Item 1A. RISK FACTORS, continued

DuPont, Historical Dow or DowDuPont executed a fraudulent conveyance in connection with divestitures and spin-offs of any one of their historical operations, including Chemours. If a court were to agree with such a plaintiff, then such court could void the Separation and Distribution as a fraudulent transfer or impose substantial liabilities on Corteva, which could materially adversely affect its financial condition and results of operations. Among other things, the court could return some of Corteva’s assets or shares of Corteva common stock to DuPont, provide DuPont with a claim for money damages against Corteva in an amount equal to the difference between the consideration received by DuPont and the fair market value of Corteva at the time of the Corteva Distribution, or require Corteva to fund liabilities of other companies involved in the Internal Reorganization and Business Realignment for the benefit of creditors.

The Distribution is also subject to review under state corporate Distribution statutes. Under the Delaware General Corporation Law (the “DGCL”), a corporation may only pay dividends to its stockholders either (i) out of its surplus (net assets minus capital) or (ii) if there is no such surplus, out of its net profits for the fiscal year in which the dividend is declared and/or the preceding fiscal year. Although the Distribution was made out of DowDuPont’s surplus and the company received an opinion that DowDuPont has adequate surplus under Delaware law to declare the dividend of Corteva common stock in connection with the Corteva Distribution, there can be no assurance that a court will not later determine that some or all of the Corteva Distribution was unlawful.

If the Corteva Distribution, together with certain related transactions, were to fail to qualify for non-recognition treatment for U.S. federal income tax purposes, then the company could be subject to significant tax and indemnification liability and stockholders receiving Corteva common stock in the Corteva Distribution could be subject to significant tax liability.

DowDuPont received an IRS Tax Ruling and tax opinion that, among other things, the Corteva Distribution and certain related transactions will qualify as a tax-free transaction under Section 355 and Section 368(a)(1)(D) of the Internal Revenue Code (the "Code). The IRS Ruling and tax opinion relied on certain facts, assumptions, and undertakings, and certain representations from DowDuPont and Corteva, regarding the past and future conduct of both respective businesses and other matters. Despite the tax opinion and the IRS Ruling, the IRS could determine on audit that the Distribution or certain related transactions should be treated as a taxable transaction if it determines that any of these facts, assumptions, representations or undertakings are not correct or have been violated, or that the Distribution should be taxable for other reasons, including if the IRS were to disagree with the conclusions of the tax opinion.

If the Corteva Distribution ultimately is determined to be taxable, then a stockholder of DuPont that received shares of Corteva common stock would be treated as having received a distribution of property in an amount equal to the fair market value of such shares (including any fractional shares sold on behalf of such stockholder) on the distribution date and could incur significant income tax liabilities. Such distribution would be taxable to such stockholder as a dividend to the extent of DuPont’s current and accumulated earnings and profits, which would include any earnings and profits attributable to the gain recognized by DuPont on the taxable distribution and could include earnings and profits attributable to certain internal transactions preceding the Corteva Distribution. Any amount that exceeded DuPont’s earnings and profits would be treated first as a non-taxable return of capital to the extent of such stockholder’s tax basis in its shares of DuPont stock with any remaining amount being taxed as a gain on the DuPont stock. In the event the Distribution is ultimately determined to be taxable, DuPont would recognize corporate level taxable gain on the Distribution in an amount equal to the excess, if any, of the fair market value of Corteva common stock distributed to DuPont stockholders on the distribution date over DuPont’s tax basis in such stock. In addition, if certain related transactions fail to qualify for tax-free treatment under U.S. federal, state, local tax and/or foreign tax law, Corteva and DuPont could incur significant tax liabilities under U.S. federal, state, local and/or foreign tax law.

Generally, taxes resulting from the failure of the Separation and Distributions to qualify for non-recognition treatment for U.S. federal income tax purposes would be imposed on DuPont or DuPont stockholders. Under the Tax Matters Agreement that the company entered into with DuPont and Dow, subject to the exceptions described below, the company is generally obligated to indemnify DuPont against such taxes imposed on DuPont. However, if the Distributions fail to qualify for non-recognition treatment for U.S. federal income tax purposes for certain reasons relating to the overall structure of the Merger and the Distributions, then under the Tax Matters Agreement, DuPont and Dow would share the tax liability resulting from such failure in accordance with their relative equity values on the first full trading day following the Dow Distribution. The company and DuPont would share any liabilities of DuPont described in the preceding sentence in accordance with its relative equity values on the first full trading day following the Corteva Distribution. Furthermore, under the terms of the Tax Matters Agreement, the company also generally will be responsible for any taxes imposed on DuPont or Dow that arise from the failure of the Corteva Distribution to qualify as tax-free for U.S. federal income tax purposes within the meaning of Section 355 of the Code or the

Part I

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS, continued

failure of certain related transactions to qualify for tax-free treatment, to the extent such failure to qualify is attributable to actions, events or transactions relating to its, or its affiliates’, stock, assets or business, or any breach of its representations made in any representation letter provided to its counsel in connection with the tax opinion. DuPont and Dow will be separately responsible for any taxes imposed on Corteva that arise from the failure of the Corteva Distribution to qualify as tax-free for U.S. federal income tax purposes within the meaning of Section 355 of the Code or the failure of certain related transactions to qualify for tax-free treatment, to the extent such failure to qualify is attributable to actions, events or transactions relating to such company’s or its affiliates’ stock, assets or business, or any breach of such company’s representations made in connection with the IRS Ruling or in the representation letter provided to counsel in connection with the tax opinion. Events triggering an indemnification obligation under the tax matters agreement include events occurring after the Corteva Distribution that cause DuPont to recognize a gain under Section 355(e) of the Code, as discussed further below. Such tax amounts could be significant. To the extent that the company is responsible for any liability under the tax matters agreement, there could be a material adverse impact on Corteva’s business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows in future reporting periods.

The company agreed to numerous restrictions to preserve the tax-free treatment of the transactions separating it from DowDuPont in the United States, which may reduce Corteva’s strategic and operating flexibility.

The company’s ability to engage in certain transactions is limited or restricted to preserve, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, the tax-free nature of the Distributions by DowDuPont, and certain aspects of the Internal Reorganization and Business Realignment. As a result of these limitations, under the Tax Matters Agreement that the company entered into with DuPont and Dow, for the two-year period following the Distribution, the company is prohibited, except in certain circumstances, from, among other things:

• entering into any transaction resulting in acquisitions of a certain percentage of its assets, whether by merger or otherwise;

• dissolving, merging, consolidating or liquidating;

• undertaking or permitting any transaction relating to Corteva stock, including issuances, redemptions or repurchases other than certain, limited, permitted issuances and repurchases;

• affecting the relative voting rights of Corteva stock, whether by amending Corteva’s certificate of incorporation or otherwise; or

• ceasing to actively conduct its business.

These restrictions may significantly limit Corteva’s ability to pursue certain strategic transactions or other transactions that the company may believe to otherwise be in the best interests of its stockholders or that might increase the value of its business.

The IRS may assert that the Merger causes the Distributions and other related transactions to be taxable to DuPont, in which case the company could be subject to significant indemnification liability.

Even if the Distributions otherwise constitutes a tax-free transaction to stockholders under Section 355 of the Code, DuPont may be required to recognize corporate level tax on the Distributions and certain related transactions under Section 355(e) of the Code if, as a result of the Merger or other transactions considered part of a plan with the Distributions, there is a 50 percent or greater change of ownership in DuPont or Corteva. In connection with the Merger, DowDuPont received a private letter ruling from the IRS regarding the proper time, manner and methodology for measuring common ownership in the stock of DowDuPont, Historical DuPont and Historical Dow for purposes of determining whether there has been a 50 percent or greater change of ownership under Section 355(e) of the Code as a result of the Merger. The tax opinion relied on the continued validity of the private letter ruling, as well as certain factual representations from DowDuPont as to the extent of common ownership in the stock of Historical DuPont and Historical Dow immediately prior to the Merger. Based on the representations made by DowDuPont as to the common ownership in the stock of Historical DuPont and Historical Dow immediately prior to the Merger and assuming the continued validity of the IRS Ruling, the tax opinion concluded that there was not a 50 percent or greater change of ownership in DowDuPont, Historical DuPont or Historical Dow for purposes of Section 355(e) as a result of the Merger. Notwithstanding the tax opinion and the IRS Ruling, the IRS could determine that the Distributions or a related transaction should nevertheless be treated as a taxable transaction to DuPont if it determines that any of the facts, assumptions, representations or undertakings of DowDuPont is not correct or that the Distributions should be taxable for other reasons, including if the IRS were to disagree with the conclusions in the tax opinion that are not covered by the private letter ruling. If DuPont is required to recognize corporate level tax on either of the Distributions and certain related transactions under Section 355(e) of the Code, then under the Tax Matters Agreement, the company may be required to indemnify DuPont and/or

Part I

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS, continued

Dow for all or a portion of such taxes, which could be a material amount, if such taxes were the result of either direct or indirect transfers of Corteva common stock or certain reasons relating to the overall structure of the Merger and the Distributions.

The company is subject to continuing contingent tax-related liabilities of DowDuPont following the Distribution.

There are several significant areas where the liabilities of DowDuPont may become Corteva’s obligations either in whole or in part. For example, under the Code and the related rules and regulations, each corporation that was a member of DowDuPont’s consolidated tax reporting group during any taxable period or portion of any taxable period ending on or before the effective time of the Distribution is jointly and severally liable for the U.S. federal income tax liability of the entire consolidated tax reporting group for such taxable period. Additionally, to the extent that any subsidiary of Corteva was included in the consolidated tax reporting group of either Historical DuPont or Historical Dow for any taxable period or portion of any taxable period ending on or before the effective date of the Merger, such subsidiary is jointly and severally liable for the U.S. federal income tax liability of the entire consolidated tax reporting group of Historical DuPont or Historical Dow, as applicable, for such taxable period. In connection with the Distributions, on April 1, 2019, the company entered into the Tax Matters Agreement with DuPont and Dow that allocates the responsibility for prior period consolidated taxes among Corteva, DuPont and Dow. If DuPont or Dow were unable to pay any prior period taxes for which it is responsible, however, the company could be required to pay the entire amount of such taxes, and such amounts could be significant. Other provisions of federal, state, local, or foreign law may establish similar liability for other matters, including laws governing tax-qualified pension plans, as well as other contingent liabilities.

Corteva’s unaudited pro forma combined financial information is not necessarily representative of the results the company would have achieved as an independent, publicly traded company and may not be a reliable indicator of its future results.

The unaudited pro forma financial information of Corteva included herein (refer to supplemental unaudited pro forma financial statements on page 51) may not reflect what Corteva’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flows would have been had the company been an independent, publicly traded company comprised solely of DowDuPont’s agriculture business during the periods presented. This is primarily because:

• The historical financial information of Corteva does not reflect the changes that the company experienced in connection with the Separation, including the Distribution.

• Prior to the Separation, Corteva’s business was operated under the corporate umbrella of DowDuPont. As part of the DowDuPont corporate organization, Corteva’s business was principally operated by Historical DuPont, with certain portions of its business being operated by Historical Dow as part of its internal corporate organization, rather than being operated as part of a consolidated agriculture business.

• The historical financial information of Corteva reflects only corporate expenses of Historical DuPont and allocated corporate expenses from Historical Dow, and thus is not necessarily representative of the costs the company incurred for similar services as an independent company following the Separation.

In addition, the unaudited pro forma financial information included in this annual report is based on a number of estimates and assumptions. These estimates and assumptions may prove to be inaccurate, and accordingly, Corteva’s unaudited pro forma financial information should not be assumed to be indicative of what the company’s financial condition or results of operations actually would have been as a standalone company during the time periods presented nor to be a reliable indicator of what its financial condition or results of operations actually may be in the future. For additional information about the unaudited pro forma financial statements, Historical DuPont’s past financial performance and the basis of presentation of Corteva’s financial statements, see Corteva’s consolidated financial statements and Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

Part I