10-K 1 a2017form10-k.htm 10-K

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act þ Yes o No

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. o Yes þ No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. þ Yes o No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). þ Yes o No

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. þ

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. þ Large accelerated filer o Accelerated filer o Non-accelerated filer o Smaller reporting company

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). o Yes þ No

The aggregate market value of common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was $22.3 billion on January 31, 2018, and $15.5 billion on June 30, 2017.

Common stock issued and outstanding was 1,447,844,743 shares on January 31, 2018, and 1,447,134,190 shares on June 30, 2017.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

FREEPORT-McMoRan INC.

i

PART I

Items 1. and 2. Business and Properties.

All of our periodic reports filed with the United States (U.S.) Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, are available, free of charge, through our website, www.fcx.com, including our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and any amendments to those reports. These reports and amendments ar

Showing the first 8K of 145K characters. Open the full section

This report contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of United States (U.S.) federal securities laws. Forward-looking statements are all statements other than statements of historical facts, such as projections or expectations relating to ore grades and milling rates; production and sales volumes; unit net cash costs; operating cash flows; anticipated tax refunds resulting from U.S. tax reform; capital expenditures; exploration efforts and results; development and production activities and costs; liquidity; tax rates; the impact of copper, gold and molybdenum price changes; the impact of deferred intercompany profits on earnings; reserve estimates; future dividend payments; and share purchases and sales.

We undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statements. We caution readers that forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and our actual results may differ materially from those anticipated, projected or assumed in the forward-looking statements. Important factors that can cause our actual results to differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements include the following:

Financial risks

Fluctuations in the market prices of copper, gold and molybdenum have caused and may continue to cause significant volatility in our financial performance and in the trading prices of our debt and common stock. Extended declines in the market prices of copper, gold and, to a lesser extent, molybdenum could adversely affect our earnings, cash flows and asset values and, if sustained, may adversely affect our ability to repay debt.

Our financial results will vary with fluctuations in the market prices of the commodities we produce, primarily copper and gold, and to a lesser extent molybdenum. An extended decline in market prices of these commodities could have a material adverse effect on our financial results, the value of our assets and/or our ability to repay our debt and meet our other fixed obligations; and may depress the trading prices of our common stock and of our publicly traded debt securities.

Additionally, if market prices for our primary commodities decline for a sustained period of time, we may have to revise our operating plans, including curtailing production, reducing operating costs and capital expenditures and discontinuing certain exploration and development programs. We may be unable to decrease our costs in an amount sufficient to offset reductions in revenues, in which case we may incur losses, and those losses may be material.

Fluctuations in commodities prices are caused by varied and complex factors beyond our control, including global supply and demand balances and inventory levels; global economic and political conditions; international regulatory,

trade and tax policies; commodities investment activity and speculation; the price and availability of substitute products; and changes in technology.

Copper prices may be affected by demand from China, which has become the largest consumer of refined copper in the world, and by changes in demand for industrial, commercial and residential products containing copper. Copper prices have fluctuated historically, with London Metal Exchange (LME) spot copper prices ranging from $1.96 per pound to $3.27 per pound during the three years ended December 31, 2017. LME spot copper prices averaged $2.80 per pound in 2017, $2.21 per pound in 2016 and $2.49 per pound in 2015. The LME spot copper price was $3.25 per pound on December 31, 2017, and $3.22 per pound on January 31, 2018.

Factors affecting gold prices may include the relative strength of the U.S. dollar to other currencies, inflation and interest rate expectations, purchases and sales of gold by governments and central banks, demand from China and India, two of the world’s largest consumers of gold, and global demand for jewelry containing gold. The London PM gold price averaged $1,257 per ounce in 2017, $1,250 per ounce in 2016 and $1,160 per ounce in 2015. The London PM gold price was $1,297 per ounce on December 31, 2017, and $1,345 per ounce on January 31, 2018.

The Metals Week Molybdenum Dealer Oxide weekly average price averaged $8.21 per pound in 2017, $6.47 per pound in 2016 and $6.66 per pound in 2015. The Metals Week Molybdenum Dealer Oxide weekly average price was $10.15 per pound on December 31, 2017, and $11.87 per pound on January 31, 2018.

As further discussed in Notes 4 and 5, non-cash charges for inventory adjustments totaled $8 million in 2017 and $36 million in 2016 primarily for molybdenum, and $338 million in 2015 for copper and molybdenum, and long-lived mining asset impairments totaled $37 million in 2015. Declines in copper, gold and/or molybdenum prices could result in additional metals inventory adjustments and impairment charges for our long-lived assets. Other events that could result in impairment of our long-lived assets include, but are not limited to, decreases in estimated proven and probable mineral reserves and any event that might have a material adverse effect on mine production costs.

Our debt and other financial commitments may limit our financial and operating flexibility.

At December 31, 2017, our total consolidated debt was $13.1 billion (see Note 8) and our total consolidated cash was $4.4 billion. We also have various other financial commitments, including reclamation and environmental obligations, take-or-pay contracts and leases. For further information, refer to the risk factor below relating to mine closure and reclamation regulations and plugging and abandonment obligations related to our remaining oil and gas properties. Our level of indebtedness and other financial commitments could have important consequences to our business, including the following:

Any failure to comply with the financial and other covenants in our debt agreements may result in an event of default that would allow the creditors to accelerate maturities of the related debt, which in turn may trigger cross-acceleration or cross-default provisions in other debt agreements. Our available cash and liquidity may not be sufficient to fully repay borrowings under our debt instruments that are accelerated upon an event of default.

From August 2015 through November 2016, we sold 326.5 million shares of our common stock under registered at-the-market equity programs, which generated $3.5 billion in gross proceeds (refer to Note 10). In addition, during 2016, we issued 48.1 million shares of our common stock in connection with the settlement of two drilling rig

contracts (refer to Note 13) and 27.7 million shares of our common stock in exchange for $369 million of FCX senior notes (refer to Note 10). Any additional issuance of equity capital to fund operations, reduce debt, improve our financial position or for other purposes, may have a negative impact on our stock price.

As of January 31, 2018, our senior unsecured debt was rated “BB-“ with a stable outlook by Standard & Poor’s (S&P), “BB+” with a negative outlook by Fitch Ratings (Fitch), and “Ba2” with a stable outlook by Moody’s Investors Service (Moody’s). Th

Showing the first 8K of 75K characters. Open the full section

Not applicable.

We are involved in numerous legal proceedings that arise in the ordinary course of our business or are associated with environmental issues arising from legacy operations conducted over the years by Freeport Minerals Corporation (FMC) and its affiliates. We are also involved periodically in reviews, inquiries, investigations and other proceedings initiated by or involving government agencies, some of which may result in adverse judgments, settlements, fines, penalties, injunctions or other relief. Management does not believe, based on currently available information, that the outcome of any legal proceeding will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition; although individual outcomes could be material to our operating results for a particular period, depending on the nature and magnitude of the outcome and the operating results for the period. Below is a discussion of our material water rights legal proceedings. Refer to Note 12 for discussion of our other material legal proceedings.

Water Rights Legal Proceedings

Our operations in the western United States (U.S.) require significant secure quantities of water for mining, ore processing and related support facilities. Continuous operation of our mines is dependent on, among other things, our ability to maintain our water rights and claims and the continuing physical availability of the water supplies. In the arid western U.S., where certain of our mines are located, water rights are often contested, and disputes over water rights are generally time-consuming, expensive and not necessarily dispositive unless they resolve both actual and potential claims. The loss of a water right, or a currently available water supply could force us to curtail operations, or force premature closures, thereby increasing and/or accelerating costs or foregoing profitable operations.

At our North America operations, certain of our water supplies are supported by surface water rights, which give us the right to use public waters for a statutorily defined beneficial use at a designated location. In Arizona, where our

operations use both surface and groundwater, we are a participant in an active general stream adjudication in which the Arizona courts have been attempting, for over 40 years, to quantify and prioritize surface water claims for the Gila River, one of the state’s largest river systems, which primarily affect our Morenci, Safford and Sierrita mines. The adjudication is addressing the state law claims of thousands of competing users, including us, as well as significant federal water claims that are potentially adverse to the state law claims of both surface water and groundwater users. Groundwater is treated differently from surface water under Arizona law, which historically allowed land owners to pump unlimited quantities of subsurface water, subject only to the requirement of putting it to “reasonable use.” However, court decisions in the adjudication have concluded that certain underground water constitutes “subflow” that is to be treated legally as surface water and is therefore subject to the Arizona doctrine of prior appropriation. This category of underground water is subject to the adjudication and potentially unavailable to groundwater pumpers in the absence of valid surface water claims, which historic groundwater pumpers typically do not have. Any re-characterization of groundwater as surface water could affect the ability of consumers, farmers, ranchers, municipalities, and industrial users like us to continue to access water supplies that have been relied on for decades. Because we are a user of both groundwater and surface water in Arizona, we are an active participant in the adjudication proceeding.

In Re The General Adjudication of All Rights to Use Water in the Gila River System and Sources, Maricopa County, Superior Court, Cause Nos. W-1 (Salt), W-2 (Verde), W-3 (Upper Gila), and W-4 (San Pedro). This case was originally initiated in 1974 with the filing of a petition with the Arizona State Land Department and was consolidated and transferred to the Maricopa County Superior Court in 1981. The principal parties, in addition to us, include: the state of Arizona; the Gila Valley Irrigation District; the Franklin Irrigation District; the San Carlos Irrigation and Drainage District; the Salt River Project; the San Carlos Apache Tribe; the Gila River Indian Community (GRIC); and the U.S. on behalf of those tribes, on its own behalf, and on behalf of the White Mountain Apache Tribe, the Fort McDowell Mohave-Apache Indian Community, the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, and the Payson Community of Yavapai Apache Indians.

Prior to January 1, 1983, various Indian tribes filed suits in the U.S. District Court in Arizona claiming superior rights to water being used by many other water users, including us, and claiming damages for prior use in derogation of their allegedly superior rights. These federal proceedings have either been stayed pending the Arizona Superior Court adjudications or have been settled.

The Maricopa County Superior Court issued a decision in 2005 in the Gila River adjudication that directed the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR) to prepare detailed recommendations regarding the delineation of the “subflow” zone of the San Pedro River, a tributary of the Gila River. According to the court, the subflow zone is the subsurface area adjacent to the river consisting of the floodplain Holocene alluvium. Underground water within the subflow zone is presumed to constitute appropriable subflow rather than groundwater. Although we have minimal interests in the San Pedro River Basin, a decision that re-characterizes groundwater in that basin as appropriable surface water may set a precedent for other river systems in Arizona that could have material implications for many commercial, industrial, municipal and agricultural users of groundwater, including our Arizona operations.

In June 2009, ADWR produced its recommended subflow zone delineation, which was objected to by numerous parties. Following a series of hearings and court rulings, ADWR submitted a revised subflow zone delineation report in 2014. The court held hearings in 2015 to address the parties’ comments and objections. In 2017, the court approved ADWR’s revised delineation, and no party has appealed that decision.

Also in 2014, ADWR submitted a proposal for the next projects that it believes should be undertaken in the case, including the development of procedures for “cone of depression” analyses to determine whether a well located outside of the subflow zone creates a cone of depression that intersects the subflow zone and causes a 0.1 foot drawdown. Based on the cone of depression analyses, wells outside of the subflow zone could be subject to the jurisdiction of the adjudication court. In the absence of a valid surface water claim to support the pumping, owners of wells deemed to be depleting the subflow zone through their cones of depression may be required to refrain from pumping or pay damages.

On January 27, 2017, ADWR issued a report containing its recommended cone of depression test, and on January 31, 2017, the Special Master issued an order initiating proceedings on the Cone of Depression Test Methodology developed by ADWR. Parties filed preliminary objections to the proposed methodology contained in ADWR’s report on March 6, 2017. On March 15, 2017, the Special Master held a status conference to determine the timing and scope of proceedings necessary to resolve the objections, including the submission of supplemental objections and

expert reports. Following the status conference, the Special Master established a discovery schedule leading up to a trial in March 2018 concerning ADWR’s recommended cone of depression test. During the course of these proceedings, it has been established that ADWR’s current recommended cone of depression test is for the purpose of establishing which wells are subject to the jurisdiction of the adjudication court. This phase of current cone of depression testing will not satisfy the burden of proving that a well is pumping subflow, nor will it establish how much of a well’s production is subflow versus groundwater. These matters will be determined by a subsequent “subflow depletion test,” which has not yet been formulated. The Special Master has ordered ADWR to produce an initial report on the subflow depletion test by November 16, 2018. The parties’ comments to ADWR’s initial report are due on January 18, 2019.

As part of the Gila River adjudication, the U.S. has asserted numerous claims for express and implied “reserved” surface water and groundwater rights on Indian and non-Indian federal lands throughout Arizona. These claims are related to reservations of federal land for specific purposes (e.g., Indian reservations, national parks, military bases and wilderness areas). Unlike state law-based water rights, federal reserved water rights are given priority in the prior appropriation system based on the date the land was reserved, not the date that water was first used on the land. In addition, federal reserved water rights, if recognized by the court, may enjoy greater protection from groundwater pumping than is accorded to state law-based water rights.

Because federal reserved water rights have not yet been quantified, the task of determining how much water each federal reservation may use has been left to the Gila River adjudication court. Several “contested cases” to quantify reserved water rights for particular federal reservations in Arizona are currently pending in the adjudication. For instance, In re Aravaipa Canyon Wilderness Area is a contested case to resolve the U.S.’s claims to water for the Aravaipa Canyon Wilderness Area. These claims went to trial in 2015 and the parties are awaiting a decision. In Re Fort Huachuca concerns the U.S.’s claims to water for an Army base. Trial concluded in February 2017, and the parties are awaiting a decision. In Re Redfield Canyon Wilderness Area is a contested case concerning U.S. claims for another wilderness area. Trial occurred in May 2017, and the matter will be taken under advisement following the completion of post-trial briefings. In Re San Pedro Riparian National Conservation Area involves U.S. claims for a national conservation area, and the case is scheduled for trial in April and May 2018.

In multiple instances, the U.S. asserts a right to all water in a particular watershed that was not effectively appropriated under state law prior to the establishment of the federal reservation. This creates risks for both surface water users and groundwater users because such expansive claims may severely impede current and future uses of water within the same watershed. Federal reserved rights present additional risks to water users aside from the significant quantities of water claimed by the U.S. Of particular significance, federal reserved rights enjoy greater protection from groundwater pumping than is accorded to state law-based water rights.

Because there are numerous federal reservations in watersheds across Arizona, the reserved water right claims of the U.S. pose a significant risk to multiple operations, including Morenci and Safford in the Upper Gila River watershed, and Sierrita in the Santa Cruz watershed. Because federal reserved water rights may adversely affect water uses at each of these operations, we have been actively involved in litigation over these claims.

Given the legal and technical complexity of these adjudications, their long history, and their long-term legal, economic and political implications, it is difficult to predict the timing or the outcome of these proceedings. If we are unable to satisfactorily resolve the issues being addressed in the adjudications, our ability to pump groundwater could be diminished or curtailed, and our operations at Morenci, Safford and Sierrita mines could be adversely affected unless we are able to acquire alternative resources.

The safety and health of all employees is our highest priority. Management believes that safety and health considerations are integral to, and compatible with, all other functions in the organization and that proper safety and health management will enhance production and reduce costs. Our approach towards the health and safety of our workforce is to continuously improve performance through implementing robust management systems and providing adequate training, safety incentive and occupational health programs.

Our objective is zero work place injuries and occupational illnesses. We measure progress toward achieving our objective against regularly established benchmarks, including measuring company-wide Total Recordable Incident Rates (TRIR). Our TRIR (including contractors) was 0.75 per 200,000 man-hours worked in 2017, 0.64 per 200,000 man-hours worked in 2016 and 0.56 per 200,000 man-hours worked in 2015. The metal mining sector industry average reported by the U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration was 1.93 per 200,000 man-hours worked in 2016 and 2.02 per 200,000 man-hours worked in 2015. The metal mining sector industry average for 2017 was not available at the time of this filing.

Refer to Exhibit 95.1 for mine safety disclosures required in accordance with Section 1503(a) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and Item 104 of Regulation S-K.

Executive Officers of the Registrant.

Certain information as of January 31, 2018, about our executive officers is set forth in the following table and accompanying text:

Richard C. Adkerson has served as Vice Chairman of the Board since June 2013, President since January 2008 and also from April 1997 to March 2007, Chief Executive Officer since December 2003 and a director since October 2006. Mr. Adkerson previously served as Chief Financial Officer from October 2000 to December 2003.

Kathleen L. Quirk has served as Executive Vice President since March 2007, Chief Financial Officer since December 2003 and Treasurer since February 2000. Ms. Quirk previously served as Senior Vice President from December 2003 to March 2007. Ms. Quirk also serves on the Board of Directors of Vulcan Materials Company.

Harry M. “Red” Conger, IV has served as Chief Operating Officer - Americas since July 2015, and as President - Americas since 2007. Mr. Conger has also served as President and Chief Operating Officer - Rod and Refining since 2014. He served as Chief Operating Officer - Africa Mining from July 2015 to December 2016. Prior to 2007, he served in a number of senior operations positions at Phelps Dodge Corporation.

Michael J. Arnold has served as Executive Vice President since March 2007 and Chief Administrative Officer since December 2003.

PART II

Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities

None.

Common Stock

Our common shares trade on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) under the symbol “FCX.” The FCX share price is reported daily in the financial press under “FMCG” in most listings of NYSE securities. The table below shows the NYSE composite tape common share price ranges during 2017 and 2016:

At January 31, 2018, there were 13,413 holders of record of our common stock.

Common Stock Dividends

In December 2015, the FCX Board of Directors (the Board) suspended the annual common stock dividend. Accordingly, there were no common stock dividends paid in 2017 or 2016. In February 2018, the Board reinstated a cash dividend on our common stock. The Board intends to declare a quarterly dividend of $0.05 per share, with the initial dividend expected to be paid May 1, 2018. The declaration of dividends is at the discretion of our Board and will depend upon our financial results, cash requirements, future prospects and other factors deemed relevant.

Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

The following table sets forth information with respect to shares of FCX common stock purchased by us during the three months ended December 31, 2017:

FREEPORT-McMoRan INC.

SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA

The selected consolidated financial data shown above is derived from our audited consolidated financial statements. These historical results are not necessarily indicative of results that you can expect for any future period. You should read this data in conjunction with Items 7. and 7A. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risks (MD&A) and Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data thereto contained in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017. All references to income or losses per share are on a diluted basis, unless otherwise noted.

sales of assets totaling $81 million primarily associated with oil and gas transactions and net credits of $13 million at oil and gas operations mostly associated with drillship settlement.

Showing the first 8K of 238K characters. Open the full section

MANAGEMENT’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING

Freeport-McMoRan Inc.’s (the Company’s) management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Internal control over financial reporting is defined in Rule 13a-15(f) or 15d-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as a process designed by, or under the supervision of, the Company’s principal executive and principal financial officers and effected by the Company’s Board of Directors, management and other personnel, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and includes those policies and procedures that:

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

Our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of the end of the fiscal year covered by this annual report on Form 10-K. In making this assessment, our management used the criteria set forth in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (2013 framework) (the COSO criteria). Based on its assessment, management concluded that, as of December 31, 2017, our Company’s internal control over financial reporting is effective based on the COSO criteria.

Ernst & Young LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, who audited the Company’s consolidated financial statements included in this Form 10-K, has issued an attestation report on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting, which is included herein.

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND STOCKHOLDERS OF

FREEPORT-McMoRan INC.

Opinion on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

We have audited Freeport-McMoRan Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2017, based on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (2013 framework) (the COSO criteria). In our opinion, Freeport-McMoRan Inc. (the Company) maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2017, based on the COSO criteria.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB), the consolidated balance sheets of Freeport-McMoRan Inc. as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income (loss), equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2017, and the related notes of the Company and our report dated February 20, 2018 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.

Basis for Opinion

The Company’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects.

Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Definition and Limitations of Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Phoenix, Arizona

February 20, 2018

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND STOCKHOLDERS OF

FREEPORT-McMoRan INC.

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Freeport-McMoRan Inc. (the Company) as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income (loss), equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2017, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the “financial statements”). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position

Showing the first 8K of 367K characters. Open the full section

Not applicable.

(a) Evaluation of disclosure controls and procedures. Our chief executive officer and chief financial officer, with the participation of management, have evaluated the effectiveness of our “disclosure controls and procedures” (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) as of the end of the period covered by this annual report on Form 10-K. Based on their evaluation, they have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures are effective as of the end of the period covered by this report.

(b) Changes in internal controls over financial reporting. There has been no change in our internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the quarter ended December 31, 2017, that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

(c) Management’s annual report on internal control over financial reporting and the report thereon of Ernst & Young LLP are included herein under Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplemental Data.”

Not applicable.

PART III

The information set forth under the captions “Information About Director Nominees” and “Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance” of our definitive proxy statement to be filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), relating to our 2018 annual meeting of stockholders, is incorporated herein by reference. The information required by Item 10 regarding our executive officers appears in a separately captioned heading after Item 4. “Executive Officers of the Registrant” in Part I of this report.

The information set forth under the captions “Director Compensation” and “Executive Officer Compensation” of our definitive proxy statement to be filed with the SEC, relating to our 2018 annual meeting of stockholders, is incorporated herein by reference.

The information set forth under the captions “Stock Ownership of Directors and Executive Officers” and “Stock Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners” of our definitive proxy statement to be filed with the SEC, relating to our 2018 annual meeting of stockholders, is incorporated herein by reference.

Equity Compensation Plan Information

Only our 2016 Stock Incentive Plan (2016 plan), which was previously approved by our stockholders, has shares of our common stock available for future grant. However, we have equity compensation plans pursuant to which awards have previously been made that could result in issuance of our common stock to employees and non-employees as compensation, including two plans that were assumed in connection with the acquisition of Plains Exploration & Production Company (Plains Exploration) under which stock-settled restricted stock units (RSUs) were previously issued and seven plans that were assumed in connection with the acquisition of McMoRan Exploration Co. under which stock-settled RSUs and nonqualified stock options were previously issued.

The following table presents information regarding our equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2017.

The information set forth under the captions “Certain Transactions” and “Board and Committee Independence” of our definitive proxy statement to be filed with the SEC, relating to our 2018 annual meeting of stockholders, is incorporated herein by reference.

The information set forth under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” of our definitive proxy statement to be filed with the SEC, relating to our 2018 annual meeting of stockholders, is incorporated herein by reference.

PART IV

(a)(1). Financial Statements.

The consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income (loss), cash flows and equity, and the consolidated balance sheets are included as part of Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”

(a)(2). Financial Statement Schedules.

The following financial statement schedule is presented below.

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

Schedules other than the one listed below have been omitted since they are either not required, not applicable or the required information is included in the financial statements or notes thereto.

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND STOCKHOLDERS OF

FREEPORT-McMoRan INC.

Opinion on the Financial Statement Schedule

We have audited the consolidated financial statements of Freeport-McMoRan Inc. (the Company) as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, and for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2017, and have issued our report thereon dated February 20, 2018 (included elsewhere in this Form 10-K). Our audits also included the financial statement schedule listed in Item 15 (a)(2) as of December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, and for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2017, of this Form 10-K. In our opinion, the financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly, in all material respects the information set forth therein.

Basis for Opinion

This schedule is the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the

Company’s schedule based on our audits. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Phoenix, Arizona

February 20, 2018

SCHEDULE II - VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS (In millions)

(a)(3). Exhibits.

Note: Certain instruments with respect to long-term debt of FCX have not been filed as exhibits to this Annual Report on Form 10-K since the total amount of securities authorized under any such instrument does not exceed 10 percent of the total assets of FCX and its subsidiaries on a consolidated basis. FCX agrees to furnish a copy of each such instrument upon request of the Securities and Exchange Commission.

• Indicates management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement.

Pursuant to a request for confidential treatment, portions of this exhibit have been redacted from the publicly filed document and have been furnished separately to the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Not applicable.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

Following is a glossary of selected terms used throughout the FCX Form 10-K that are technical in nature:

Mining

Adits. A horizontal passage leading into a mine for the purposes of access or drainage.

Alluvial aquifers. A water-bearing deposit of loosely arranged gravel, sand or silt left behind by a river or other flowing water.

Anode. A positively charged metal sheet, usually lead, on which oxidation occurs. During the electro-refining process, anodes are impure copper sheets from the smelting process that require further processing to produce refined copper cathode.

Azurite. A bluish supergene copper mineral and ore found in the oxidized portions of copper deposits often associated with malachite.

Bench. The horizontal floor cuttings along which mining progresses in an open-pit mine. As the pit progresses to lower levels, safety benches are left in the walls to catch any falling rock.

Blasthole stoping. An underground mining method that extracts the ore zone in large vertical rooms. The ore is broken by blasting using large-diameter vertical drill holes.

Block cave. A general term used to describe an underground mining method where the extraction of ore depends largely on the action of gravity. By continuously removing a thin horizontal layer at the bottom mining level of the ore column, the vertical support of the ore column is removed and the ore then caves by gravity.

Bornite. A red-brown isometric mineral comprising copper, iron and sulfur.

Brochantite. A greenish-black copper mineral occurring in the oxidation zone of copper sulfide deposits.

Cathode. Refined copper produced by electro-refining of impure copper or by electrowinning.

Chalcocite. A grayish copper sulfide mineral, usually found as a supergene in copper deposits formed from the re-deposition of copper minerals that were solubilized from the oxide portion of the deposit.

Chalcopyrite. A brass-yellow sulfide of mineral copper and iron.

Chrysocolla. A bluish-green to emerald-green oxide copper mineral that forms incrustations and thin seams in oxidized parts of copper-mineral veins; a source of copper and an ornamental stone.

Cobalt. A tough, lustrous, nickel-white or silvery-gray metallic element often associated with nickel and copper ores from which it is obtained as a by-product.

Concentrate. The resulting product from the concentrating process that is composed predominantly of copper sulfide or molybdenum sulfide minerals. Further processing might include smelting and electro-refining, or roasting.

Concentrating. The process by which ore is separated into metal concentrate through crushing, milling and flotation.

Concentrator. A process plant used to separate targeted minerals from gangue and produce a mineral concentrate that can be marketed or processed by additional downstream processes to produce salable metals or mineral products. Term is used interchangeably with Mill.

Contained copper. The percentage of copper in a mineral sample before the reduction of amounts unable to be recovered during the metallurgical process.

Covellite. A metallic, indigo-blue supergene mineral found in copper deposits.

Crushed-ore leach pad. A slightly sloping pad upon which leach ores are placed in lifts for processing.

Cutoff grade. The minimum percentage of copper contained in the ore for processing. When percentages are below this grade, the material would be routed to a high-lift or waste stockpile. When percentages are above grade, the material would be processed using concentrating or leaching methods for higher recovery.

Disseminations. A mineral deposit in which the desired minerals occur as scattered particles in the rock that has sufficient quantity to be considered an ore deposit.

Electrolytic refining. The purification of metals by electrolysis. A large piece of impure copper is used as the anode with a thin strip of pure copper as the cathode.

Electrowinning. A process that uses electricity to plate copper contained in an electrolyte solution into copper cathode.

Flotation. A concentrating process in which valuable minerals attach themselves to bubbles of an oily froth for separation as concentrate. The gangue material from the flotation process reports as a tailing product.

Grade. The relative quality or percentage of metal content.

Leach stockpiles. A quantity of leachable ore placed on a leach pad or in another suitable location that permits leaching and collection of solutions that contain solubilized metal.

Leaching. The process of extracting copper using a chemical solution to dissolve copper contained in ore.

Malachite. A bright-green copper mineral (ore) that often occurs with azurite in oxidized zones of copper deposits.

Metric ton. The equivalent of 2,204.62 pounds.

Mill stockpile. Millable ore that has been mined, and is available for future processing.

Mine-for-leach. A mining operation focused on mining only leachable ores.

Mineralization. The process by which a mineral is introduced into a rock, resulting in concentration of minerals that may form a valuable or potentially valuable deposit.

Molybdenite. A black, platy, disulfide of molybdenum. It is the most common ore of molybdenum.

Ore body. A continuous, well-defined mass of mineralized material of sufficient ore content to make extraction economically feasible.

Oxide. In mining, oxide is used as an ore classification relating to material that usually leaches well but does not perform well in a concentrator. Oxide minerals in mining refer to an oxidized form.

Paste backfill. A slurry of paste material produced from railings with engineered cement and water content that is used to fill underground mined out stopes.

Porphyry. A deposit in which minerals of copper, molybdenum, gold or, less commonly, tungsten and tin are disseminated or occur in stock-work of small veinlets within a large mass of hydro-thermally altered igneous rock. The host rock is commonly an intrusive porphyry, but other rocks intruded by a porphyry can also be hosts for ore minerals.

Production level. With respect to underground mining, the elevation of the underground works that permit extraction/transport of the ore to a common point, shaft or plant.

Pseudomalachite. A dark-green monoclinic copper mineral.

Roasting. The heating of sulfide ores to oxidize sulfides to facilitate further processing.

Run-of-Mine (ROM). Leachable ore that is mined and directly placed on a leach pad without utilizing any further processes to reduce particle size prior to leaching.

Skarn. A Swedish mining term for silicate gangue of certain iron ore and sulfide deposits of Archaean age, particularly those that have replaced limestone and dolomite. Its meaning has been generally expanded to include lime-bearing silicates, of any geologic age, derived from nearly pure limestone and dolomite with the introduction of large amounts of silicon, aluminum, iron and magnesium.

Smelting. The process of melting and oxidizing concentrate to separate copper and precious metals from metallic and non-metallic impurities, including iron, silica, alumina and sulfur.

Solution extraction. A process that transfers copper from a copper-bearing ore to an organic solution, then to an electrolyte. The electrolyte is then pumped to a tankhouse where the copper is extracted, using electricity, into a copper cathode (refer to the term Electrowinning), together referred to as solution extraction/electrowinning (SX/EW).

Spot price. The current price at which a commodity can be bought or sold at a specified time and place.

Stope. An underground mining method that is usually applied to highly inclined or vertical veins. Ore is extracted by driving horizontally upon it in a series of workings, one immediately over the other. Each horizontal working is called a stope because when a number of them are in progress, each working face under attack assumes the shape of a flight of stairs.

Sulfide. A mineral compound containing sulfur and a metal. Copper sulfides can be concentrated or leached, depending on the mineral type.

Tailing. The material remaining after economically recoverable metals and minerals have been extracted.

Tolling. The process of converting customer-owned material into specified products, which is then returned to the customer.

Oil and Gas

Barrel or Bbl. One stock tank barrel, or 42 U.S. gallons liquid volume (used in reference to crude oil or other liquid hydrocarbons).

Blowouts. Accidents resulting from loss of hydraulic well control while conducting drilling operations.

Barrel of Oil Equivalent or BOE. One stock tank barrel equivalent of oil, calculated by converting gas volumes to equivalent oil barrels at a ratio of 6 thousand cubic feet to 1 barrel of oil.

British thermal unit or Btu. One British thermal unit is the amount of heat required to raise the temperature of one pound of water by one degree Fahrenheit.

Completion. The installation of permanent equipment for production of oil or gas, or, in the case of a dry well, the reporting to the appropriate authority that the well has been abandoned.

Condensate. A mixture of hydrocarbons that exists in the gaseous phase at original reservoir temperature and pressure, but that, when produced, is in the liquid phase at surface pressure and temperature.

Cratering. The collapse of the circulation system dug around the drilling rig for the prevention of blowouts.

Developed oil and gas reserves. Developed oil and gas reserves are reserves of any category that can be expected to be recovered: (i) through existing wells with existing equipment and operating methods or in which the cost of the required equipment is relatively minor compared to the cost of a new well; and (ii) through installed extraction equipment and infrastructure operational at the time of the reserves estimate if the extraction is by means not involving a well.

Development well. A well drilled within the proved area of an oil or gas reservoir to the depth of a stratigraphic horizon known to be productive.

Differential. An adjustment to the price of oil or natural gas from an established spot market price to reflect differences in the quality and/or location of oil or gas.

Natural gas liquids or NGLs. Hydrocarbons (primarily ethane, propane, butane and natural gasolines) which have been extracted from wet natural gas and become liquid under various combinations of increasing pressure and lower temperature.

Shale. A fine-grained, clastic sedimentary rock composed of mud that is a mix of flakes of clay minerals and tiny fragments of other minerals.

Standardized measure. The present value, discounted at 10 percent per year, of estimated future net revenues from the production of proved reserves, computed by applying sales prices used in estimating proved oil and natural gas reserves to the year-end quantities of those reserves in effect as of the dates of such estimates and held constant throughout the productive life of the reserves (except for consideration of future price changes to the extent provided by contractual arrangements in existence at year-end), and deducting the estimated future costs to be incurred in developing, producing and abandoning the proved reserves (computed based on year-end costs and assuming continuation of existing economic conditions). Future income taxes are calculated by applying the appropriate year-end statutory federal and state income tax rates, with consideration of future tax rates already legislated, to pre-tax future net cash flows, net of the tax basis of the properties involved and utilization of available tax carryforwards related to proved oil and natural gas reserves.

Undeveloped acreage. Lease acreage on which wells have not been drilled or completed to a point that would permit the production of economic quantities of oil or gas regardless of whether the acreage contains proved reserves.

Undeveloped oil and gas reserves. Undeveloped oil and natural gas reserves are reserves of any category that are expected to be recovered from new wells on undrilled acreage, or from existing wells where a relatively major expenditure is required for recompletion. Reserves on undrilled acreage shall be limited to those directly offsetting development spacing areas that are reasonably certain of production when drilled, unless evidence using reliable technology exists that establishes reasonable certainty of economic producibility at greater distances. Undrilled locations can be classified as having undeveloped reserves only if a development plan has been adopted indicating that they are scheduled to be drilled within five years, unless the specific circumstances justify a longer time. Under no circumstances shall estimates for undeveloped reserves be attributable to any acreage for which an application of fluid injection or other improved recovery technique is contemplated, unless such techniques have been proved effective by actual projects in the same reservoir or an analogous reservoir, or by other evidence using reliable technology establishing reasonable certainty.

Working interest. An interest in an oil and gas lease that gives the owner of the interest the right to drill for and produce oil and gas on the leased acreage and requires the owner to pay a share of the costs of drilling and production operations.

For additional information regarding the definitions contained in this Glossary, or for other oil and gas definitions, refer to Rule 4-10 of Regulation S-X.

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, on February 20, 2018.

Freeport-McMoRan Inc.

By:/s/ Richard C. Adkerson

Richard C. Adkerson

Vice Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed by the following persons on behalf of the registrant in the capacities indicated on February 20, 2018.

S - 1