Sapiens (SPNS) Risk Factors

There has historically been limited trading volume in our common shares, both formerly on the NASDAQ Capital Market and more recently on the NASDAQ Global Select Market (after we uplisted to it in September 2020), as well as on the TASE. While over the past couple of years, there has been improvement, the trading volume is still relatively low, which results in reduced liquidity for our shareholders. As a further result of the historically limited volume, our common shares have experienced significant market price volatility in the past and may experience significant market price and volume fluctuations in the future, in response to factors such as announcements of developments related to our business, announcements by competitors, quarterly fluctuations in our financial results and general conditions in the industry in which we compete.

Generally, if for any taxable year 75% or more of our gross income is passive income, or at least 50% of the average quarterly value of our assets (which may be measured in part by the market value of our Common Shares, which is subject to change) are held for the production of, or produce, passive income, we would be characterized as a passive foreign investment company, or PFIC, for U.S. federal income tax purposes under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code. Based on our gross income and gross assets, and the nature of our business, we believe that we were not classified as a PFIC for the taxable year ended December 31, 2020. Because PFIC status is determined annually based on our income, assets and activities for the entire taxable year, it is not possible to determine whether we will be characterized as a PFIC for the taxable year ending December 31, 2021, or for any subsequent year, until we finalize our financial statements for that year. Furthermore, because the value of our gross assets is likely to be determined in large part by reference to our market capitalization, a decline in the value of our Common Shares may result in our becoming a PFIC. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that we will not be considered a PFIC for any taxable year. Our characterization as a PFIC could result in material adverse tax consequences for you if you are a U.S. investor, including having gains realized on the sale of our Common Shares treated as ordinary income, rather than a capital gain, the loss of the preferential rate applicable to dividends received on our Common Shares by individuals who are U.S. holders, and having interest charges apply to distributions by us and the proceeds of share sales. Certain elections exist that may alleviate some of the adverse consequences of PFIC status and would result in an alternative treatment (such as mark-to-market treatment) of our Common Shares. Prospective U.S. investors should consult their own tax advisers regarding the potential application of the PFIC rules to them. Prospective U.S. investors should refer to "Item 10.E. Taxation-U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations" for discussion of additional U.S. income tax considerations applicable to them based on our treatment as a PFIC. Certain U.S. holders of our Common Shares may suffer adverse tax consequences if we or any of our non-U.S. subsidiaries are characterized as a "controlled foreign corporation," or a CFC, under Section 957(a) of the Code. Certain changes to the CFC constructive ownership rules under Section 958(b) of the Code introduced by the U.S. Tax Act may cause one or more of our non-U.S. subsidiaries to be treated as CFCs, may also impact our CFC status, and may adversely affect holders of our Common Shares that are United States shareholders. Generally, for U.S. shareholders that own 10% or more of the combined vote or combined value of our Common Shares, this may result in adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences and these shareholders may be subject to certain reporting requirements with the U.S. Internal Revenue Service. Any such 10% U.S. shareholder should consult its own tax advisors regarding the U.S. tax consequences of acquiring, owning, or disposing our Common Shares and the impact of the U.S. Tax Act, especially the changes to the rules relating to CFCs.

We have recently experienced, and expect to continue to experience, rapid growth in our number of employees, especially in India, and in our international operations that has placed, and will continue to place, a significant strain on our operational and financial resources and our personnel. To manage our anticipated future growth effectively, we must continue to maintain and may need to enhance our information technology infrastructure, financial and accounting systems and controls and manage expanded operations and employees in geographically distributed locations. We also must attract, train and retain a significant number of additional qualified sales and marketing personnel, professional services personnel, software engineers, technical personnel and management personnel. Our failure to manage our rapid growth effectively could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. Our growth could require significant capital expenditures and may divert financial resources from other projects, such as the development of new services or product enhancements. For example, since it may take as long as six months to hire and train a new member of our professional services staff, we make decisions regarding the size of our professional services staff based upon our expectations with respect to customer demand for our products and services. If these expectations are incorrect, and we increase the size of our professional services organization without experiencing an increase in sales of our products and services, we will experience reductions in our gross and operating margins and net income. If we are unable to effectively manage our growth, our expenses may increase more than expected, our revenues could decline or grow more slowly than expected and we may be unable to implement our business strategy. Our rapid growth may also be accompanied by greater exposure to litigation, including suits by clients, vendors, employees or former employees, as the sizes of our workforce and our overall international operations increase. All such litigation carries with it related costs and could divert our management's attention from ongoing business concerns. We also intend to continue to expand into additional international markets which, if not technologically or commercially successful, could harm our financial condition and prospects.

One of our Israeli subsidiaries received grants in the past from the government of Israel through the National Technological Innovation Authority, or the Innovation Authority (formerly operating as Office of the Chief Scientist of the Ministry of Economy of the State of Israel, or the OCS), for the financing of a portion of its research and development expenditures in Israel with respect to our legacy technology. In consideration for receiving grants from the Innovation Authority, we are obligated to pay the Innovation Authority royalties from the revenues generated from the sale of products (and related services) developed (in whole or in part) using the Innovation Authority funds, in an amount that is up to 100% to 150% of the aggregate amount of the total grants that we received from the Innovation Authority, plus annual interest for grants received after January 1, 1999. We must fully and originally own any intellectual property developed using the Innovation Authority grants and any right derived therefrom unless transfer thereof is approved in accordance with the provisions of the Israeli Encouragement of Research, Development and Technological Innovation Law, 5744-1984, or the Innovation Law (formerly known as the Encouragement of Industrial Research and Development Law, 5744-1984, or the Research Law), and related regulations. When a company develops know-how, technology or products using grants provided by the Innovation Authority, the terms of these grants and the Innovation Law restrict the transfer of such know-how, and the transfer of manufacturing or manufacturing rights of such products, technologies or know-how outside of Israel. Even after the repayment of such grants in full, we will remain subject to the restrictions set forth under the Innovation Law, including: - Transfer of know-how outside of Israel. Any transfer of the know-how that was developed with the funding of the Innovation Authority, outside of Israel, requires prior approval of the Innovation Authority, and the payment of a redemption fee. - Local manufacturing obligation. The terms of the grants under the Innovation Law require that the manufacturing of products resulting from Innovation Authority-funded programs be carried out in Israel, unless a prior written approval of v Innovation Authority is obtained (except for a transfer of up to 10% of the production rights, for which a notification to the Innovation Authority is sufficient). - Certain reporting obligations. We, as any recipient of a grant or a benefit under the Innovation Law, are required to file reports on the progress of activities for which the grant was provided as well as on our revenues from know-how and products funded by the Innovation Authority. In addition, we are required to notify the Innovation Authority of certain events detailed in the Innovation Law. Therefore, if aspects of our technologies are deemed to have been developed with Innovation Authority funding, the discretionary approval of an Innovation Authority committee would be required for any transfer to third parties outside of Israel of know-how or manufacturing or manufacturing rights related to those aspects of such technologies. We may not receive those approvals. Furthermore, the Innovation Authority may impose certain conditions on any arrangement under which it permits us to transfer technology or development out of Israel. The transfer of Innovation Authority-supported technology or know-how outside of Israel may involve the payment of significant amounts, depending upon the value of the transferred technology or know-how, the amount of Innovation Authority support, the time of completion of the Innovation Authority-supported research project and other factors. Furthermore, the consideration available to our shareholders in a transaction involving the transfer outside of Israel of technology or know-how developed with Innovation Authority funding (such as a merger or similar transaction) may be reduced by any amounts that we are required to pay to the Innovation Authority. We received grants from the Innovation Authority prior to an extensive amendment to the Research Law that came into effect as of January 1, 2016, or the Amendment, which may also affect the terms of existing grants. The Amendment provides for an interim transition period (which has not yet expired), after which time our grants will be subject to terms of the Amendment. Under the Research Law, as amended by the Amendment, the Innovation Authority is provided with a power to modify the terms of existing grants. Such changes, if introduced by the Innovation Authority in the future, may impact the terms governing our grants.

Corporate tax reform, base-erosion efforts and tax transparency continue to be high priorities in many tax jurisdictions where we have business operations. As a result, policies regarding corporate income and other taxes in numerous jurisdictions are under heightened scrutiny and tax reform legislation is being proposed or enacted in a number of jurisdictions. In 2015, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, or the OECD, released various reports under its Base Erosion and Profit Shifting, or BEPS, action plan to reform international tax systems and prevent tax avoidance and aggressive tax planning. These actions aim to standardize and modernize global corporate tax policy, including cross-border taxes, transfer-pricing documentation rules and nexus- based tax incentive practices which in part are focused on challenges arising from the digitalization of the economy. The reports have a very broad scope including, but not limited to, neutralizing the effects of hybrid mismatch arrangements, limiting base erosion involving interest deductions and other financial payments, countering harmful tax practices, preventing the granting of treaty benefits in inappropriate circumstances and imposing mandatory disclosure rules. It is the responsibility of OECD members to consider how the BEPS recommendations should be reflected in their national legislation. Many countries are beginning to implement legislation and other guidance to align their international tax rules with the OECD's BEPS recommendations, for example, by signing up to the Multilateral Convention to Implement Tax Treaty Related Measures to Prevent BEPS, or the MLI, which currently has been signed by over 85 jurisdictions, including Israel, which signed the MLI on September 13, 2018. The MLI implements some of the measures that the BEPS initiative proposes to be transposed into existing treaties of participating states. Such measures include the inclusion in tax treaties of one, or both, of a "limitation-on-benefit", or LOB, rule and a "principle purposes test", or PPT, rule. The application of the LOB rule or the PPT rule could deny the availability of tax treaty benefits (such as a reduced rate of withholding tax) under tax treaties. There are likely to be significant changes in the tax legislation of various OECD jurisdictions during the period of implementation of BEPS. Such legislative initiatives may materially and adversely affect our plans to expand internationally and may negatively impact our financial condition, tax liability, results of operations and could increase our administrative efforts. In addition, the OECD has published proposals covering a number of issues, including country-by-country reporting, permanent establishment rules, transfer pricing rules, tax treaties and taxation of the digital economy. Future tax reform resulting from this development may result in changes to long-standing tax principles, which could adversely affect our effective tax rate or result in higher cash tax liabilities, to the extent those changes are deemed applicable to us.

As we seek to expand the marketing and offering of our products into new territories, because insurance regulations vary by legal jurisdiction, the investment required to adapt our solutions to the legal and language requirements of such territories may prevent or delay us from effectively expanding into such territories. Such adaptation process requires the retention of new, additional skilled personnel with knowledge of the particular market and applicable regulatory regime. Such skilled personnel may not be available at a reasonable cost relative to the additional revenues that we expect to recognize in those territories, or may not be available at all.