Lockheed Martin (LMT) Risk Analysis

We are the prime contractor on most of our contracts and rely on other companies to provide materials, major components and products, and to perform a portion of the services that are provided to our customers under the terms of most of our contracts. These arrangements may involve subcontracts, teaming arrangements, joint ventures, or supply agreements with other companies on which we rely (contracting parties) and, in many cases, our contracting parties in turn rely on lower-tier subcontractors. We sometimes have disputes with our contracting parties, including disputes regarding the cost, quality and timeliness of work performed, workshares, customer concerns about the other party's performance, issues related to lower-tier subcontractor performance, our failure to issue or extend task orders, or our hiring the personnel of a subcontractor, teammate or joint venture partner or vice versa. We also could be adversely affected by actions or issues experienced by our contracting parties that are outside of our control, such as misconduct and reputational issues involving our contracting parties, which could subject us to liability or adversely affect our ability to compete for contract awards. The financial stability and viability of our contracting parties or lower-tier subcontractors have and in the future could adversely affect their ability to meet their performance obligation. A failure by one or more of our contracting parties to provide the agreed-upon materials, components or products, or perform the agreed-upon services, on a timely basis, according to specifications, including compliance with regulatory requirements we flow down from our prime contracts, or at all, has and may adversely affect our ability to perform our obligations and require that we transition the work to other companies. Contracting party performance deficiencies may result in additional costs or delays in product deliveries and affect our operating results and could result in a customer terminating our contract for default or convenience. A default termination could expose us to liability and affect our ability to compete for future contracts and orders. A failure by our contracting parties to meet affordability targets could negatively affect our profitability, result in contract losses and affect our ability to win new business. Additionally, we are affected by government procurement restrictions and issues affecting industry supply chains broadly. For example, U.S. Government statutes and regulations impose restrictions on the sourcing of items from specified countries. We seek to manage supply risk through long-term contracts, identifying domestic or other U.S. allied alternative sources of items and maintaining an acceptable level of our key materials in inventories. Advanced microelectronics, including semiconductors, underpin many of our current and future critical technologies and platforms, and global shortages of these products due to increased demand or other supply chain challenges could result in increased procurement lead times and increased costs and potential shortages, which could affect our performance. We also must comply with specific procurement requirements that can limit the number of eligible suppliers, and a significant number of the components or supplies used are currently single or sole sourced. Because the identification and qualification of new or additional suppliers can take an extended period of time and can result in additional cost, issues with suppliers or trade actions that limit our ability to use certain suppliers, especially when single or sole sourced, can have an adverse impact on our business. Complying with U.S. Government contracting regulations that limit the source or manufacture of suppliers and impose stringent cybersecurity regulations also may create challenges for our supply chain and increase costs. We remain heavily dependent on our supply chain for sourcing contractually compliant components, which is outside of our direct control and is multi-tiered. The future occurrence of non-compliant components in our programs could cause suspensions in product deliveries, remediation work on installed components, contract price adjustments and alternate supply sourcing, all of which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

A significant portion of our business relates to designing, developing and manufacturing advanced defense and technology products and systems. New technologies may be untested or unproven. Failure of some of these products and services could result in extensive loss of life or property damage. Accordingly, we may incur liabilities that are unique to our products and services. In some but not all circumstances, we may be entitled to certain legal protections or indemnifications from our customers, either through U.S. Government indemnifications under Public Law 85-804, 10 U.S.C. 3861, the Commercial Space Launch Act or the Price-Anderson Act, qualification of our products and services by the Department of Homeland Security under the SAFETY Act provisions of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, contractual provisions or otherwise. We seek to obtain insurance coverage from established and reputable insurance carriers to the extent available in order to cover these risks and liabilities. However, the amount of insurance coverage that we maintain or that is available to purchase in the market may not be adequate to cover all claims or liabilities and we may self-insure certain types of risk. Insurance coverage is subject to the terms and conditions of the insurance contract and is further subject to any sublimits, exclusions, restrictions, or defenses, including standard exclusions for acts of war. Existing coverage is renewed annually and may be canceled pursuant to the terms of the policies while we remain exposed to the risk and it is not possible to obtain insurance to protect against all operational risks, natural hazards and liabilities. For example, we are limited in the amount of insurance we can obtain to cover unusually hazardous risks or certain natural hazards such as earthquakes, fires or extreme weather conditions, some of which may be exacerbated by climate change. We have significant operations in geographic areas prone to these risks, such as in California, Florida and Texas, and certain of our properties have suffered damage from natural disasters in the past and may again in the future. We could incur significant costs to improve the climate resiliency of our infrastructure and supply chain and otherwise prepare for, respond to, and mitigate the effects of climate change. In addition, under certain classified fixed-price development and production contracts, we are unable to insure risk of loss to government property because of the classified nature of the contracts and the inability to disclose classified information necessary for underwriting and claims to commercial insurers. Even if insurance coverage is available, we may not be able to obtain it in an amount, at a price or on terms acceptable to us. Some insurance providers may be unable or unwilling to provide us insurance given the nature of our business or products. Additionally, disputes with insurance carriers over coverage terms or the insolvency of one or more of our insurance carriers may significantly affect the amount or timing of our cash flows. Substantial costs resulting from an accident, failure of or defect in our products or services, natural catastrophe or other incident, or liability arising from our products and services in excess of any legal protection, indemnity, and our insurance coverage (or for which indemnity or insurance is not available or not obtained) could adversely impact our financial condition and operating results. Any accident, failure of, or defect in our products or services, even if fully indemnified or insured, could negatively affect our reputation among our customers and the public and make it more difficult for us to compete effectively. It also could affect the cost and availability of adequate insurance in the future.

We operate in a highly competitive industry and our competitors may have more extensive or more specialized engineering, technical, marketing and servicing capabilities than we do in certain areas. Our competitors may develop new technologies, products or services that could replace our current offerings. Additionally, if competitors can offer lower cost services and products, or provide services or products more quickly, at equivalent or in some cases even reduced capabilities, we may lose new business opportunities or contract recompetes, which could adversely affect our future results. We are facing increased competition from startups and non-traditional defense contractors, which may have a lower cost structure or be able to move more quickly in addition to being favored, in certain cases, by procurement policy. Furthermore, acquisitions in our industry, including vertical integration, also could result in increased competition or limit our access to certain suppliers without appropriate remedies to protect our interests. A substantial portion of our business is awarded through competitive bidding. The U.S. Government increasingly has relied on competitive contract award types, including indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity and other multi-award contracts, which have the potential to create pricing pressure and to increase our costs by requiring us to submit multiple bids and proposals. Multi-award contracts require us to make sustained efforts to obtain task orders under the contract. Additionally, procurements that do not evaluate whether the cost assumptions in the bids are realistic can lead to bidders taking aggressive pricing positions, which could result in the winner realizing a loss upon contract award or an increased risk of lower margins or realizing a loss over the term of the contract. Competitors may be willing to accept more risk or lower profitability in competing for contracts than we are. The U.S. Government also may not award us large competitive contracts that we otherwise might have won in an effort to strengthen a broad industrial base. U.S. Government procurement policies and procedures and the application thereof are regularly changing, and such changes could adversely affect our profitability or the ability to win new business. For example, an increase in the use of contract structures that shift risk to the contractor, such as fixed-price development contracts and incentive-based fee arrangements, or the U.S Government using different award fee criteria than historically used (such as the evaluation of environmental factors) could adversely affect our profit rates or make it more difficult to win new contracts. The DoD is increasingly pursuing rapid acquisition pathways and procedures for new technologies, including through so called "other transaction authority" agreements (OTAs). OTAs are exempt from many traditional procurement laws, including the FAR, and an OTA award may be subject, in certain cases, to the condition that a significant portion of the work under the OTA is performed by a non-traditional defense contractor or that a portion of the cost of the protype project is funded by non-governmental sources. Changes in regulations or interpretations of what are allowable costs under our government contracts could adversely impact our profitability and changes in contract financing policy for fixed-price contracts, such as changes in performance and progress payments policies, could significantly affect the timing of our cash flows.

Our profitability and cash flow may vary materially depending on the types of government contracts undertaken, the nature of products produced or services performed under those contracts, the costs incurred in performing the work, the achievement of other performance objectives and the stage of performance at which the right to receive fees is determined, particularly under award and incentive-fee contracts. Failure to perform to customer expectations and contract requirements may result in reduced fees or losses and may adversely affect our financial performance. Contract types primarily include fixed-price and cost-reimbursable contracts. Cost-reimbursable contracts provide for the payment of allowable costs incurred during performance of the contract plus a fee up to a ceiling based on the amount that has been funded. Cost, schedule or technical performance issues with respect to cost-reimbursable contracts could result in reduced fees, lower profit rates, or program cancellation. Fixed-price contracts are predominantly either firm fixed-price (FFP) contracts or fixed-price incentive (FPI) contracts. Under FFP contracts, we receive a fixed price irrespective of the actual costs we incur and therefore we carry the burden of any cost overruns. Under FPI contracts the U.S. Government is responsible for our costs up to a negotiated ceiling price and we generally share, based on a negotiated sharing formula, savings from cost underruns and expenses, up to the negotiated ceiling price, from cost overruns. We bear the risk for all cost overruns that exceed the negotiated ceiling price. Due to the fixed-price nature of the contracts, if our actual costs exceed our estimates, our margins and profits are reduced and we could incur a reach-forward loss. A reach-forward loss is when estimates of total costs to be incurred on a contract exceed total estimates of the transaction price. When this occurs, a provision for the entire loss is determined at the contract level and is recorded in the period in which the loss is evident. Under both fixed-price and cost-reimbursable contracts, if we are unable to control costs, our operating results could be adversely affected. Costs to complete a contract may increase for many reasons, including technical and manufacturing challenges, schedule delays, workforce-related issues, inaccurate initial contract cost estimates, the timeliness and availability of materials from suppliers, internal and subcontractor performance or product quality issues, inability to meet cost reduction initiatives or achieve efficiencies from digital transformation, changing laws or regulations, inflation and natural disasters. Certain contracts may impose other risks, such as forfeiting fees, paying penalties, or providing replacement systems in the event of performance failure. Contracts for development programs include complex design and technical requirements and are often contracted on a cost-reimbursable basis, however, some of our existing development programs are contracted on a fixed-price basis. In addition, we have certain contracts where we bid upfront on cost-reimbursable development work and the follow-on fixed-price production options in one submission. We expect we also will bid on similar programs in the future. Fixed-price development work or fixed-price production options, especially on competitively bid programs, is inherently riskier than cost-reimbursable work because the revenue is fixed, while the estimates of costs required to complete these contracts are subject to significant variability due to the nature of development programs. The technical complexity coupled with the fixed-price contract structure of certain of our ongoing development programs or new programs increases the risk that our costs will be greater than anticipated, resulting in reduced margins, operating profit, or reach-forward losses during the period of contract performance or upon contract award, all of which could be significant to our financial condition and operating results. Bidding upfront on fixed-price production options increases the risk that we may experience lower margins than expected, or a loss, on the production options because we must estimate the cost of producing a product before it has been developed. These risks may cause us not to bid on certain future programs, which could adversely affect our future growth prospects and financial performance. See Note 1 – Organization and Significant Accounting Policies included in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further details about losses incurred on certain programs, including fixed-price development programs. Contracts for the transition from development to production (e.g., low rate initial production (LRIP) contracts) also create performance and financial risks to our business because of the challenge of starting and stabilizing a manufacturing production and test line while concurrently validating final design and managing change in requirements or capabilities requested by the customer. Many of our contracts include multiple option years exercisable at the customer's discretion, which carries risk. The customer may decline to exercise an option, or the customer may exercise an option on a contract for which we expect to incur a loss or perform at a low margin, either of which could adversely affect our financial results.

In pursuing our business strategy, we routinely conduct discussions, evaluate companies, and enter into agreements regarding possible acquisitions, joint ventures, other investments and divestitures. We seek to identify acquisition or investment opportunities that will expand or complement our existing products and services or customer base, at reasonable valuations. To be successful, we must conduct due diligence to identify valuation issues and potential loss contingencies or underlying risks, some of which are difficult to discover or assess prior to consummation of an acquisition or investment; negotiate transaction terms; complete and close complex transactions; integrate acquired companies and employees; and realize anticipated operating synergies efficiently and effectively. U.S. regulators have increased their scrutiny of mergers and acquisitions in recent years, which could continue to limit our ability to execute certain transactions that we might otherwise pursue. Acquisitions, divestitures, joint ventures and investments often require substantial management resources and have the potential to divert our attention from our existing business. Unidentified or identified but uncertain liabilities that are not covered by indemnification or other coverage could adversely affect our future financial results. This is particularly the case in respect of successor liability under procurement laws and regulations such as the False Claims Act or the Truthful Cost or Pricing Data Act (formerly the Truth in Negotiations Act), anti-corruption, environmental, tax, import-export and technology transfer laws, which provide for civil and criminal penalties and the potential for debarment. We also may incur unanticipated costs or expenses, including post-closing asset impairment charges, expenses associated with eliminating duplicate facilities, employee retention, transaction-related or other litigation, and other liabilities. Any of the foregoing could adversely affect our business and results of operations. Joint ventures and other noncontrolling investments operate under shared control with other parties. These investments typically face many of the same risks and uncertainties as we do, but may expose us to additional risks not present if we retained full control. A joint venture partner may have economic or other business interests that are inconsistent with ours and we may be unable to prevent strategic decisions that may adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. We also could be adversely affected by, or liable for, actions taken by these joint ventures that we do not control, including violations of anti-corruption, import and export, taxation and anti-boycott laws. Depending on our rights and percentage of ownership, we may consolidate the financial results of such entities or account for our interests under the equity method. Under the equity method of accounting for nonconsolidated ventures and investments, we recognize our share of the operating profit or loss of these joint ventures in our results of operations. Our operating results are affected by the conduct and performance of businesses over which we do not exercise control and, as a result, we may not be successful in achieving the growth or other intended benefits of strategic investments. We make investments in early-stage companies that we believe are advancing or developing new technologies applicable to our business. These investments are generally illiquid at the time of investment and typically we hold a non-controlling interest. We have and expect to continue to recognize gains or losses attributable to adjustments of the investments' fair value, including impairments up to and including the full value of the investment, which events are generally outside of our control such as the success or failure of the company and market volatility.

Many of the products and services we provide are highly engineered and involve sophisticated technologies with related complex manufacturing and systems integration processes. Our customers' requirements change and evolve regularly. Accordingly, our future performance depends, in part, on our ability to adapt to changing customer needs rapidly, identify emerging technological trends, develop and manufacture innovative products and services efficiently and bring those offerings to market quickly at cost-effective prices. This includes efforts to provide mission solutions that integrate capabilities and resources across all forces and domains, which we refer to as joint all domain operations, and to implement emerging digital and network technologies and capabilities. Artificial intelligence technologies have rapidly developed and our business may be adversely affected if we cannot successfully integrate the technology into our internal business processes and product and service offerings in a timely, cost-effective, compliant and responsible manner. To advance our innovation and position us to meet our customers' requirements, we make investments in emerging technologies that we believe are needed to keep pace with rapid industry innovation and seek to collaborate with commercial entities that we believe have complementary technologies to ours. These commercial entities may not be accustomed to government contracting and may be unwilling to agree to the government's customary terms, including with respect to intellectual property, liability and indemnification term, which may prevent or lessen the benefit of collaboration. We may not be successful in identifying or developing emerging technologies and may spend significant resources on projects that ultimately are unsuccessful or yield a low return on the amount invested. Our future success in delivering innovative and affordable solutions to our customers relies, in part, on our multi-year business transformation initiative that seeks to significantly enhance our digital infrastructure to increase efficiencies and collaboration throughout our business while reducing costs. This digital transformation effort requires substantial investment and if we are unable to successfully implement the strategy or do so in a timely manner, our results of operations and future competitiveness may be adversely affected. If we fail in our development projects or if our new products or technologies fail to achieve customer acceptance or competitors develop more capable technologies or offerings or develop new technologies or offerings faster, we may be unsuccessful in obtaining new contracts or winning all or a portion of next generation programs, including in key areas such as hypersonics and classified work, and this could adversely affect our future performance and financial results.

We own a substantial number of U.S. and foreign patents and trademarks related to the products and services we provide. In addition to owning a large portfolio of patents and trademarks, we develop and own other intellectual property, including copyrights, trade secrets and research, development and engineering know-how, which contribute significantly to our business. We also license intellectual property to and from third parties. The FAR and DFARS provide that the U.S. Government obtains certain rights in intellectual property, including patents, developed by us and our subcontractors and suppliers in performance of government contracts or with government funding. The U.S. Government may use, or may authorize others including competitors to use, such intellectual property. Non-U.S. governments also may have certain rights in patents and other intellectual property developed in performance of our contracts with these entities. The U.S. Government is pursuing aggressive positions on the acquisition of broad data and software packages as well as the scope and applicability of these rights once acquired. The DoD is also implementing an overarching intellectual property acquisition policy that will require a greater focus and planning as to intellectual property rights for its programs, with the potential impacts of this policy or any associated regulatory changes on future acquisitions yet to be determined. The DoD's efforts could affect our ability to protect and exploit our intellectual property and to leverage supplier intellectual property, for example, if we are unable to obtain necessary licenses from our suppliers to meet government requirements. Additionally, third parties may assert that our products or services infringe their intellectual property rights, which could result in costly and time-consuming disputes, subject us to damages and injunctions and adversely affect our ability to compete and perform on certain contracts.

As an aerospace and defense company, we face a multitude of security threats, including cybersecurity threats ranging from attacks common to most industries, such as ransomware and denial-of-service, to attacks from more advanced and persistent, highly organized adversaries, including nation state actors, some of which target the defense industrial base and other critical infrastructure sectors. The sophistication of the threats continues to evolve and grow, including the risk associated with the use of emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence and quantum computing, for nefarious purposes. In addition to cybersecurity threats, we face threats to the security of our facilities and employees from terrorist acts, sabotage and other disruptions, any of which could adversely affect our business. The improper conduct of our employees or others working on our behalf who have access to export controlled, classified or other sensitive information could also adversely affect our business and reputation. If we are unable to protect sensitive information, including by complying with evolving information security, data protection and privacy regulations and related disclosure requirements, our customers or governmental authorities could investigate the adequacy of our threat mitigation and detection processes and procedures; and could bring actions against us for noncompliance with applicable laws and regulations. Moreover, depending on the severity of an incident, our customers' data, our employees' data, our intellectual property (including trade secrets and research, development and engineering know-how) and other third-party data (such as that of subcontractors, suppliers and vendors) could be compromised, which could adversely affect our business. Products and services we provide to customers also carry cybersecurity risks, including risks that they could be breached or fail to detect, prevent or combat attacks, which could result in losses to our customers and claims against us, and could harm our relationships with our customers and financial results. Given the persistence, sophistication, volume and novelty of threats we face, we may not be successful in preventing or mitigating an attack that could have a material adverse effect on us and the costs related to cyber or other security threats or disruptions may not be fully insured or indemnified by other means. The national security aspects of our business and much of the data we protect increase and create different risks relative to other industries. National security considerations may also preclude us from publicly disclosing a cybersecurity incident. Our customers (including sites that we operate and manage for our customers), suppliers, subcontractors, joint venture partners and acquired entities face similar security threats and an incident at one of these entities could adversely impact our business. These entities are typically outside our control and may have access to our information with varying levels of security and cybersecurity resources, expertise, safeguards and capabilities. Their relationships with government contractors, including us, may increase the risk that they are targeted by the same threats we face, however, they may not be as prepared for such threats. Adversaries actively seek to exploit security and cybersecurity weaknesses in our supply chain. Breaches in our multi-tiered supply chain, which is comprised of thousands of direct and indirect suppliers, have and could in the future compromise our data and adversely affect customer deliverables. We also must rely on our supply chain for adequately detecting and reporting cyber incidents, which could affect our ability to report or respond to cybersecurity incidents effectively or in a timely manner. For information on our cybersecurity risk management, strategy and governance, see Item 1C. – Cybersecurity.

Geopolitical. Changes in U.S. government and other nations' administration and their associated shifts in policy and priorities could also impact our operations and market conditions. Our business is highly sensitive to geopolitical and security issues, including foreign policy actions taken by governments such as tariffs, sanctions, embargoes, export and import controls, and other trade restrictions, which can affect the demand for, and our ability to sell, our products and services, cause disruptions to our supply chain, and, ultimately, could adversely affect our business. Global conflicts, including Russia's invasion of Ukraine, conflicts in the Middle East, and heightened tensions in the Pacific region, have significantly elevated global geopolitical tensions and security concerns and resulted in increased demand for some of our products and services. However, if we are unable to increase production to meet demand in the timeframe expected by potential customers, whether due to supply constraints, government funding, or otherwise, then we may lose sales opportunities as those possible customers seek alternatives, even less capable ones, that may be delivered more quickly. Furthermore, the level of continuing demand and our ability to sell to customers to meet that demand is subject in part to changes in government policies and priorities. Economic sanctions, export controls, and other trade restrictions, for instance those that the U.S. Government and other nations implemented against Russia in light of its invasion of Ukraine or those relating to the conflict in the Middle East, could directly and indirectly result in the disruption of our business and supply chain. Conflicts in Ukraine and elsewhere have increased the threat of malicious cyber activity from nation states and other actors. China has placed restrictions on and sanctioned our company and certain executives in connection with foreign military sales by the U.S. Government to Taiwan involving our products and services. We will continue to follow official U.S. Government guidance as it relates to sales to Taiwan and do not currently expect a material impact to our business from these actions. In 2023, China also implemented broad-based export restrictions on certain minerals used in the production of, among other things, semiconductors and missile systems; in 2024, China specifically banned export of certain minerals to the U.S. China may impose additional sanctions that could adversely affect Lockheed Martin, our suppliers, teammates and/or partners in the future. Our international sales also could be adversely affected by actions taken by the U.S. Government, including the exercise of foreign policy, Congressional oversight or the financing of particular programs, that may prevent, restrict or otherwise impose conditions upon the sale and delivery of our products or the transfer of sensitive technology. For example, the U.S. Government has imposed certain sanctions on Türkish entities and persons, which has affected our ability to obtain certain U.S. export permits or authorizations necessary to perform under our existing contracts supporting the Türkish Utility Helicopter Program (TUHP), and could impact our work with Türkish industry and our opportunity for sales in Türkiye generally. See "Note 1 – Organization and Significant Accounting Policies" included in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for more information on TUHP. Our inability to perform under, or compete for, contracts with international customers because of actions taken by the U.S. Government has resulted and may in the future result in our inability to recover our costs, incurrence of reach-forward losses, claims and contract terminations by these customers and suppliers, and limitations on our ability to pursue new business, which could have an adverse effect on our operating results. Macroeconomic. Heightened levels of inflation and the potential worsening of macroeconomic conditions, including slower growth or recession, changes to fiscal and monetary policy, tighter credit, higher interest rates and currency fluctuations, present risks for us, our suppliers and the stability of the broader defense industrial base. If we are unable to successfully mitigate the impact, our future profits, margins and cash flows, particularly for existing fixed-price contracts, may be adversely affected. Although we believe defense spending is more resilient to adverse macroeconomic conditions than many other industrial sectors, our suppliers and other partners, many of which are more exposed to commercial markets or have fewer resources, may be adversely impacted to a more significant degree than we are by an economic downturn. Such an impact could affect their performance and adversely impact our operations. In addition, macroeconomic conditions could cause budgetary pressures for our government customers resulting in reductions or delays in spending, which could adversely impact our business. Higher interest rates increase the borrowing costs on new debt and could affect the fair value of our investments. Interest rates also impact our pension. For example, higher interest rates generally reduce the measure of our gross pension obligations while lower interest rates increase it. Public health. We face a wide variety of risks related to public health crises, epidemics, pandemics or similar events. If a new health epidemic or outbreak were to occur, we could experience broad and varied effects similar to the impact of COVID-19, including adverse impacts to our workforce and supply chain, inflationary pressures and increased costs, schedule or production delays, market volatility and other financial ramifications. If any of these were to occur, our future results and performance could be adversely impacted.

International sales present risks that are different and potentially greater than those encountered in our U.S. business. In 2024, 26% of our total net sales were associated with international customers. International sales are subject to numerous political and economic factors, including changes in foreign national priorities, foreign government budgets, global economic conditions, and fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates, the possibility of trade sanctions and other government actions, regulatory requirements, significant competition, taxation, and other risks associated with doing business outside the U.S. Sales of military products and services and any associated industrial development (offset) agreements are subject to U.S. export regulations and foreign policy, and there could be significant delays or other issues in reaching definitive agreements for announced programs. See the Risk Factor "Geopolitical, macroeconomic and public health events and conditions could adversely affect our business, financial condition and operating results." Competition for international sales is intense, including from international manufacturers whose governments sometimes provide research and development assistance, marketing subsidies and other assistance for their products and services. Our international business is conducted through FMS contracted through the U.S. Government and by direct commercial sales (DCS) to international customers. FMS contracts with the U.S. Government are subject to the FAR and the DFARS. Because the U.S. Government functions as an intermediary in FMS sales, we are reliant on, and could be adversely impacted by, the capacity and speed of the DoD's administration of requests from non-U.S. countries to convert requests to sales. In contrast, DCS transactions represent sales directly to international customers and are subject to U.S. and foreign laws and regulations, including product testing, import-export control, technology transfer restrictions, investments, taxation, repatriation of earnings, exchange controls, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and other anti-corruption laws and regulations, and the anti-boycott provisions of the U.S. Export Control Reform Act of 2018. While we have extensive policies in place to comply with such laws and regulations, failure by us, our employees or others working on our behalf to comply with these laws and regulations could result in administrative, civil, or criminal liabilities, including suspension, debarment from bidding for or performing government contracts, or suspension of our export privileges, which could have a material adverse effect on us. We frequently team with international subcontractors and suppliers who also are exposed to similar risks. We believe DCS transactions present a higher level of potential risks because they involve direct commercial relationships with parties with which we typically have less familiarity. Additionally, international procurement and local country rules and regulations, contract laws and judicial systems differ from those in the U.S. and, in some cases, may be less predictable than those in the U.S., which could impair our ability to enforce contracts and increase the risk of adverse or unpredictable outcomes, including the possibility that certain matters that would be considered civil matters in the U.S. are treated as criminal matters in other countries. In conjunction with defense procurements, some international customers require contractors to comply with industrial cooperation regulations, including entering into industrial participation, industrial development or localization agreements, sometimes referred to as offset agreements (also known as offset contracts), as a condition to obtaining orders for our products and services. These offset agreements generally extend over several years and obligate the contractor to perform certain commitments, which may include in-country purchases, technology transfers, local manufacturing support, consulting support to in-country projects, investments in joint ventures and financial support projects, and preference for local suppliers or subcontractors. The customer's expectations in respect of the scope of offset commitments can be substantial, including high-value content, and may exceed existing local technical capability. Failure to meet these commitments, which can be subjective and outside of our control, may result in significant penalties, and could lead to a reduction in sales to a country. Furthermore, some of our existing offset agreements are dependent upon the successful operation of joint ventures that we do not control and involve products and services that are outside of our core business, which may increase the risk of breaching our obligations, exposing us to compliance risks of the joint venture, and impairing our ability to recover our investment. For more information on our industrial development obligations, including the notional value of our remaining industrial development obligations and potential penalties for non-compliance, see "Contractual Commitments" in Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.