Intuitive Surgical (ISRG) Risk Analysis

Our products and operations are subject to extensive regulation in the U.S. by the FDA. The FDA regulates the development and clinical testing, manufacturing, labeling, storage, record keeping, promotion, sales, distribution, and post-market support and medical device reporting in the U.S. to ensure that medical products distributed domestically are safe and effective for their intended uses. In order for us to market products for use in the U.S., we generally must first obtain clearance from the FDA pursuant to Section 510(k) of the FFDCA or approval of the product through the PMA pathway. Clearance under Section 510(k) requires demonstration that a new device is substantially equivalent to another device with 510(k) clearance or grandfathered ("pre-amendment") status and for which a PMA is not required. If we develop products in the future that are not considered to be substantially equivalent to a device with 510(k) clearance or grandfathered status, we may be required to obtain marketing authorization through the more burdensome PMA process or alternatively through the de novo classification process, which is a path to market for novel devices that are low to moderate risk and for which a predicate device is not available. Although our current products have generally been cleared through the 510(k) clearance process, we may decide to seek approval for future products through a PMA submission or through the de novo classification process. A PMA is typically a much more complex, lengthy, and burdensome application than a 510(k) and generally takes from one to three years, or even longer, from the time the application is submitted to the FDA. In the PMA process, the FDA must determine that a proposed device is safe and effective for its intended use based, in part, on extensive data, including, but not limited to, technical, preclinical, clinical study, manufacturing, and labeling data. The PMA process is typically required for devices that are deemed to pose the greatest risk, such as life-sustaining, life-supporting, or implantable devices. In the de novo classification process, a manufacturer whose novel device under the FFDCA would otherwise be automatically classified as Class III and require the submission and approval of a PMA prior to marketing is able to request down-classification of the device to Class I or Class II on the basis that the device presents a low or moderate risk. Similarly, although the FDA has a statutory deadline of 120 days to review a de novo submission, in practice, the review may take much longer. In addition, a PMA application or de novo classification requests generally require the performance of one or more clinical studies. In some cases, such studies may also be required to support a 510(k) application, and any requirements to conduct clinical studies beyond those we anticipate for our current or future products could add significantly to our costs and have a material adverse effect on our business. The FDA may not act favorably or quickly in its review of any marketing application submissions, or we may encounter significant difficulties and costs in our efforts to obtain marketing authorization from the FDA, either of which could delay or preclude the sale of new products in the U.S. In addition, the FDA may place significant limitations upon the intended use of our products as a condition of granting marketing authorization. Product applications can also be denied or withdrawn due to failure to comply with regulatory requirements or the occurrence of unforeseen problems following marketing authorization. Any delays or failure to obtain FDA marketing authorization for new or modified products that we develop, any limitations imposed by the FDA on new product use, or the costs of obtaining FDA clearance or approvals could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations. In addition, the FDA or other regulatory agencies may change their policies, adopt additional regulations, revise existing regulations, or take other actions that may prevent or delay approval or clearance of our products under development or impact our ability to modify our currently approved or cleared products on a timely basis. We may be found non-compliant as a result of future changes in, or interpretations of, regulations by the FDA or other regulatory agencies. For example, on February 2, 2026, the FDA's final rule implementing the QMSR became effective. The QMSR, which replaces the FDA's former Quality System Regulation sets forth the FDA's current good manufacturing practice requirements for medical devices, and among other things, incorporates by reference the quality management system requirements of ISO 13485:2016. Although the FDA has stated that the standards contained in ISO 13485:2016 are substantially similar to those set forth in the QSR, and although we have obtained ISO 13485:2016 certification for our quality management system, the FDA has indicated that ISO:13485 certification alone will not ensure compliance under the QMSR, nor will ISO certification exempt manufacturers from FDA inspection. The QMSR also includes certain compliance obligations, such as those relating to unique device identification, product traceability, and maintenance of complaint and service records, that align more closely with FDA's existing medical device requirements than with ISO standards. Accordingly, it remains unclear the extent to which the QMSR may impose additional or different regulatory requirements on us that could increase the costs of compliance or otherwise negatively affect our business. If we are unable to comply with the QMSR, or with any other changes in the laws or regulations enforced by FDA or comparable regulatory authorities, we may be subject to enforcement action, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations. Additionally, in September 2019, the FDA issued revised guidance describing an optional "safety and performance based" premarket review pathway for manufacturers of "certain, well-understood device types" to demonstrate substantial equivalence under the 510(k) clearance pathway by showing that such device meets objective safety and performance criteria established by the FDA, thereby obviating the need for manufacturers to compare the safety and performance of their medical devices to specific predicate devices in the clearance process. The FDA maintains a list of device types appropriate for the "safety and performance based" pathway and continues to develop product-specific guidance documents that identify the performance criteria for each such device type, as well as the recommended testing methods, where feasible. The FDA may establish performance criteria for classes of devices for which we or our competitors seek or currently have received clearance, and it is unclear the extent to which such performance standards, if established, could impact our ability to obtain new 510(k) clearances or otherwise create competition that may negatively affect our business. In order to conduct a clinical investigation involving human subjects for the purpose of demonstrating the safety and effectiveness of a medical device, a company must, among other things, apply for and obtain IRB approval of the proposed investigation. In addition, if the clinical study involves a "significant risk" (as defined by the FDA) to human health, the sponsor of the investigation must also submit and obtain FDA approval of an IDE application. Many of our products to date have been or would be considered significant risk devices requiring IDE approval prior to investigational use. We may not be able to obtain FDA and/or IRB approval to undertake clinical trials in the U.S. for any new devices that we intend to market in the U.S. in the future. Even if we obtain such approvals, we may not be able to conduct studies that comply with the IDE and other regulations governing clinical investigations or the data from any such trials may not support clearance or approval of the investigational device. Clinical testing is difficult to design and implement, can take many years, can be expensive, and carries uncertain outcomes and, if we fail to complete our planned or ongoing clinical trials or if such clinical trials produce negative or inconclusive results, we may be delayed or prevented from obtaining regulatory clearances or approvals to commercialize our products for new or expanded indications. Additionally, we may experience delays in our ongoing clinical trials for any number of reasons, which could adversely affect the costs, timing, or successful completion of our clinical trials. If we fail to complete our planned and ongoing clinical trials or if such clinical trials produce negative or inconclusive results, we may be delayed or prevented from obtaining regulatory clearances or approvals to commercialize our products for new or expanded indications, which may limit demand for our products. Certainty that clinical trials will meet desired endpoints, produce meaningful or useful data, and be free of unexpected adverse effects or that the FDA will accept the validity of foreign clinical study data cannot be assured, and such uncertainty could preclude or delay market clearance or authorizations resulting in significant financial costs and reduced revenue. Failure to obtain such approvals or to comply with such regulations could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations.

We are subject to the FDA's medical device reporting regulations and similar foreign regulations, which require us to report to the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities when we receive or become aware of information that reasonably suggests that one or more of our products may have caused or contributed to a death or serious injury or malfunctioned in a way that, if the malfunction were to recur, it could cause or contribute to a death or serious injury. The timing of our obligation to report is triggered by the date we become aware of the adverse event as well as the nature of the event. We may fail to report adverse events of which we become aware within the prescribed time frame. We may also fail to recognize that we have become aware of a reportable adverse event, especially if it is not reported to us as an adverse event or if it is an adverse event that is unexpected or removed in time from the use of the product. If we fail to comply with our reporting obligations, the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities could take action, including warning letters, untitled letters, administrative actions, criminal prosecution, imposition of civil monetary penalties, revocation of our device clearance, approval, or certification, seizure of our products or delay in clearance, approval, or certification of future products. The FDA and foreign regulatory bodies have the authority to require the recall of commercialized products in the event of material deficiencies or defects in the design or manufacture of a product or in the event that a product poses an unacceptable risk to health. The FDA's authority to require a recall must be based on a finding that there is reasonable probability that the device could cause serious injury or death. We may also choose to voluntarily recall a product if any material deficiency is found. A government-mandated or voluntary recall by us could occur as a result of an unacceptable risk to health, component failures, malfunctions, manufacturing defects, labeling or design deficiencies, packaging defects, or other deficiencies or failures to comply with applicable regulations. Product defects or other errors may occur in the future. Depending on the corrective action we take to redress a product's deficiencies or defects, the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities may require, or we may decide, that we will need to obtain new clearances, approvals, or certifications for the device before we may market or distribute the corrected device. Seeking such clearances, approvals, or certifications may delay our ability to replace the recalled devices in a timely manner. Moreover, if we do not adequately address problems associated with our devices, we may face additional regulatory enforcement actions, including FDA or foreign regulatory authorities warning letters, product seizure, injunctions, administrative penalties, or civil or criminal fines. Companies are required to maintain certain records of recalls and corrections, even if they are not reportable to the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities. We may initiate voluntary withdrawals or corrections for our products in the future that we determine do not require notification of the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities. If the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities disagree with our determinations, it could require us to report those actions as recalls, and we may be subject to enforcement actions. A future recall announcement could harm our reputation with customers, potentially lead to product liability claims against us, and negatively affect our sales. Any corrective action, whether voluntary or involuntary, as well as defending ourselves in a lawsuit, would require the dedication of our time and capital, distract management from operating our business, and may harm our reputation, financial condition, or results of operations.

Our manufacturing facilities are subject to periodic inspection by regulatory authorities and audit by notified bodies, and our operations will continue to be regulated and inspected by the FDA and other regulatory agencies and notified bodies for compliance with Good Manufacturing Practice requirements contained in the QMSR and other regulatory requirements. We are similarly required to comply with ISO quality system standards as well as EU legislation and norms in order to produce products for sale in the EU. In addition, many countries, such as Canada and Japan, have very specific additional regulatory requirements for quality assurance and manufacturing. If we fail to continue to comply with Good Manufacturing Practice requirements, as well as ISO or other regulatory standards, we may be required to cease all or part of our operations until we comply with these regulations. We continue to be subject to FDA and certain other inspections by other regulatory authorities and notified bodies at any time. Maintaining such compliance is difficult and costly. We cannot be certain that our facilities will be found to comply with Good Manufacturing Practice requirements or ISO standards and other regulatory requirements in future inspections and audits by regulatory authorities and notified bodies. We are currently participating in the Medical Device Single Audit Program ("MDSAP"), which allows an MDSAP-recognized auditing organization to conduct a single regulatory audit of a medical device manufacturer that evaluates our quality system to assess compliance with the requirements of multiple regulatory jurisdictions, including the U.S., Japan, Brazil, Australia, and Canada. The information collected in an MDSAP audit is shared and reviewed amongst all the regulatory authorities participating in the MDSAP, who may or may not determine that additional information or auditing is required. Our Sunnyvale, California facility is licensed by the State of California to manufacture medical devices. We have been subject to periodic inspections by the California Department of Health Services Food and Drug Branch and, if we are unable to maintain this license following any future inspections, we will be unable to manufacture or ship some products, which would have a material adverse effect on our results of operations. In addition, all of our facilities are subject to periodic inspections by other regulatory bodies, including third-party auditors on behalf of national regulatory authorities. Compliance with multiple regulatory standards is complex, difficult, and costly to maintain, and material deficiencies could result in significant limitations on our ability to manufacture, transport, and sell our products in one or more countries.

To be able to sell our products in other countries, we must obtain regulatory approvals or certifications and comply with the regulations of those countries, which may differ substantially from those of the U.S. These regulations, including the requirements for approvals or certifications and the time required for regulatory review, vary from country to country. Obtaining and maintaining foreign regulatory approvals or certifications is complex, and the time to obtain clearances or certifications in other countries varies; therefore, we cannot be certain that we will receive regulatory approvals or certifications in any other country in which we plan to market our products or obtain such approvals or certifications on a favorable schedule. If we fail to obtain or maintain regulatory approval or certification in any other country in which we plan to market our products, our ability to generate revenue will be harmed. In particular, if the FDA refuses to provide CFGs, our ability to register products or renew such registrations may be delayed or denied. In the EU, the EU MDR, which repealed and replaced the MDD, became applicable on May 26, 2021. In accordance with transitional provisions, both (i) devices lawfully placed on the market pursuant to the EU MDD prior to May 26, 2021, and (ii) legacy devices lawfully placed on the EU market from May 26, 2021, in accordance with the EU MDR transitional provisions may generally continue to be made available on the market or put into service until December 31, 2028 (at the very latest and depending on the product risk classification) per the EU MDR extended transitional provisions, provided that the requirements of the transitional provisions are fulfilled. However, since May 26, 2021, manufacturers must already comply with a number of new, or reinforced, requirements set forth in the EU MDR, including registration of economic operators and of devices control plan, Periodic Safety Update Report ("PSUR"), notify body periodic vigilance report, post-market surveillance, clinical periodic review report, and vigilance requirements, such as the Post Market Clinical Follow-Up ("PMCF") or Clinical Evaluation Plan ("CEP"). These requirements are in active implementation and may change as the European Commission adopts additional implementing acts and considers targeted revisions to related medical device rules. Subject to the transitional provisions, in order to sell our products in EU member states, our products must comply with the general safety and performance requirements of the EU MDR. Compliance with these requirements is a prerequisite to be able to affix the CE mark to our products, without which they cannot be sold or marketed in the EU. All medical devices placed on the market in the EU must meet the general safety and performance requirements laid down in Annex I to the EU MDR, including the requirement that a medical device must be designed and manufactured in such a way that, during normal conditions of use, it is suitable for its intended purpose. It is the responsibility of the (manufacturer) Person Responsible for Regulatory Compliance ("PRRC") to ensure such requirements are fulfilled and in place in the company. Medical devices must be safe and effective and must not compromise the clinical condition or safety of patients or the safety and health of users and, where applicable, other persons, provided that any risks that may be associated with their use constitute acceptable risks when weighed against the benefits to the patient and are compatible with a high level of protection of health and safety, taking into account the generally acknowledged state of the art. To demonstrate compliance with the general safety and performance requirements, we must undergo a conformity assessment procedure, which varies according to the type of medical device and its (risk) classification and may include a technical documentation assessment and an onsite audit. Except for low-risk medical devices (Class I), where the manufacturer can self-assess the conformity of its products with the general safety and performance requirements (except for any parts that relate to sterility, metrology, or reuse aspects), a conformity assessment procedure requires the intervention of a notified body. The notified body would typically audit and examine the technical file and the quality system for the manufacture, design, and final inspection of our devices. If satisfied that the relevant product conforms to the relevant general safety and performance requirements and we have the organizational structure to support it (i.e., PRRC), the notified body issues a certificate of conformity, which the manufacturer uses as a basis for its own declaration of conformity. The manufacturer may then apply the CE mark to the device, which allows the device to be placed on the market throughout the EU. If we fail to comply with applicable laws and regulations, we would be unable to affix the CE mark to our products, which would prevent us from selling them within the EU or any countries recognizing the CE mark. The aforementioned EU rules are generally applicable in the EEA. We have gained certification under the EU MDR and, where appropriate, maintained our certificates granted under the former EU MDD for all medical devices that we intend to continue to market in the EU and EEA. Further, Switzerland, which is the country from which we import our products into the EU and where our EU regulatory team is based, has not yet entered into a Mutual Recognition Agreement with the EU that covers the EU MDR and allows medical devices to move freely between Switzerland and the EU. Therefore, for future needs, we will adjust the manner in which we bring our products into the EU market. Any such adjustments could cause temporary disruptions in and have adverse financial implications to our business in Europe. In addition, the EU regulatory landscape concerning medical devices recently evolved and continues to undergo legislative changes. On May 26, 2021, the EU MDR became applicable and repealed and replaced the EU MDD and the Active Implantable Medical Devices Directive. Unlike directives, which must be implemented into the national laws of the EU member states, regulations are directly applicable (i.e., without the need for adoption of EU member state laws implementing them) in all EU member states and are intended to eliminate current differences in the regulation of medical devices among EU member states. The EU MDR, among other things, is intended to establish a uniform, transparent, predictable, and sustainable regulatory framework across the EU for medical devices and ensure a high level of safety and health while supporting innovation. These requirements are in active implementation and may change as the European Commission adopts additional implementing acts and considers targeted revisions to related medical device rules. In addition, on December 16, 2025, the European Commission published a targeted revision proposal of the EU MDR to address structural issues, certification delays, and burdens on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The proposal will enter the ordinary legislative procedure and is not expected to be adopted before 2027. In Japan, to date, we received approvals from the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare for our da Vinci Si, Xi, X, 5, and SP surgical systems and various associated instruments and accessories for use in certain da Vinci procedures. We may seek additional approvals for other products and/or indications; however, there can be no assurance that such approvals will be granted. In addition, because not all of our instruments have received product approvals and reimbursement is an additional process to generate commercial acceptance, it is possible that procedures will be adopted slowly or not at all. Sales of our products depend, in part, on the extent to which the costs of our products are reimbursed by governmental health administration authorities. There are multiple pathways to obtain reimbursement for procedures including those that require in-country clinical data and which are considered for reimbursed status in April of even-numbered years. If we are not successful in obtaining the necessary reimbursement approvals or obtaining approvals for future products and procedures, then the demand for our products could be limited. These limitations could eliminate a significant opportunity for our products in Japan. In China, our capital sales are subject to importation authorizations and purchasing tender processes. In June 2023, the China National Health Commission published the 2023 Quota. Under the original 2023 Quota, the government will allow for the sale of 559 new surgical robots into China, which could include da Vinci surgical systems as well as surgical systems introduced by others. As of December 31, 2025, including systems that were sold in prior quarters, we have placed 162 da Vinci surgical systems under the original 2023 Quota and 5 da Vinci surgical systems under special approvals. Our ability to track the number of systems that could be sold under these quotas in the future is limited by provincial and national agencies making such information publicly available. Future system sales and our ability to grow future procedure volumes are dependent on the completion of these purchasing tender authorizations. The timing and magnitude of these future authorizations, which may determine our system placements in future years, is not certain, and we expect to continue to experience variability in the timing of capital sales in China.

In the U.S., there have been, and continue to be, a number of legislative initiatives to contain healthcare costs. In March 2010, the ACA was enacted, which made changes that have impacted and are expected to significantly impact the pharmaceutical and medical device industries. The ACA contained a number of provisions designed to generate the revenues necessary to fund health insurance coverage expansions among other things. This included a number of Medicare payment system reforms, including a national pilot program on payment bundling to encourage hospitals, physicians, and other providers to improve the coordination, quality, and efficiency of certain healthcare services through bundled payment models and appropriated funding for comparative effectiveness research. Since its enactment, there have been judicial, executive branch, and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. On June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the most recent judicial challenge to the ACA brought by several states without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA. Thus, the ACA will remain in effect in its current form. In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA became law. These changes included an aggregate reduction in Medicare payments, which went into effect on April 1, 2013, and will remain in effect through 2032, unless additional Congressional action is taken. Individual states in the U.S. have also become increasingly active in passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints and discounts, and require marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures. Furthermore, implementation of OBBBA may reduce the number of individuals enrolled in state Medicaid programs and ACA marketplace plans, which may result in changes in healthcare utilization that may adversely affect demand for our products and services and could have an adverse impact on our business, financial condition, or results of operations. We expect additional state and federal healthcare reform measures to be adopted in the future that could have a material adverse effect on our industry generally and on our customers. Any changes to, or uncertainty with respect to, future reimbursement rates or changes in hospital admission rates could impact our customers' demand for our products and services, which, in turn, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations. Further, the federal, state, and local governments, Medicare, Medicaid, managed-care organizations, and foreign governments have, in the past, considered, are currently considering, and may, in the future, consider healthcare policies and proposals intended to curb rising healthcare costs, including those that could significantly affect both private and public reimbursement for healthcare services. Future significant changes in the healthcare systems in the U.S. or other countries, including retroactive and prospective rate and coverage criteria changes, competitive bidding or tender processes for certain products and services, and other changes intended to reduce expenditures along with uncertainty about whether and how changes may be implemented, could have a negative impact on the demand for our products. We are unable to predict whether other healthcare policies, including policies stemming from legislation or regulations affecting our business may be proposed or enacted in the future, what effect such policies would have on our business, or what effect ongoing uncertainty about these matters will have on the purchasing decisions of our customers. For instance, in December 2021, the EU Regulation No. 2021/2282 on Health Technology Assessment ("HTA"), amending Directive 2011/24/EU, was adopted. The Regulation entered into force in January 2022 and has been applicable since January 2025, with phased implementation based on the type of product, e.g., certain high-risk medical devices as of 2026. This Regulation intends to boost cooperation among EU member states in assessing health technologies, including certain high-risk medical devices, and provide the basis for cooperation at the EU level for joint clinical assessments in these areas. It will permit EU member states to use common HTA tools, methodologies, and procedures across the EU, working together in four main areas, including joint clinical assessment of the innovative health technologies with the highest potential impact for patients, joint scientific consultations whereby developers can seek advice from HTA authorities, identification of emerging health technologies to identify promising technologies early, and continuing voluntary cooperation in other areas. Individual EU member states will continue to be responsible for assessing non-clinical (e.g., economic, social, ethical, etc.) aspects of health technology and making decisions on pricing and reimbursement.

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act requires us to track and disclose the source of any tantalum, tin, gold, and tungsten used in manufacturing that may originate in the Democratic Republic of the Congo or adjoining regions (so called "conflict minerals"). These metals are central to the technology industry and are present in some of our products as component parts. In most cases, no acceptable alternative material exists that has the necessary properties that our products require. Because it is not possible to determine the source of the metals by analysis, we must obtain a good faith description of the source of the intermediate components and raw materials from parties in our supply chain. The components that incorporate those metals may originate from many sources, and we purchase fabricated products from manufacturers who may have a long and difficult-to-trace supply chain. As the spot price of these materials varies, producers of the metal intermediates can be expected to change the mix of sources used. Accordingly, components and assemblies we buy may have a mix of sources as their origin. We are required to carry out a diligent effort to determine and disclose the source of these materials. There can be no assurance that we can obtain this information accurately or reliably, or at all, from intermediate producers who may be unwilling or unable to provide this information or further identify their sources of supply or to notify us if these sources change. In addition, these metals are subject to price fluctuations and shortages that can affect our ability to obtain the manufactured materials that we rely on at favorable terms or from consistent sources. These changes could have an adverse impact on our ability to manufacture and market our devices and products. We are subject to healthcare regulation and enforcement by the federal government and the states and foreign governments where we conduct our business. The healthcare laws and regulations that may affect our ability to operate include the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits the payment of remuneration to induce or reward hospitals, physicians, or other healthcare professionals either to refer patients or to purchase, lease, order, or arrange for or recommend the purchase, lease, or order of healthcare products or services for which payment may be made under the federal healthcare programs, such as Medicare, Medicaid, and other third-party payor programs. Further, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of this statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. Similar laws must be complied with at the state level and in foreign jurisdictions. We must comply with the federal civil and criminal false claims laws, including the federal False Claims Act, and civil monetary penalties laws, which prohibit, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, claims for payment from Medicare, Medicaid, or other federal healthcare programs that are false or fraudulent. Although we do not submit claims directly to government payors, manufacturers can be held liable under the federal False Claims Act if they are deemed to "cause" the submission of false or fraudulent claims by, for example, providing inaccurate billing or coding information to customers or promoting a product off-label. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the False Claims Act. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, which created additional federal criminal statutes prohibit, among other things, executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program and making false statements relating to healthcare matters. Similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it to have committed a violation. These laws may affect our sales, marketing, and other promotional activities by limiting the kinds of financial arrangements that we may have with hospitals, physicians, or other potential purchasers of our products. They particularly impact how we structure our sales offerings, including discount practices, customer support, speaker, education, and training programs, physician consulting, and other service arrangements. These laws are broadly written, and it is often difficult to determine precisely how these laws will be applied to specific circumstances. Violating anti-kickback laws and false claims laws can result in civil and criminal fines and penalties, which can be substantial and include monetary damages and penalties, imprisonment, and exclusion from government healthcare programs. Even an unsuccessful challenge or investigation into our practices could cause adverse publicity and be costly to defend and, thus, could harm our business, financial condition, or results of operations. The federal Physicians Payments Sunshine Act imposes reporting and disclosure requirements on certain device manufacturers for any "transfer of value" made or distributed to physicians (including family members), as defined by statute, certain non-physician practitioners, including physician assistants and nurse practitioners, and teaching hospitals. Such information must be made publicly available in a searchable format. In addition, device manufacturers are required to report and disclose any ownership or investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members, as well as any transfers of value made to such physician owners and investors, during the preceding calendar year. Similar requirements apply in foreign jurisdictions. Failure to submit required information at the designated times may result in civil monetary penalties for all payments, transfers of value, or ownership or investment interests not reported in an annual submission. Device manufacturers are required to submit reports to CMS by the 90th day of each calendar year. Many states have similar laws and regulations, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws, which may be broader in scope and may apply regardless of payor, in addition to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid and other state programs. Certain states mandate implementation of commercial compliance programs to ensure compliance with these laws, impose restrictions on device manufacturer marketing practices, and/or require the tracking and reporting of gifts, compensation, and other remuneration to physicians or marketing expenditures and pricing information. The shifting commercial compliance environment and the need to build and maintain robust and expandable systems to comply with multiple jurisdictions with different compliance and/or reporting requirements increases the possibility that a healthcare company may be found out of compliance with one or more of the requirements, subjecting us to significant civil monetary penalties. Additionally, to the extent that our product is sold in a foreign country, we may be subject to similar foreign laws. Compliance with complex foreign and U.S. laws and regulations that apply to our OUS operations increases our cost of doing business in foreign jurisdictions and could expose us or our employees to fines and penalties in the U.S. and/or abroad. These numerous, and sometimes conflicting, laws and regulations include U.S. laws, such as the FCPA, and similar laws in other countries, such as the UK Bribery Act. Violations of these laws and regulations could result in fines, criminal sanctions against us, our officers, or our employees, prohibitions on the conduct of our business, and damage to our reputation. Although we have implemented policies and procedures designed to ensure compliance with these laws, there can be no assurance that our employees, contractors, distributors, or other agents will not violate our policies. Our operations are subject to certain antitrust and competition laws in the jurisdictions in which we conduct our business, in particular the U.S. and the EU. These laws prohibit, among other things, anticompetitive agreements and practices. If any of our commercial agreements or practices are found to violate or infringe such laws, we may be subject to civil and other penalties. We may also be subject to third-party claims for damages. Further, agreements that infringe upon these antitrust and competition laws may be void and unenforceable, in whole or in part, or require modification in order to be lawful and enforceable. If we are unable to enforce our commercial agreements, whether at all or in material part, our business, financial condition, or results of operations could be adversely affected. We are also subject to claims, lawsuits, and government investigations involving labor and employment. Such claims, lawsuits, and government investigations are inherently uncertain. Regardless of the outcome, any of these types of legal proceedings can have an adverse impact on us because of legal costs, diversion of management resources, and other factors. We are also exposed to the risk that our employees, independent contractors, consultants, manufacturers, suppliers, and any other third parties that we may engage in connection with the development and commercialization of our products may engage in fraudulent or illegal activity. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless, and/or negligent conduct or disclosure of unauthorized activities to us that violates: (i) the laws of the FDA and other similar regulatory authorities, including those laws requiring the reporting of true, complete, and accurate information to such authorities; (ii) manufacturing standards; (iii) data privacy, security, fraud, and abuse laws and regulations; or (iv) laws that require the true, complete, and accurate reporting of financial information or data. Activities subject to these laws could also involve the improper use or misrepresentation of information obtained in the course of clinical trials or the creation of fraudulent data in clinical trials, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation. It is not always possible to identify and deter misconduct by employees and other third parties, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with such laws or regulations. Additionally, we are subject to the risk that a person or government could allege fraud or other misconduct, even if none occurred. If any such actions are instituted against us and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business or results of operations, including the imposition of significant civil, criminal, and administrative penalties, damages, monetary fines, disgorgements, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid, other U.S. federal healthcare programs, or healthcare programs in other jurisdictions, integrity oversight and reporting obligations to resolve allegations of non-compliance, imprisonment, other sanctions, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, and curtailment of our operations.

Our global customers are subject to periodic inspection by regulatory authorities. Our customers are required to comply with applicable regulations, including with respect to the reprocessing of our instruments and accessories. Hospitals may not follow cleaning and sterilization instructions properly, or equipment used for cleaning and sterilization may malfunction or be used improperly. If our customers deviate from cleaning and sterilization instructions, regulatory authorities may require them to suspend the use of our systems.