Teekay (TK) Risk Analysis

We are organized under the laws of the Marshall Islands, and all of our assets are located outside of the United States. In addition, a majority of our directors and officers are non-residents of the United States, and all or a substantial portion of the assets of these non-residents are located outside the United States. As a result, it may be difficult or impossible to bring an action against us or against these individuals in the United States. Even if successful in bringing an action of this kind, the laws of the Marshall Islands and of other jurisdictions may prevent or restrict the enforcement of a judgment against us or our assets or our directors and officers.

Cocaine production has risen dramatically in recent years, and the demand for cocaine has seen an increase in many countries as well. As a result, new hubs and new routes for cocaine smuggling have emerged, and seizures by law enforcement agencies are reaching record highs around the world. Many of these seizures have a direct impact on merchant ships. Detentions of vessels and crew members are possible when cocaine is discovered, leading to operational delays, lengthy legal proceedings, psychological impacts on employees, and associated costs. Our vessels call on certain ports, such as Brazil, Venezuela and Colombia, where there is a higher risk that smugglers may attempt to hide drugs and other contraband on vessels, with or without the knowledge of crew members. To the extent our vessels are found with contraband, whether inside or attached to the hull of our vessel and whether with or without the knowledge of any of our crew, we may face governmental or other regulatory claims which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

A non-U.S. entity treated as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes will be treated as a PFIC for such purposes in any tax year in which, after taking into account the income and assets of the corporation and, pursuant to a "look-through" rule, any other corporation or partnership in which the corporation directly or indirectly owns at least 25% of the stock or equity interests (by value) and any partnership in which the corporation directly or indirectly owns less than 25% of the equity interests (by value) to the extent the corporation satisfies an "active partner" test and does not elect out of "look through" treatment, either (i) at least 75% of its gross income consists of "passive income" (or the PFIC income test) or (ii) at least 50% of the average value of the entity's assets is attributable to assets that produce or are held for the production of "passive income" (or the PFIC asset test). For purposes of these tests, "passive income" includes dividends, interest, gains from the sale or exchange of investment property and rents and royalties other than rents and royalties that are received from unrelated parties in connection with the active conduct of a trade or business. By contrast, income derived from the performance of services does not constitute "passive income." For purposes of the PFIC asset test, cash and other current assets readily convertible into cash (or "cash assets") are considered to be assets that produce passive income. We have significant cash assets. Please read "Item 5 – Operating and Financial Review and Prospects – Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Overview". At the present time, we do not expect to be treated as a PFIC for the 2024 tax year under the PFIC asset test. However, if current estimates or assumptions relating to our current PFIC asset test modeling, including our assumptions on the tanker market and the value of our fleet, were to prove to be inaccurate or contrary to anticipated future financial results, or if any other factors that would negatively affect PFIC asset outcomes were to occur, we could be a PFIC in 2024 or future tax years. In addition, should Teekay Tankers dispose of a certain number of their vessels without immediately replacing those vessels, we expect this would result in a significant risk that we would become a PFIC in the tax year in which these sales occurred. Furthermore, if our ownership of Teekay Tankers or another look-through subsidiary falls below 25% of the equity interests (by value), such as by way of us selling equity interests in any such look-through subsidiary, by way of any such look-through subsidiary issuing new equity and diluting our ownership, or by way of a merger of a look-through subsidiary, based on our current asset portfolio, we expect that we would become a PFIC in the year in which this event occurred. If any of the scenarios set out above were to occur, or any other scenario were to occur which resulted in a substantial increase in cash or other passive assets, our PFIC status for any tax year may depend significantly on how, and how quickly, we use our cash assets, including the cash proceeds received in connection with any dispositions of our shares in Teekay Tankers (or another look-through subsidiary), or received from the sale of any of Teekay Tankers' vessels or from cash generated through vessel operations, and the extent to which we acquire or retain assets that are not considered to produce passive income. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that we will not be a PFIC in 2024 or any future tax years under the PFIC asset test, which could have adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences to U.S. shareholders and may cause the price of our common stock to decline and materially and adversely affect our ability to raise capital on acceptable terms. Additionally, with respect to the PFIC income test, there are legal uncertainties involved in determining whether the income derived from our and our look-through subsidiaries' time-chartering activities constitutes rental income or income derived from the performance of services, including the decision in Tidewater Inc. v. United States, 565 F.3d 299 (5th Cir. 2009), which held that income derived from certain time-chartering activities should be treated as rental income rather than services income for purposes of a foreign sales corporation provision of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (or the Code). However, the Internal Revenue Service (or the IRS) stated in an Action on Decision (AOD 2010-01) that it disagrees with, and will not acquiesce to, the way that the rental versus services framework was applied to the facts in the Tidewater decision, and in its discussion stated that the time charters at issue in Tidewater would be treated as producing services income for PFIC purposes. The IRS's statement with respect to Tidewater cannot be relied upon or otherwise cited as precedent by taxpayers. Consequently, in the absence of any binding legal authority specifically relating to the statutory provisions governing PFICs, there can be no assurance that the IRS or a court would not follow the Tidewater decision in interpreting the PFIC provisions of the Code. Nevertheless, based on our and our look-through subsidiaries' current assets and operations, we intend to take the position that we are not now and have never been a PFIC by reason of the PFIC income test. No assurance can be given, however, that this position would be sustained by a court if contested by the IRS or that we would not constitute a PFIC by reason of the PFIC income test (or, alternatively, as described above, the PFIC asset test) for the 2024 tax year or any future tax year if there were to be changes in our and our look-through subsidiaries' assets, income or operations. If we or the IRS were to determine that we are or have been a PFIC for any tax year during which a U.S. Holder (as defined below under "Item 10 – Additional Information – Material United States Federal Income Tax Considerations") held our common stock, such U.S. Holder would face adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences. For a more comprehensive discussion regarding the tax consequences to U.S. Holders if we are treated as a PFIC, please read "Item 10 – Additional Information – Material United States Federal Income Tax Considerations – United States Federal Income Taxation of U.S. Holders – Consequences of Possible PFIC Classification".

An increasing concern for and focus on climate change has promoted extensive existing and proposed international, national and local regulations intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (including from various jurisdictions and the IMO). These regulatory measures may include the adoption of cap and trade regimes, carbon taxes, use of alternative fuels, increased efficiency standards and incentives or mandates for renewable energy. Compliance with these or other regulations and our efforts to participate in reducing greenhouse gas emissions are expected to increase our compliance costs and require additional capital expenditures to reduce vessel emissions and may require changes to our business and could have an adverse impact on our financial condition. Our business includes transporting oil and oil products. Regulatory changes and growing public concern about the environmental impact of climate change may lead to reduced demand for our assets and decreased demand for our services, while increasing or creating greater incentives for use of alternative energy sources. We expect regulatory and consumer efforts aimed at combating climate change to intensify and accelerate. Although we do not expect demand for oil to decline dramatically over the short-term, in the long-term, climate change initiatives will likely significantly affect demand for oil and for alternatives. Any such change could adversely affect our ability to compete in a changing market and our business, financial condition, and results of operations. For example, as of January 1, 2024, the European Union has expanded the existing EU Emissions Trading System (or EU ETS) to include carbon dioxide (or CO2) emissions from vessels of 5,000 gross tonnage and above. Shipping companies which perform voyages to/from/within the EU and EEA (Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway) will need to acquire and surrender EU allowances (or EUAs) through their Union Registry account by September of the following year to cover their annual emissions. One EUA is equivalent to one tonne of CO2 emission. The EU ETS covers 50% of emissions from voyages starting or ending outside of the EU and 100% of emissions from voyages that occur between two EU ports and when ships are within EU ports. The surrendering of allowances by shipping companies will be gradually increased with respect to verified emissions reported for the years 2024 and 2025. This means, in 2025, shipping companies will be liable to surrender allowances for 40% of verified emissions reported in 2024. In 2026, this increases to 70% of verified emissions reported in 2025. As of 2027 and each year thereafter, shipping companies will have to surrender allowances reflecting 100% of their verified emissions.

Economic downturns, bank failures and financial crises in the global markets could produce illiquidity in the capital markets, market volatility, heightened exposure to interest rate and credit risks, and reduced access to capital markets. If global financial markets and economic conditions deteriorate in the future, we may face restricted access to the capital markets or bank lending, which may make it more difficult and costly to fund future growth. Decreased access to such resources could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations. Global financial markets and economic conditions have been, and continue to be, volatile. Global economic growth weakened during 2023, due in part to inflationary pressures and higher interest rates. Growth in 2024 is expected to remain below long-term average levels.

Terrorist attacks, and current or future conflicts in Ukraine, the Middle East, the Red Sea, Libya, East Asia, Southeast Asia, West Africa and elsewhere, and political change, may adversely affect the tanker industry and our business, operating results, financial condition, and ability to raise capital and fund future growth. Recent hostilities in Ukraine, the Middle East (including the Israel-Hamas war) and elsewhere may lead to additional armed conflicts or to further acts of terrorism and civil disturbance in the U.S. or elsewhere, which may contribute further to economic instability and disruption of oil production and distribution, which could result in reduced demand for our services and have an adverse impact on our operations and our ability to conduct business. Furthermore, Russia's invasion of Ukraine, in addition to sanctions announced by several world leaders and nations against Russia and any further sanctions, may also adversely impact our business given Russia's role as a major global exporter of crude oil. Our business could be harmed by trade tariffs, trade embargoes or other economic sanctions by the U.S., the European Union or other countries against Russia, companies with Russian connections or the Russian energy sector and harmed by any retaliatory measures by Russia or other countries in response. While much uncertainty remains regarding the global impact of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, it is possible that such tensions could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operation and cash flows. In addition, it is possible that third parties with which we have charter contracts may be impacted by events in Russia, Ukraine, or the Middle East, which could adversely affect our operations and financial condition. In addition, oil facilities, shipyards, vessels, pipelines, oil fields or other infrastructure could be targets of terrorist attacks or warlike operations and our vessels could be targets of hijackers, terrorists, or warlike operations. For example, the conflict in Ukraine has resulted in missile attacks on commercial vessels in the Black Sea, and since mid-December 2023, Houthi rebels in Yemen have carried out numerous attacks on vessels in the Red Sea area resulting in many shipping companies routing their vessels away from the Red Sea, which has affected trading patterns, rates, and expenses. Any such attacks could lead to, among other things, bodily injury or loss of life, vessel or other property damage, increased vessel operational costs, including insurance costs, and the inability to transport oil to or from certain locations. Terrorist attacks, war, hijacking, or other events beyond our control that adversely affect the distribution, production or transportation of oil to be shipped by us could entitle customers to terminate charters which would harm our cash flow and business.

We periodically dry dock each of our vessels for inspection, repairs and maintenance and any modifications to comply with industry certification or governmental requirements. Generally, each vessel is dry docked every two and a half years to five years depending on the age of the vessel. Depending on the type of dry docking required, a vessel will incur a number of days of downtime when it will not be in service. During times of favorable market conditions, any increase in the number of required dry dockings in a given timeframe and the lost revenue days arising from this downtime could result in a material loss of earnings.

Our vessels, crew and cargoes are at risk of being damaged, injured or lost because of events such as: - marine disasters;- bad weather or natural disasters;- mechanical or electrical failures;- grounding, capsizing, fire, explosions and collisions;- piracy (hijackings and kidnappings);- cyber-attacks;- acute-onset illness in connection with global or regional pandemics or similar public health crises;- mental health of crew members;- human error; and - war and terrorism. An accident involving any of our vessels could result in any of the following: - significant litigation with our customers or other third parties;- death or injury to persons, loss of property or damage to the environment and natural resources;- delays in the delivery of cargo;- liabilities or costs to recover any spilled oil or other petroleum products and to restore the environment affected by the spill;- loss of revenues from charters;- governmental fines, penalties, or restrictions on conducting business;- higher insurance rates; and - damage to our reputation and customer relationships generally. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and operating results, and the associated costs could exceed our insurance coverage. If our vessels suffer damage, they may need to be repaired at a drydocking facility. The costs of dry-dock repairs are unpredictable and may be substantial. We may have to pay drydocking costs if our insurance does not cover them in full. The total loss of any of our vessels could harm our reputation as a safe and reliable vessel owner and operator. If we are unable to adequately maintain or safeguard our vessels, we may be unable to prevent any such damage, costs or loss, which could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, any damage to, or environmental contamination involving, oil production facilities serviced by our vessels could result in the suspension or curtailment of operations by our customers, which would, in turn, result in loss of revenues.

A significant portion of our seafarers are employed under collective bargaining agreements. We may become subject to additional labor agreements in the future. We may suffer labor disruptions if relationships deteriorate with the seafarers or the unions that represent them. Our collective bargaining agreements may not prevent labor disruptions, particularly when the agreements are being renegotiated. Salaries are typically renegotiated annually or bi-annually for seafarers and annually for onshore operational staff and may increase our cost of operation. Any labor disruptions could harm our operations and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

High oil prices could negatively impact tanker freight rates due to reduced oil demand and weaker refining margins. In addition, fuel, or bunkers, is a significant operating expense for our vessels employed in the spot market and can have a significant impact on earnings. For any vessels which may be employed on time charters, the charterer is generally responsible for the cost and supply of fuel; however, such cost may affect the time charter rates we may be able to negotiate for such vessels. Changes in the price of fuel may adversely affect our profitability. The price and supply of fuel is unpredictable and fluctuates based on events outside our control, including, among other factors, geopolitical developments, supply and demand for oil and gas, actions by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (or OPEC) and other oil and gas producers, war and unrest in oil producing countries and regions, regional production patterns and environmental concerns.

As of the date of this Annual Report, one of our time chartered-in vessels operates under a fixed-rate time-charter contract. To the extent we enter into medium or long-term time charters, the vessels committed to such time charters may not be available for spot charters during periods of increasing charter hire rates, when spot charters might be more profitable.

Historically, the tanker industry has been cyclical, experiencing volatility in profitability due to changes in the supply of and demand for tanker capacity and changes in the supply of and demand for oil and oil products. The cyclical nature of the tanker industry may cause significant increases or decreases in the revenues we earn from our vessels and may also cause significant increases or decreases in the value of our vessels. If the tanker market is depressed, our earnings may decrease. Our exposure to industry business cycles is more acute because of our exposure to the spot tanker market, which is more volatile than the tanker industry generally. Our ability to operate profitably in the spot market and to recharter our other vessels upon the expiration or termination of their charters will depend upon, among other factors, the economic conditions in the tanker market. The factors affecting the supply of and demand for tankers are outside of our control, and the nature, timing and degree of changes in industry conditions are unpredictable. Key factors that influence the supply of tanker capacity include: - environmental concerns and regulations;- the number of newbuilding deliveries;- the scrapping rate of older vessels;- conversion of tankers to other uses; and - the number of vessels that are out of service. Key factors that influence demand for tanker capacity include: - supply of oil and oil products;- demand for oil and oil products;- regional availability of refining capacity;- global and regional economic and political conditions;- the distance oil and oil products are to be moved by sea;- demand for floating storage of oil;- changes in seaborne and other transportation patterns;- weather and natural disasters;- competition from alternative sources of energy; and - international sanctions, embargoes, import and export restrictions, nationalizations and wars. Historically, the tanker markets have been volatile as a result of the many conditions and factors that can affect the price and the supply of, and demand for, tanker capacity. Changes in demand for transportation of oil over longer distances and in the supply of tankers to carry that oil may materially affect our revenues, profitability and cash flows. Following our sale in January 2022 of the Teekay Gas Business, which operated primarily under long-term, fixed-rate charter contracts, our revenues are more volatile and dependent on revenues generated by our tanker fleet. The conflict in Ukraine and the consequent sanctions imposed on Russia have significantly increased tanker demand and rates by reshaping global oil trading patterns, including the rerouting of Russian oil exports away from Europe and the subsequent backfilling of imports into Europe from other more distant sources. Changes in or resolution of the conflict in Ukraine and the lifting of those sanctions may lead to a reversal of these trading patterns or other effects that could significantly decrease tanker demand and rates. Although the Hamas-Israel war so far has not had a direct material effect on the tanker industry, war, terrorism and geopolitical tensions in the Middle East could have material adverse effects. Since mid-December 2023, Houthi rebels in Yemen have carried out numerous attacks on vessels in the Red Sea area. As a result of these attacks, many shipping companies have routed their vessels away from the Red Sea, which has affected trading patterns, rates and expenses. Further escalation, or expansion of hostilities relating to the Israel-Hamas war could continue to affect the price of crude oil and the oil industry, the tanker industry, demand for or services, and our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.