H.R. 1865), which repeals the Cadillac tax, the health insurance provider tax, and the medical device excise tax. It is impossible to determine whether similar taxes could be instated in the future. It is unclear whether the ACA will be overturned, repealed, replaced, or further amended. We cannot predict what effect further changes to the ACA would have on our business. In addition, other legislative and regulatory changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted: • On August 2, 2011, the U.S. Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, included aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year. These reductions went into effect on April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect through 2030, with the exception of a temporary suspension from May 1, 2020 through December 31, 2021, unless additional U.S. Congressional action is taken. • On January 2, 2013, the U.S. American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers. • On April 13, 2017, CMS published a final rule that gives states greater flexibility in setting benchmarks for insurers in the individual and small group marketplaces, which may have the effect of relaxing the essential health benefits required under the ACA for plans sold through such marketplaces. • On May 30, 2018, the Right to Try Act was signed into law. The law, among other things, provides a federal framework for certain patients to access certain investigational new drug products that have completed a Phase 1 clinical trial and that are undergoing investigation for FDA approval. Under certain circumstances, eligible patients can seek treatment without enrolling in clinical trials and without obtaining FDA permission under the FDA expanded access program. There is no obligation for a pharmaceutical manufacturer to make its drug products available to eligible patients as a result of the Right to Try Act. • On?May 23, 2019, CMS published a final rule to allow Medicare Advantage Plans the option of using step therapy for Part B drugs beginning January 1, 2020. • On December 20, 2019, former President Trump signed into law the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act (H.R. 1865), which repealed the Cadillac tax, the health insurance provider tax, and the medical device excise tax. It is impossible to determine whether similar taxes could be instated in the future. Additionally, there has been increasing legislative and enforcement interest in the United States with respect to drug pricing practices. Specifically, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, reduce the cost of prescription drugs under Medicare, and review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs. At a federal level, President Biden signed an executive order on July 9, 2021 affirming the administration’s policy to (i) support legislative reforms that would lower the prices of prescription drug and biologics, including by allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices, by imposing inflation caps, and, by supporting the development and market entry of lower-cost generic drugs and biosimilars; and (ii) support the enactment of a public health insurance option. Among other things, the executive order also directs the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS") to provide a report on actions to combat excessive pricing of prescription drugs, enhance the domestic drug supply chain, reduce the price that the federal government pays for drugs, and address price gouging in the industry; and directs the FDA to work with states and Indian Tribes that propose to develop section 804 Importation Programs in accordance with the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003, and the FDA’s implementing regulations. FDA released such implementing regulations on September 24, 2020, which went into effect on November 30, 2020, providing guidance for states to build and submit importation plans for drugs from Canada. On September 25, 2020, CMS stated drugs imported by states under this rule will not be eligible for federal rebates under Section 1927 of the Social Security Act and manufacturers would not report these drugs for “best price” or "average manufacturer price" purposes. Since these drugs are not considered covered outpatient drugs, CMS further stated it will not publish a national average drug acquisition cost for these drugs. If implemented, importation of drugs from Canada may materially and adversely affect the price we receive for any of our product candidates. Further, on November 20, 2020 CMS issued an interim final rule implementing the most favored nation ("MFN") model under which Medicare Part B reimbursement rates would have been be calculated for certain drugs and biologicals based on the lowest price drug manufacturers receive in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries with a similar gross domestic product per capita. However, on August 6, 2021 CMS announced a proposed rule to rescind the MFN model rule. Additionally, on November 30, 2020, HHS published a regulation removing safe harbor protection for price reductions from pharmaceutical manufacturers to plan sponsors under Medicare Part D, either directly or through pharmacy benefit managers, unless the price reduction is required by law. The rule also creates a new safe harbor for price reductions reflected at the point-of-sale, as well as a safe harbor for certain fixed fee arrangements between pharmacy benefit managers and manufacturers. Pursuant to court order, the removal and addition of the aforementioned safe harbors were delayed and recent legislation imposed a moratorium on implementation of the rule until January 1, 2026. Although a number of these and other proposed measures may require authorization through additional legislation to become effective, and the Biden Administration may reverse or otherwise change these measures, both the Biden Administration and Congress have indicated that they will continue to seek new legislative measures to control drug costs. We expect that additional U.S. federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that the U.S. federal government will pay for healthcare drugs and services, which could result in reduced demand for our products or additional pricing pressures. Additionally, the federal government and individual states in the United States have also become increasingly active in passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. Legally mandated price controls on payment amounts by third-party payors or other restrictions could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs. This could reduce the ultimate demand for our products or put pressure on drug pricing, which could negatively affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. We expect that additional state and federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future.

Since December 2019, an outbreak of a novel strain of a virus named SARS-CoV-2, or coronavirus, which causes COVID-19, has since spread to countries in which we or our customers and suppliers operate, including the United States. COVID-19 is evolving, and to date, has led to the implementation of various responses, including government-imposed quarantines, extended business closures, travel restrictions and other public health safety measures, as well as reported adverse impacts on healthcare resources, facilities and providers, in Massachusetts, across the United States and in other countries. The COVID-19 outbreak continues to rapidly evolve, including the spread of the Delta and Omicron variants. In response to COVID-19, and in accordance with direction from state and local government authorities, we have restricted and may continue to restrict access to our facilities mostly to personnel and third parties who must perform critical activities that must be completed on-site, limited the number of such personnel that can be present at our facilities at any one time, and requested that most of our personnel work remotely. In the event that governmental authorities were to further modify current restrictions, our employees conducting research and development or manufacturing activities may not be able to access our manufacturing space. Certain of our third-party suppliers have experienced labor shortage due to the spread of COVID-19. Such shortages may lead to interruptions in our manufacturing activities and our product supply and could have a material adverse effect on our business and our results of operation and financial condition. Our revenues and other operating results depend in large part on our ability to manufacture and assemble our products in sufficient quantities and in a timely manner. In addition, the trading prices for our common stock and other biopharmaceutical companies have been highly volatile as a result of COVID-19. As a result, we may face difficulties raising capital through sales of our common stock or such sales may be on unfavorable terms. We operate on a global basis with offices or activities in Japan, South Korea, China, India, Europe and North America, and global health crises, such as COVID-19, could result in a widespread economic downturn in the industries in which we and our customers operate. The extent to which the outbreak impacts our business and the businesses of our customers will depend on future developments, which remain highly uncertain and cannot be predicted with confidence, such as the continued geographic spread of the disease, the duration of the outbreak, and actions taken in the United States and elsewhere to contain the outbreak and treat the disease, such as social distancing and quarantines, business closures or business disruptions. Some factors from COVID-19 that could delay or otherwise adversely affect the completion of our customers’ preclinical activities and clinical trials, as well as the healthcare industry generally, include: • the potential diversion of resources in the healthcare system away from routine patient treatment, drug development and clinical trials to focus on pandemic concerns, which could result in reduced demand for our products or our customer’s products and could significantly impact our operating results; • limitations on travel that could interrupt our customers’ key preclinical activities and trial activities, such as clinical trial site initiations and monitoring, domestic and international travel by customer employees, contractors or patients to clinical trial sites, including any government-imposed travel restrictions or quarantines that will impact the ability or willingness of patients, employees or contractors to travel to a customer’s research, manufacturing and clinical trial sites or secure visas or entry permissions, any of which could delay or adversely impact the conduct or progress of such customer’s prospective clinical trials; • interruption or delays in the operations of the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory agencies, which may impact review, inspection, clearance and approval timelines; • interruption in global shipping affecting the transport of our products and other supplies used in our customers’ prospective clinical trials due to staffing shortages, production slowdowns or stoppages and disruptions in delivery systems; • limitations on business operations by local, state, or the federal government that could impact our customers’ ability to conduct preclinical or clinical activities; • business disruptions caused by potential workplace, laboratory and office closures and an increased reliance on employees working from home, disruptions to or delays in ongoing laboratory experiments and operations, staffing shortages, travel limitations, or communication or mass transit disruptions, any of which could adversely impact our business operations or delay necessary interactions with local regulators, ethics committees, manufacturing sites and other important agencies and contractors; • business disruptions or cybersecurity risks associated with a substantial portion of our workforce working from home for extended periods of time; and • the impact on the valuation of our marketable securities and other financial assets due to market volatility.

We expect a portion of our future revenue growth to come from introducing new bioprocessing products, including line extensions and new features for our OPUS® disposable chromatography columns, our XCell ATF system, our SIUS® tangential flow filtration (“TFF”) cassettes, our Spectrum® hollow fiber modules TFF line of cassettes and our growth factors. The commercial success of all of our products will depend upon their acceptance by the life science and biopharmaceutical industries. Many of the bioprocessing products that we are developing are based upon new technologies or approaches. As a result, there can be no assurance that these new products, even if successfully developed and introduced, will be accepted by customers. If customers do not adopt our new products and technologies, our results of operations may suffer and, as a result, the market price of our common stock may decline.

There has been substantial litigation and other proceedings regarding the complex patent and other intellectual property rights in the life sciences industry. We have been a party to, and in the future may become a party to, patent litigation or other proceedings regarding intellectual property rights. We may become involved in patent litigation or other intellectual property proceedings, including the following situations: We may initiate litigation or other proceedings against third parties to seek to invalidate the patents held by such third parties or to obtain a judgment that our products or services do not infringe on such third parties’ patents. • We may initiate litigation or other proceedings against third parties to seek to enforce our patents against infringement. • If our competitors file patent applications that claim technology also claimed by us, we may participate in interference or opposition proceedings to determine the priority of invention. • If third parties initiate litigation claiming that our processes or products infringe their patent or other intellectual property rights, we will need to defend against such claims. The cost to us of any patent litigation or other proceeding, even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the cost of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their substantially greater financial resources. If a patent litigation or other intellectual property proceeding is resolved in a way that is unfavorable to us, we or our collaborative or strategic partners may be enjoined from manufacturing or selling our products and services without a license from the other party and be held liable for significant damages. The failure to obtain any required license on commercially acceptable terms or at all may harm our business, results of operations, financial condition, cash flow and future prospects. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete in the marketplace. Patent litigation and other proceedings may also absorb significant management time, attention and resources.

Our revenues and other operating results will depend in large part on our ability to manufacture and assemble our products in sufficient quantities and in a timely manner. Any interruptions we experience in the manufacturing or shipping of our products could delay our ability to recognize revenues in a particular quarter. Manufacturing problems can and do arise, and as demand for our products increases, any such problems could have an increasingly significant impact on our operating results. While we have not generally experienced problems with, or delays in, our production capabilities that resulted in delays in our ability to ship finished products, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter such problems in the future. We may not be able to quickly ship products and recognize anticipated revenues for a given period if we experience significant delays in the manufacturing process. In addition, we must maintain sufficient production capacity in order to meet anticipated customer demand, which carries fixed costs that we may not be able to offset if orders slow, which would adversely affect our operating margins. If we are unable to manufacture our products consistently, in sufficient quantities, and on a timely basis, our bioprocessing revenue, gross margins and our other operating results will be materially and adversely affected.