Investing in our securities involves uncertainty and risk due to a variety of factors. You should carefully consider each of the following risks and all of the other information contained in this Report and in other documents that we file with, or furnish to, the SEC before making any investment decision with respect to our securities. Statements in this section are based on our beliefs and opinions regarding matters that could materially adversely affect us in the future and are not representations as to whether such matters have or have not occurred previously. Further, the risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face and should not be considered a complete statement of all potential risks or uncertainties that we face or may face in the future. Additional risks not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also materially affect our business.
Risks Related to Our Products and Our Operations
We rely heavily on sales of our treprostinil-based therapies to generate revenues and support our operations.
Sales of our treprostinil-based therapies — Tyvaso DPI, Nebulized Tyvaso, Remodulin, and Orenitram — comprise the vast majority of our revenues. Substantially decreased sales of any of these products could have a material adverse impact on our operations. A wide variety of events, such as withdrawal of regulatory approvals or substantial changes in prescribing practices or dosing patterns, many of which are described in other risk factors below, could cause sales of these products to materially decline, or to grow more slowly than expected. Our net revenues could also be negatively impacted by pricing pressure as a result of competitive challenges, the IRA, MFN policies, and other drug price reduction initiatives. The availability of generic versions of our products and the approval and launch of new competitive therapies have negatively impacted our revenues, and these and additional products launched in the future may continue to do so. Sales may decrease if any third party that manufactures, markets, distributes, or sells our commercial products cannot do so satisfactorily, or we cannot manage our internal manufacturing processes. Finally, if demand for our Tyvaso products does not meet our expectations, the revenue opportunity for our treprostinil products could be significantly lower than we expect.
If our products fail in clinical trials, we will be unable to sell those products.
To obtain approvals from the FDA and international regulatory agencies to sell new products, to expand the product labeling for our existing products, or to launch new delivery devices for our existing products, we must conduct clinical trials demonstrating that our products are safe and effective. Regulators have substantial discretion over the approval process. Regulators may require us to amend ongoing trials or perform additional trials, which have in the past and could in the future result in significant delays and additional costs and may be unsuccessful. Delays and costs associated with regulatory requirements to change or add trials have sometimes caused us to discontinue efforts to develop a particular product, and may do so again in the future. If our clinical trials are not successful, or we fail to address identified deficiencies adequately, we will not obtain required approvals to market the new product or new indication. We cannot predict with certainty how long it will take, or how much it will cost, to complete necessary clinical trials or obtain regulatory approvals of our current or future products. The time and cost needed to complete clinical trials and obtain regulatory approvals varies by product, indication, and country. In addition, failure to obtain, or delays in obtaining, regulatory approval has in the past and could in the future require us to recognize impairment charges.
Our clinical trials have been and in the future may be discontinued, delayed, canceled, or disqualified for various reasons, including: (1) pandemics; (2) manufacturing and supply chain disruptions; (3) the drug is unsafe or ineffective, or physicians and/or patients believe that the drug is unsafe or ineffective, or that other therapies are safer, more effective, better tolerated, or more convenient; (4) patients do not enroll in or complete clinical trials at the rate we expect, due to the availability of alternative therapies, the enrollment of competing clinical trials, or other reasons; (5) we, or clinical trial sites or other third parties, do not adhere to trial protocols and required quality controls under good clinical practices (GCP) regulations; (6) patients experience severe side effects during treatment or die during our trials because of adverse events; and (7) the results of clinical trials conducted in a particular country are not acceptable to regulators in other countries.
42 United Therapeutics, a public benefit corporation
Table of Contents
Part II. Other Information
We may not compete successfully with established or newly developed drugs or products.
Competition could negatively impact our operating results. We compete with well-established drug companies for market share, as well as, among other things, funding, licenses, expertise, personnel, clinical trial patients and investigators, consultants, and third-party collaborators. Some of these competitors have substantially greater financial, marketing, manufacturing, sales, distribution, and technical resources, and a larger number of approved products, than we do. Some of these competitors also possess greater experience in areas critical to our success, such as research and development, clinical trials, sales and marketing, and regulatory matters.
Numerous treatments compete with our commercial therapies. For example, for the treatment of PAH, we compete with over fifteen branded and generic drugs. The availability of generic treprostinil injection in the United States could materially impact our revenues, and generic competition materially impacted our Remodulin revenues outside the United States. Our competitors are also developing numerous new products that may compete with ours, including products intended to treat PAH and/or PH-ILD. For example, Merck commercially launched Winrevair (sotatercept-csrk) in the United States in March 2024, which competes with our treprostinil-based products. In addition, in June 2025 Liquidia launched U.S. sales of Yutrepia for PAH and PH-ILD, which now competes with our treprostinil-based products. Additional treatments, such as Insmed Incorporated’s TPIP, are in late-stage clinical trials for treatment of PAH and/or PH-ILD. Competition from the products that have launched to date has adversely affected our treprostinil-based product revenues, and competition from these and any future approved products could materially adversely affect our revenues. There are also three branded and two generic therapies approved for the treatment of IPF, including Boehringer Ingelheim’s Jascayd® (nerandomilast), which was approved by the FDA in October 2025 for IPF, and later for PPF. A wide variety of additional therapies are being developed by our competitors for the treatment of IPF. Existing and future approved IPF and PPF therapies would compete with Nebulized Tyvaso if it is approved for these indications, and any other products we may ultimately develop for IPF and PPF. The introduction of lower-priced competing products may reduce both the price that we are able to charge for our products and the volume of products we sell.
Patients and doctors may discontinue use of our products if they perceive competing products as safer, more effective, less invasive, more convenient, and/or less expensive than ours. Doctors may reduce the prescribed doses of our products if they prescribe them in combination with competing products. In addition, many competing therapies are less invasive or more convenient than our products, and use of these competing therapies often delays or prevents initiation of our therapies.
The successful commercialization of our products depends on the availability of coverage and adequacy of reimbursement from third-party payers, including governmental authorities and private health insurers. Pharmaceutical pricing and reimbursement pressures may negatively impact our sales.
The commercial success of our products depends, in significant part, on coverage by governmental payers such as Medicare and Medicaid, and private insurance companies. A reduction in the availability or extent of reimbursement from domestic or foreign government healthcare programs could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of our operations. Government and commercial payers are increasingly attempting to limit the price of medicinal products and frequently challenge the pricing of new or expensive drugs. In many markets outside the United States, governments control the prices of prescription pharmaceuticals through the implementation of reference pricing, price cuts, rebates, revenue-related taxes, and profit control. Financial pressures may cause United States government payers and/or private health insurers to implement policies that would reduce reimbursement rates for our products, limit future price increases, cap reimbursement rates for pharmaceuticals to rates paid internationally, require the automatic substitution of generic products, demand more rigorous requirements for initial coverage for new products, implement step therapy policies that require patients to try other medicines, including generic products, before using our products, or take other similar steps that could make it more difficult for patients to access our products. See, for example, the discussion of the IRA and the proposed GLOBE and GUARD regulations in the risk factor below entitled Government healthcare reform and other reforms could adversely affect our revenue, costs, and results of operations.
Our prostacyclin analogue products (Tyvaso DPI, Nebulized Tyvaso, Remodulin, and Orenitram) and our oncology product (Unituxin) are expensive therapies. Specialty pharmacy distributors may not be able to obtain adequate reimbursement for our products from commercial and government payers to motivate them to support our products. Third-party payers may reduce the amount of reimbursement for our products based on changes in pricing of other therapies for the same disease or the development of new payment methodologies to cover and reimburse treatment costs, such as the use of cost-effectiveness research or value-based payment contracts. Third-party payers often encourage the use of less-expensive generic alternative therapies, which materially impacted our Adcirca revenues and which may materially impact our Remodulin revenues and revenues from our other products if and when generic competitors come to market. Similarly, pricing and rebating strategies for competitive therapies could put pressure on us to reduce the prices of our products and/or offer increased rebates to third-party payers. If commercial or government payers do not cover our products or limit payment rates, patients and physicians could choose competing products or products with lower out-of-pocket costs.
We have submitted an sNDA to the FDA seeking approval to add IPF to the labeled indications for Nebulized Tyvaso, based on the successful TETON-1 and TETON-2 results. Following any FDA approval, we then plan to submit a request to the Durable Medical Equipment Medicare Administrative Contractors (DME MACs) to revise the local coverage determination (LCD) that governs Medicare Part B coverage for Nebulized Tyvaso, to allow coverage for the use of Nebulized Tyvaso for the new IPF indication. DME MACs have significant discretion with respect to the overall timing to update the LCD; once the process is initiated, it could take well over a year to complete. Until such time as the LCD is updated, we expect revenues
Quarterly Report 43
Table of Contents
Part II. Other Information
generated by sales of Nebulized Tyvaso for the new IPF indication could be limited, since we believe that most U.S. IPF patients are Medicare beneficiaries.
Our manufacturing strategy exposes us to significant risks.
We must be able to manufacture sufficient quantities of our commercial products to satisfy demand. We manufacture Nebulized Tyvaso drug product, Remodulin, Orenitram, and Unituxin, including the active ingredient in each of these products (and in Tyvaso DPI), at our own facilities and rely on third parties for additional manufacturing capacity for Nebulized Tyvaso and Remodulin. We also rely on third parties for our manufacturing, sometimes exclusively, as detailed under the risk factor below entitled, We rely in part on third parties to perform activities that are critical to our business. If any of our internal or third-party manufacturing and supply arrangements are interrupted, we may not have sufficient inventory to meet future demand. Changes in suppliers and/or service providers could interrupt the manufacturing of our commercial products and impede the progress of our commercial launch plans and clinical trials.
Our internal manufacturing process subjects us to risks as we engage in increasingly complex manufacturing processes. We manufacture our entire supply of Orenitram and Unituxin without an FDA-approved back-up manufacturing site. We do not plan to engage a third party to manufacture Orenitram; however, we have initiated efforts to qualify a third party to manufacture Unituxin drug substance, which may not succeed or may take longer than we anticipate. Our manufactured organ and organ alternative programs will involve exceptionally complicated manufacturing processes, many of which have never been attempted on a clinical or commercial scale. It will take substantial time and resources to develop and implement such manufacturing processes, and we may never be able to do so successfully. Additional risks of our manufacturing strategy include the following:
•We, our third-party manufacturers, and other third parties involved in the manufacturing process, such as third parties that operate testing and storage facilities, are subject to the current good manufacturing practices requirements of the FDA and its international counterparts, as applicable, current good tissue practices, and similar international regulatory standards, and other quality standards related to device manufacturing. Our ability to exercise control over regulatory compliance by our third-party manufacturers is limited.
•We and our third-party manufacturers may need to increase our respective manufacturing capacity by constructing new facilities, and/or expanding existing facilities, in order to continue meeting anticipated demand for our products. These efforts are often costly and time-consuming, and must meet rigorous regulatory requirements. These efforts could be unsuccessful or take longer or cost more than we anticipate, due to a variety of factors including the lead time needed to procure, install, and qualify the highly specialized equipment necessary to manufacture the product.
•We may experience difficulty designing and implementing processes and procedures to comply with applicable regulations as we develop manufacturing operations for new products.
•Our primary manufacturing facilities are located in rapidly growing biopharmaceutical manufacturing hubs. Competition for experienced technical and entry level operations personnel is intense, and we may experience difficulty in staffing both our existing and future manufacturing facilities, which could limit the capacity of our facilities and/or delay startup of new facilities.
•Unituxin is a chimeric monoclonal antibody that has stringent quality control and stability requirements. The drug substance manufacturing process involves a complex, multi-step cell culture and purification process. Many biologic products, including Unituxin, are particularly sensitive to the conditions under which they are manufactured. Supplier-driven changes to any of the raw materials or components used in the manufacture of Unituxin, such as discontinuation or alteration, could have unintended impacts on the quality and shelf life of Unituxin and may inhibit or prevent our ability to supply acceptable finished product in sufficient quantities or at all. Batches of Unituxin that fail to meet certain release specifications cannot be sold into the market. We have a limited capacity to produce batches of Unituxin. If a sufficient number of batches fail to meet release specifications, we could face a shortage of drug product. During 2025 we encountered limitations on our ability to supply Unituxin to our distributor in Japan, which caused our distributor to delay starting new patients on this therapy in Japan. Our efforts to obtain FDA approval to adjust certain manufacturing specifications for Unituxin to reduce the risk of a shortage in the United States may prove unsuccessful. Furthermore, Unituxin has a limited shelf life, which impacts our ability to stockpile inventory at comparable levels to our other commercial products.
•Natural and man-made disasters (such as fires, contamination, power loss, hurricanes, flooding, and other forms of severe weather (some of which could be exacerbated by climate change), earthquakes, terrorist attacks, and acts of war), disease outbreaks, and pandemics such as COVID-19 impacting our internal and third-party manufacturing and warehousing sites could cause a supply disruption.
•The chemical, microbiological, and physical quality attributes of our products could be substandard and such products could not be sold or used or could be subject to recalls.
•The FDA and its international counterparts could require new testing and compliance inspections of new manufacturers of our products, or new manufacturing facilities we operate.
•If we produce products that do not meet FDA-approved specifications and we fail to detect these issues prior to distribution of these products, our products may be the subject of safety alerts, product recalls, or other corrective actions, and we may be charged in product liability claims and lawsuits which, regardless of their ultimate outcome, could have a material adverse effect on our business and reputation and on our ability to attract and retain customers.
44 United Therapeutics, a public benefit corporation
Table of Contents
Part II. Other Information
•Regulatory agencies may not be able to timely inspect our facilities, or those of our third-party manufacturers, which could result in delays in obtaining necessary regulatory approvals for our products.
•We may be unable to contract with needed manufacturers on satisfactory terms or at all.
•The supply of materials and components necessary to manufacture and package our products may become scarce or unavailable, which in the past has delayed, and in the future could delay, the manufacturing and subsequent sale of such products. Products manufactured with substituted materials or components must be approved by the FDA and applicable international regulatory agencies before they can be sold.
•Manufacturers of the devices used to administer our inhaled and infused therapies are subject to medical device requirements of the FDA and its international counterparts, as applicable. Any non-compliance, recall, or enforcement action issued against them could adversely impact our sales and operations.
•The infrastructure of our internal manufacturing facilities, along with certain facilities of our third-party manufacturers, is aging. These facilities have highly sophisticated and complex utility systems and manufacturing equipment. If any of these systems or equipment require long-term repair or replacement, the impacted facility may not be able to manufacture product for a substantial period of time.
•We and our third-party manufacturers rely upon local municipalities to supply our facilities with clean water, which is subsequently processed into high purity water and used as a key ingredient for several of our commercial drug products. If local municipalities are unable to supply water that meets relevant quality standards, we and our third-party manufacturers may be unable to manufacture these products until such a situation is remediated.
•We and our third-party manufacturers rely upon utility companies to supply our facilities with electrical power. The U.S. power grid is aging and demand for electrical power is rapidly increasing, including as a result of the construction of data centers in certain regions. If utility companies cannot reliably supply electrical power, we and our third-party manufacturers may be unable to operate our facilities at full capacity.
•Our supply chain for raw materials and consumables extends worldwide and is complex. Suppliers based in China, India, and Taiwan play a role in our supply chain to support our second- and third-tier suppliers. Political unrest or trade disputes involving China, India, Taiwan, or other countries in our supply chain could impact our ability and the ability of our third-party manufacturers to source raw materials and consumables. We also have limited visibility into the supply chains on which our primary suppliers rely; as such, we rely on our primary suppliers to have robust risk mitigation strategies to detect issues and prevent supply disruption. Our commercial active pharmaceutical ingredient and all of our finished commercial product are manufactured in the United States.
•We are closely monitoring global military conflicts including those involving Iran, Israel, and Ukraine. Although we do not directly source any raw materials or consumables from the directly impacted countries, our international suppliers and service providers in these regions could be impacted by extended conflicts or an escalation of these conflicts into neighboring countries.
•The cost of many key raw materials and consumables used in the manufacture of our products has increased due to significant inflationary pressure, and could increase further as a result of tariffs enacted by the Trump administration. Should the prices of raw materials and consumables further increase as a result of inflation or tariffs, we could see higher than average year-over-year increases in cost of goods sold. Tariffs and other trade barriers could also cause a substantial increase in the material costs associated with our construction activities.
•Any of our third-party manufacturers could undergo a change of control, causing a change in our business relationship with the relevant manufacturer. Such a change could impact our long-term supply outlook and cause us to seek alternatives that could require a lengthy regulatory approval process. Alternative suppliers may not be readily available, causing us to rely solely on internal capabilities to meet future demand.
•In 2024 we completed a designated pathogen-free (DPF) facility to produce our xenotransplantation products for human clinical studies. This facility houses gene-edited pigs in a highly controlled containment environment. This facility is a first of its kind, and unforeseen operational issues or disease outbreak amongst its herd could significantly impact the clinical development timelines for our xenotransplantation products. We are constructing two additional DPF facilities to mitigate operational risk and increase capacity. We will need to construct additional DPF facilities at significant expense to support the development and commercialization of our xenotransplantation products. If development of our xenotransplantation products fails or demand is significantly less than anticipated, we will not recoup our significant investment in these unique facilities as they would be difficult to repurpose. Conversely, if we do not construct a sufficient number of facilities prior to approval of our xenotransplantation products, it will limit the number of organs we are able to supply when and if our xenotransplantation products are approved.
•Unituxin and Tyvaso DPI both require cold chain transportation since these products must be maintained at 2-8°C while in transit. As a result, these products have an elevated risk of quality-control incidents compared to our other commercial products, which may be transported under room temperature conditions. We use third party logistics companies that specialize in cold chain transportation for high-value products; however, should a temperature excursion occur, it may cause loss of some or all product in the particular shipment.
Any of these factors could disrupt sales of our commercial products, delay clinical trials or commercialization of new products, result in product liability claims and product recalls, and entail higher costs or lost revenues. Interruptions in our
Quarterly Report 45
Table of Contents
Part II. Other Information
manufacturing process could be significant given the length of time and complexity involved in obtaining necessary regulatory approvals for alternative arrangements, through either third parties or internal manufacturing processes.
We rely in part on third parties to perform activities that are critical to our business.
Third parties assist us in activities critical to our operations, such as: (1) manufacturing our clinical and commercial products; (2) conducting clinical trials, preclinical studies, and other research and development activities; (3) obtaining regulatory approvals; (4) conducting pharmacovigilance and product complaint activities, including handling and reporting of adverse effects (including adverse events and product complaints); (5) manufacturing and obtaining regulatory approvals for the devices used to administer our drugs; and (6) marketing and distributing our products. Any disruption in the ability of third parties to continue to perform these critical activities could materially adversely impact our business and results of operations. Any change in service providers could interrupt the manufacture and distribution of our products and services, and impede the progress of our clinical trials, commercial launch plans, and related revenues.
We rely on various distributors to market, distribute, and sell our commercial products. If they are unsuccessful in, or reduce or discontinue, their sales efforts, our revenues may decline materially. Outside the United States, we rely substantially on our international distributors to obtain and maintain regulatory approvals for our products and to market and sell our products in compliance with applicable laws and regulations. In the United States, we derive substantially all our treprostinil-based revenues from sales to two distributors, Accredo and CVS Specialty. If either of these two distributors places significantly larger or smaller orders in a given time period, our revenues can be impacted in a way that does not reflect patient demand.
We rely entirely on third parties to supply pumps and other supplies necessary to administer Remodulin. There are a limited number of pumps and other supplies available in the market, and the discontinuation of any particular pump could have a material, adverse impact on our Remodulin revenues if a viable supply of an alternate pump is not available. We rely entirely on ICU Medical to manufacture the CADD-Solis pump, which is the primary pump used to administer intravenous Remodulin in the United States. We rely entirely on DEKA Research & Development Corp. and its affiliates to manufacture the Remunity and RemunityPRO Pumps, which are the primary pumps used to administer subcutaneous Remodulin in the United States. Additional ancillary supplies are used with these pumps, and there are a limited number of manufacturers that supply them.
We rely on two contract manufacturers — Forj Medical and Phillips-Medisize Corp. — to manufacture the Tyvaso Inhalation System for Nebulized Tyvaso. As Nebulized Tyvaso is a drug-device combination product, we cannot sell Nebulized Tyvaso without the Tyvaso Inhalation System. We also rely on various third parties to supply the monthly disposable device accessories that are used with the Tyvaso Inhalation System. We rely entirely on MannKind to manufacture Tyvaso DPI finished drug product and inhalers for us, with no plans to develop an alternate or backup supply arrangement. If MannKind is unable to manufacture Tyvaso DPI in sufficient quantities for us for any reason, our commercial sales of Tyvaso DPI could be materially and adversely impacted.
We also rely on various sole-source suppliers for manufacturing activities related to ralinepag. We are in the process of qualifying our Silver Spring facility to produce our primary commercial supply of ralinepag API, and our Research Triangle Park facility to produce our primary commercial supply of ralinepag tablets, if and when oral ralinepag is approved by the FDA. These efforts could be unsuccessful or take longer or cost more than we anticipate, in which case we may be more reliant on our existing third-party contract manufacturers.
For a further discussion of risks created by the use of third-party contract manufacturers, see the risk factor above entitled, Our manufacturing strategy exposes us to significant risks.
We rely heavily on third-party contract research organizations, contract laboratories, clinical investigative sites, and other third parties to conduct our clinical trials, preclinical studies, and other research and development activities. Third-party failure to conduct or assist us in conducting clinical trials in accordance with study protocols, quality controls, GCP, or other applicable requirements or to submit associated regulatory filings, could limit or prevent our ability to rely on results of those trials in seeking regulatory approvals.
Reports of actual or perceived side effects and other adverse effects associated with our products could cause our sales to decrease or regulatory approvals to be revoked.
Reports of adverse effects (including side effects and other adverse events, as well as product complaints) associated with our products could affect a physician’s decision to prescribe or a patient’s willingness to use our products, which may have a significant adverse impact on sales of our products. An example of a known risk associated with the pump system used for intravenous Remodulin is sepsis, which is a serious and potentially life-threatening infection of the bloodstream caused by a wide variety of bacteria. In addition, Unituxin is associated with severe side effects, and its label contains a boxed warning related to potential infusion reactions and neurotoxicity. We are required to report certain adverse effects to the FDA and its international counterparts. Development of new products, and new formulations, indications, and delivery devices for existing products, could result in new side effects and other adverse effects which may be serious in nature. If the use of our products harms patients or is perceived to harm patients, regulatory approvals could be revoked or otherwise negatively impacted.
Negative attention from special interest groups may impair our business.
Our early-stage research and development involves animal testing required by regulatory authorities, which we conduct both directly and through contracts with third parties. Our organ manufacturing programs rely heavily on the use of animals to manufacture and test our products. Certain special interest groups categorically object to the use of animals for research
46 United Therapeutics, a public benefit corporation
Table of Contents
Part II. Other Information
purposes. Any negative attention, threats, or acts of vandalism directed against our animal research or manufacturing activities could impede the operation of our business.
We may not maintain adequate insurance coverage to protect us against significant product liability claims.
The testing, manufacturing, marketing, and sale of drugs and diagnostics involve product liability risks. We may not be able to maintain our current product liability insurance at an acceptable cost, if at all. In addition, our insurance coverage may not be adequate for all potential claims. If losses significantly exceed our liability insurance coverage, we may experience financial hardship or potentially be forced out of business. Clinical testing and eventual marketing and sale of new products, reformulated versions of existing products, or use of existing products in new indications could expose us to new product liability risks that are not covered by our existing policies.
If we fail to attract and retain key management and qualified scientific and technical personnel, we may not be able to achieve our business objectives.
Members of our management team, including our founder, Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Dr. Martine Rothblatt, play a critical role in defining our business strategy and maintaining our corporate culture. The loss of the services and leadership of Dr. Rothblatt or any other members of our senior management team could have an adverse effect on our business. We do not maintain key person life insurance on our senior management team members. Failure to identify, hire, and retain suitable successors for members of our senior management team and to transfer knowledge effectively could impede the achievement of our business objectives. Our future success also depends on our ability to attract and retain qualified scientific and technical personnel. Competition for such personnel in our industries is intense. If we fail to attract and retain such employees, we may not be successful in developing and commercializing new therapies.
Risks Related to Legal Compliance
We must comply with extensive laws and regulations in the United States and other countries. Failure to obtain approvals on a timely basis or to comply with these requirements could delay, disrupt, or prevent commercialization of our products.
The products we develop must be approved for marketing and sale by regulatory agencies. Our research and development efforts must comply with extensive regulations, including those promulgated by the FDA, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and their international counterparts, as applicable. The process of obtaining and maintaining regulatory approvals for new drugs, biologics, and medical devices is lengthy, expensive, and uncertain. The regulatory approval process is particularly uncertain for our organ manufacturing program. Once approved, the manufacture, distribution, advertising, and marketing of our products are subject to extensive regulation, including requirements related to product labeling, pharmacovigilance and adverse effect reporting and processing (including both adverse events and product complaints), storage, distribution, and record-keeping. Our product candidates have in the past and may in the future fail to receive regulatory approval. If granted, product approvals can be conditioned on the completion of post-marketing clinical studies, accompanied by significant restrictions on the use or marketing of a given product and withdrawn for failure to comply with regulatory requirements, such as post-marketing requirements and post-marketing commitments, or upon the occurrence of adverse effects subsequent to commercial introduction. Our ability to obtain regulatory approvals for our products has been, and in the future may be, materially impacted by the outcome and quality of our clinical trials and other data submitted to regulators, as well as the quality of our manufacturing operations and those of our third-party contract manufacturers and contract laboratories. In addition, third parties may submit citizen petitions to the FDA seeking to delay approval of, or impose additional approval conditions for, our products. Citizen petitions have in the past, and may in the future, significantly delay or prevent approval of our products.
In April 2025, the Trump administration announced a reduction in force at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, including layoffs at the FDA. These and other efforts to reduce the size of the FDA or its funding, combined with significant changes in FDA leadership, have resulted in slower FDA response times and longer review periods, and may lead to less predictable outcomes. Future government shutdowns, funding disputes, reorganizations, furloughs, or reductions in resources or changes in priorities or focus may result in further delays. If response and review delays persist and/or worsen, they could potentially impact our ability to advance our pipeline efforts on a timely basis or obtain regulatory approval for new products and new indications for existing products.
Regulatory approval for our currently marketed products is limited by the FDA and other regulators to those specific indications and conditions for which clinical safety and efficacy have been demonstrated.
Any regulatory approval of our products is limited to specific diseases and indications for which our products have been deemed safe and effective. Regulatory approval is also required for new formulations and new indications for an approved product. While physicians may prescribe drugs for uses that are not described in the product’s labeling and for uses that differ from those approved by regulatory authorities (called “off-label” uses), our ability to promote our products is limited to those indications that are specifically approved by the FDA and its international counterparts. Failure to follow applicable rules and guidelines related to promotion and advertising can result in adverse regulatory actions by the FDA and its international counterparts — such as warning letters, enforcement actions, civil lawsuits, or criminal prosecution.
Quarterly Report 47
Table of Contents
Part II. Other Information
We must comply with various laws in jurisdictions around the world that restrict certain marketing practices.
Our business activities may be subject to challenge under laws in jurisdictions around the world restricting marketing practices, such as:
•Anti-kickback and false claim statutes, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, and the United Kingdom Bribery Act. In the United States, the Federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other activities, knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting, or receiving remuneration (i.e., anything of value) to induce, or in return for, the purchase, lease, order or arranging the purchase, lease or order of any healthcare product or service reimbursable under any federally financed healthcare program like Medicare or Medicaid. This statute is interpreted broadly to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers and prescribers, purchasers, specialty pharmacies, formulary managers, patients, and others. Our practices may not always qualify for safe harbor protection under this statute.
•The Federal False Claims Act, which prohibits any person from knowingly presenting or causing to be presented a false or fraudulent claim for payment of government funds, or making or causing a false statement material to a false or fraudulent claim. Pharmaceutical and healthcare companies have faced liability under this law for causing false claims to be submitted because they marketed a product for unapproved and non-reimbursable uses.
•Analogous state laws and regulations, including anti-kickback and false claims laws, which apply to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid or, in several states, regardless of the payer, including private payers.
We are also subject to numerous other laws and regulations that, while not specific to the healthcare industry, apply to the healthcare industry in important ways. For example, we are subject to antitrust regulations with respect to interactions with other participants in the markets we currently serve or may serve in the future. These antitrust laws are vigorously enforced in the U.S. and in other jurisdictions in which we operate.
Compliance with these and similar laws on a state-by-state basis is difficult, time consuming, and requires substantial resources. Any investigation, inquiry, or other legal proceeding under these laws related to our operations, even if we successfully defend against it, or any penalties imposed upon us for failure to comply, could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition or reputation. Sanctions under these federal and state laws may include treble civil monetary penalties, payment of damages, fines, exclusion of our products from reimbursement under federal healthcare programs, imprisonment, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations.
Government healthcare reform and other reforms could adversely affect our revenue, costs, and results of operations.
Our industry is highly regulated and changes in law or government healthcare programs, like Medicaid or Medicare, may adversely impact our business, operations, or financial results. We cannot predict how future federal or state legislative or administrative changes related to healthcare reform will affect our business.
Political, economic, and regulatory developments may lead to fundamental changes in the U.S. healthcare industry, particularly given the persistent criticism of prescription drug costs in the U.S. We expect there will continue to be legislative and regulatory proposals to change the healthcare system in ways that could adversely impact our ability to commercialize and to sell our products profitably. Even proposals or executive actions that ultimately are deemed unlawful or otherwise repealed could negatively impact the U.S. pharmaceutical sector and our business.
Among other things, there have been several U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things: bring more transparency to drug pricing; reduce the cost of prescription drugs under government payer programs; review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs; and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs.
The IRA was enacted in 2022. Among other things, the IRA requires manufacturers of certain drugs to engage in price negotiations with Medicare, with prices that can be negotiated subject to a cap; imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation (first due in 2023); redesigns the Medicare Part D benefit (beginning in 2024); and replaces the Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program with a new manufacturer discounting program (beginning in 2025). The U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has published the negotiated prices for the initial ten drugs, which went into effect in January 2026, and the subsequent 15 drugs, which will first be effective in 2027. The IRA permits the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. HHS has issued guidance, and is expected to continue to issue guidance, even while multiple lawsuits challenging the IRA negotiation requirement remain pending. While the impact of the IRA on the pharmaceutical industry cannot yet be fully determined, it is likely to be significant.
Under the Medicare Part D manufacturer discounting program that became effective January 1, 2025 pursuant to the IRA, manufacturers must give a 10 percent discount on Part D drugs in the initial coverage phase, and a 20 percent discount on Part D drugs in the so-called “catastrophic phase” (the phase after the patient incurs costs above the initial phase out-of-pocket threshold, which is $2,000 beginning in 2025). The IRA allows the 10 and 20 percent discounts to be phased in over time for certain drugs for “specified small manufacturers.” In April 2024, CMS informed us that we are deemed a specified small manufacturer.
Orenitram and Tyvaso DPI are both reimbursed under Medicare Part D, and the reimbursement amount is impacted by the 10 and 20 percent discounts under the IRA’s manufacturer discounting program. These increased discounts impact Tyvaso DPI and Orenitram revenues, while also having an industry-wide impact on the cost of Part D drugs. The impact on Tyvaso DPI
48 United Therapeutics, a public benefit corporation
Table of Contents
Part II. Other Information
and Orenitram revenues could be offset because of the IRA’s Part D redesign, which went into effect in 2025 and resulted in an increase in the number of patients able to afford these therapies. The amount of the offset, if any, is inherently uncertain and difficult to measure and predict.
The manner in which CMS has implemented the manufacturer discounting program will also increase financial obligations of Part D prescription drug plans with respect to beneficiaries in the catastrophic coverage phase. This may incentivize Part D prescription drug plans to seek greater price concessions from us in order to include our products on their formularies.
More recently, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which was enacted in July 2025, significantly reduced funding of the Medicaid program. Such reductions are expected to decrease the number of persons enrolled in Medicaid and reduce the services covered by Medicaid, which could adversely affect our sales of our commercial products.
The Trump administration is pursuing a two-fold strategy to reduce drug costs in the U.S. On the one hand, the Trump administration has threatened to impose significant tariffs on pharmaceutical manufacturers that do not adopt pricing policies such as MFN pricing, which would tie the price for drugs in the U.S. to the lowest price in a group of other countries. In response, multiple manufacturers have entered into confidential pricing agreements with the federal government. On the other hand, the Trump administration is pursuing regulatory pathways to impose drug pricing policies and published two proposed regulations in December 2025, referred to as GLOBE and GUARD. If finalized and adopted, and if they withstand any legal challenges, these regulations would implement mandatory payment models under which manufacturers of eligible drugs would be required to pay rebates to the federal government on a portion of the units of their drugs that are reimbursed by Medicare, with the rebate amount based on MFN pricing. Imposing a rebate in the U.S. that is based on drug prices outside the U.S. would mark a drastic and unprecedented shift in the U.S. pharmaceutical market. While it is unclear whether and how the Trump administration proposals will be implemented, the Trump administration policies are likely to have a significant negative impact on the pharmaceutical industry and may negatively affect our ability to receive revenues from sales of our commercial products. Even regulatory proposals or executive actions that ultimately are deemed unlawful or otherwise repealed could negatively impact the U.S. pharmaceutical sector and our business.
Individual U.S. states have also increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement limitations, marketing cost disclosure, and transparency measures, and, in some cases, measures designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. A number of states have either implemented or are considering implementation of drug price transparency legislation. Requirements of pharmaceutical manufacturers under such laws include advance notice of planned price increases; reporting price increase amounts and factors considered in taking such increases; wholesale acquisition cost information disclosure to prescribers, purchasers, and state agencies; and new product notice and reporting. Other legislation establishes so-called prescription drug affordability boards that could impose price caps on specific drugs, and at least one state board is imposing an upper payment limit. States are also seeking to implement general, across-the-board price caps for pharmaceuticals, or are seeking to regulate drug distribution. These state legislative measures could limit the price or payment for certain drugs or could complicate the distribution of drugs. A number of states are authorized to impose civil monetary penalties or pursue other enforcement mechanisms against manufacturers who fail to comply with state law requirements, including the untimely, inaccurate, or incomplete reporting of drug pricing information under transparency obligations. Additional legislation in these areas imposing additional requirements on manufacturers, as well as penalties for noncompliance, could be introduced in the future. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs.
In October 2020, HHS and the FDA issued a final rule and guidance concerning two new pathways for importing lower-cost drugs into the United States. The final rule allows certain prescription drugs to be imported from Canada, and the guidance describes procedures for drug manufacturers to facilitate the importation of FDA-approved drugs and biologics manufactured abroad and originally intended for sale in a foreign country into the United States.
The 2026 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule final rule amended the Medicare Part B “average sales price” regulations, including by mandating that, as part of the manufacturer “bona fide service fee” determination, manufacturers submit reasonable assumptions and, for all new service vendor contracts as of January 1, 2026, obtain certifications from service vendors that they do not pass on service fees in whole or in part.
These legal reforms, as well as the IRA and other healthcare legislative or regulatory reform measures that may be adopted in the future, have resulted in, and may in the future result in, downward pressure on the payment for any of our approved products, and may adversely impact our business. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare and other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payment from commercial payers. Further state and federal healthcare reform measures adopted in the future could limit the amounts that state and federal governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for our products or additional pricing pressure.
It is difficult to predict the impact, if any, that future federal or state legislation, or executive actions, might have on the use of and reimbursement for our products in the United States, such as the potential for the importation of generic versions of our products, for reimbursement reductions or price caps on our products, or for increased difficulties and costs related to the distribution of our products.
Quarterly Report 49
Table of Contents
Part II. Other Information
If we fail to comply with our reporting and payment obligations under the Medicaid Drug Rebate program or other governmental pricing programs, we could be subject to additional reimbursement requirements, penalties, sanctions, and fines, which could adversely impact our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
We participate in, and have certain price reporting obligations to, the Medicaid Drug Rebate program, the Medicare program for Part B drugs, and other governmental programs that require us to pay rebates or offer discounts on our products, or establish reimbursement rates based on our reported pricing and other data. Certain programs, such as the 340B program, impose limits on the price we are permitted to charge certain entities for our products or for any future products for which we receive regulatory approval. Agencies continue to pursue and implement price reporting regulatory reforms under these programs. Changes to these programs could negatively affect the coverage and reimbursement by these programs of our products or any future products for which we receive regulatory approval and could negatively impact our results of operations. Our failure to comply with these price reporting, rebate payment, or pricing requirements could adversely impact our financial results. Applicable laws and regulations, including the IRA, could affect our obligations in ways we cannot anticipate.
Pricing and rebate calculations vary among products and programs. The calculations are complex and are often subject to interpretation by us, governmental or regulatory agencies, and the courts. If we must restate or recalculate information provided under these programs, our costs of compliance could increase. We could be held liable for errors in the submissions we are required to make with respect to governmental drug pricing programs, including retroactive rebates and program refunds. We may incur significant civil monetary penalties if we are found to have knowingly provided false information to the government or to have charged 340B covered entities more than the statutorily mandated ceiling price, and resolution of any claims that we violated these provisions could be costly. Certain failures to timely submit required data also could result in a civil monetary penalty for each day the information is late. We could also become subject to allegations under the False Claims Act and other laws and regulations. In addition, misreporting and failure to timely report data to CMS also can be grounds for CMS to terminate our Medicaid drug rebate agreement, pursuant to which we participate in the Medicaid Drug Rebate program. If CMS terminates our rebate agreement, no federal payments would be available under Medicaid or Medicare Part B for our covered outpatient drugs.
CMS, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, the Office of Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services (OIG), and other governmental agencies have pursued manufacturers that were alleged to have failed to report data to the government in a timely manner. Governmental agencies may also make changes in program interpretations, requirements or conditions of participation, some of which may have implications for amounts previously estimated or paid. We cannot assure you that any submissions we are required to make under governmental drug pricing programs will not be found to be incomplete or incorrect.
Similar political, economic, and regulatory developments are occurring in other countries and may affect our profitability. In addition to continuing pressure on prices and cost containment measures, legislative developments at the European Union (EU) or member state level may result in significant additional requirements or obstacles that may increase operating costs. Healthcare budgetary constraints in most EU member states have resulted in restrictions on the pricing and reimbursement of medicines and medical devices by relevant health service providers. Coupled with ever-increasing EU and national regulatory burdens on those wishing to develop and market products, this could prevent or delay marketing approval or certification of our product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities, and affect our ability to commercialize our product candidates, if approved or certified. In markets outside of the United States and EU, reimbursement and healthcare payment systems vary significantly by country, and many countries have instituted price ceilings on specific products and therapies.
We may be subject to enforcement action or penalties in connection with the contract pharmacy policy we have implemented pursuant to the 340B program.
We participate in the Public Health Service’s 340B drug pricing program (the 340B program) and have implemented a policy regarding the distribution of our drugs at 340B ceiling prices through third-party pharmacies that contract with 340B covered entities, known as “340B contract pharmacies.” Under our 340B contract pharmacy policy, which we adopted to address program integrity risks, our drugs are only shipped at the 340B ceiling price to those 340B contract pharmacies that meet certain criteria. Our policy has no impact on 340B purchases made by and distributed to 340B covered entities themselves. Our contract pharmacy policy preserves patient access, while addressing compliance and integrity concerns resulting from the proliferation of contract pharmacies. Nonetheless, the HHS, in a non-binding (and now-retracted) Advisory Opinion, stated that manufacturers in the 340B program are obligated to sell their covered outpatient drugs at the 340B ceiling price to all contract pharmacies acting as agents of a covered entity. Certain covered entities have expressed the view that participating manufacturers are obligated to sell their covered outpatient drugs to all contract pharmacies of a covered entity.
We and certain other manufacturers initiated litigation challenging the Advisory Opinion and the U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)’s position on contract pharmacies generally. HHS subsequently withdrew the Advisory Opinion, but HRSA issued letters to manufacturers, including us, threatening enforcement action if the manufacturers do not abandon their 340B contract pharmacy policies. We filed suit against HHS and HRSA in June 2021 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. In September 2021, HRSA sent to us, along with the other manufacturers challenging HRSA’s 340B interpretation, letters stating that HRSA was referring this issue to the OIG for potential enforcement action. We have not had any communication from the OIG regarding our 340B contract pharmacy policy. In November 2021, the court granted our motion for summary judgment, ruling that the letters threatening enforcement action “contain legal reasoning that rests upon
50 United Therapeutics, a public benefit corporation
Table of Contents
Part II. Other Information
an erroneous reading of Section 340B.” HRSA appealed, and the appellate court affirmed the lower court’s decision in our favor.
If HRSA or another entity develops a new theory of liability, we may face enforcement action or penalties as well as adverse publicity. Such an outcome may also prompt other parties to challenge our policies. It is also possible that covered entities could bring an action against us through dispute mechanisms including the administrative dispute resolution pathway. We expect the compliance of policies like ours will continue to be litigated. We may also face enforcement action under the laws of certain states that are seeking to impose their own 340B contract pharmacy requirements. Such actions could, if determined adversely to us, result in penalties and other sanctions that could have a negative impact on our business. If we are unable to curb the proliferation of abuses caused by 340B contract pharmacies, we could see increased sales at 340B ceiling prices, which could have a material adverse impact on our revenues.
Patient assistance programs for pharmaceutical products have come under increasing scrutiny by governments, legislative bodies, enforcement agencies, and other third parties. These activities may result in actions that effectively reduce prices or demand for our products, harm our business or reputation, or subject us to fines or penalties.
Company-sponsored patient assistance programs, including insurance premium and co-pay assistance programs and manufacturers’ donations to third-party charities that provide such assistance, are subject to heightened scrutiny. The Department of Justice (DOJ) has taken enforcement action against pharmaceutical companies alleging violations of the Federal False Claims Act and other laws in connection with patient assistance programs. We have been, and may in the future be, subject to DOJ investigations with respect to our support of non-profit patient assistance programs, which can result in sanctions, fines, or other payments and agreements with respect to our compliance programs. As discussed in Note 12—Litigation, to our consolidated financial statements, we have been sued by Humana Inc., United Healthcare Services, Inc., and various parties in the MSP Recovery litigation for allegedly violating RICO and various state laws in connection with our donations to a charity. These lawsuits, or other lawsuits in the future, could result in significant monetary judgments and the imposition of other penalties against us.
Members of Congress have called upon the OIG to issue revised guidance about patient assistance programs. Actions taken by the OIG, the DOJ, or other agencies as a result of this industry-wide inquiry could reduce demand for our products and/or coverage of our products by federal and state healthcare programs. If any or all of these events occur, our business, prospects, and stock price could be materially and adversely affected.
Payers and pharmacy benefit managers have developed mechanisms to limit the benefits patients receive under co-pay assistance programs through imposing so-called co-pay accumulator or maximizer programs. These programs do not allow a patient using co-pay assistance to count the manufacturer’s co-payment contribution toward their annual out-of-pocket payment maximum/deductible. Once the co-pay benefit has been exhausted, patients are faced with paying the full out-of-pocket maximum/deductible. Some states have passed legislation to limit the use of co-pay accumulator programs, while some other states have indicated that these programs should be allowed to limit cost of care and encourage patients to use lower cost generics. In addition, some states have imposed restrictions on manufacturer co-pay programs when therapeutic equivalents are available. Growing use of such programs, or new laws limiting manufacturer ability to provide co-pay assistance, could affect patient access to our products and limit product utilization, which may, in turn, adversely affect our business, prospects, and stock price.
Improper handling of hazardous materials used in our activities could expose us to significant remediation liabilities.
Our research and development and manufacturing activities involve the controlled use of chemicals and hazardous substances. We are expanding these activities in both scale and location. Patients may dispose of our products using means we do not control. Such activities subject us to numerous federal, state, and local environmental and safety laws and regulations that govern the management, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials. Compliance with current and future environmental laws and regulations can require significant costs. The risk of accidental contamination or injury from these materials cannot be eliminated. Once chemical and hazardous materials leave our facilities, we cannot control the manner in which such hazardous waste is disposed of by our contractors. We could be liable for substantial civil damages or costs associated with the cleanup of the release of hazardous materials and such liability could have a material adverse effect on our business.
The increasing use of social media platforms and artificial intelligence-based software presents new risks and challenges.
Social media is increasingly being used to communicate information about our products and the diseases that our therapies are designed to treat. Social media practices in our industry continue to evolve and regulations related to such use are not always clear. This evolution creates uncertainty and risk of noncompliance. For example, patients and others may use social media channels to comment on the effectiveness of a product or to report alleged adverse effects, such as adverse events and product complaints. When such disclosures occur, we may fail to monitor and comply with applicable adverse effect reporting obligations or we may not be able to defend against political and market pressures generated by social media due to restrictions on what we may say about our products. There is also a risk of inappropriate disclosure of sensitive information or negative or inaccurate comments about us on any social networking website. If any of these events occur or we otherwise fail to comply with applicable regulations, we could incur liability, face overly restrictive regulatory actions, or incur other harm to our business.
Quarterly Report 51
Table of Contents
Part II. Other Information
Additionally, artificial intelligence-based software is increasingly being used in our business and in the biopharmaceutical industry generally. As with many developing technologies, artificial intelligence-based software presents risks and challenges that could affect its further development, adoption, and use, and therefore our business. For example, algorithms employed by such software may be flawed; data sets may be insufficient, of poor quality, or contain biased information; and inappropriate or controversial data practices could impair the accuracy and usefulness of the results. If our analyses assisted by artificial intelligence applications are deficient or inaccurate, we could be subject to competitive harm, potential legal liability, and brand or reputational harm. Furthermore, use of artificial intelligence-based software may lead to the inadvertent release of confidential information which may impact our ability to realize the benefit of our intellectual property and expose us to liability and brand or reputational harm.
Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property and Data Privacy
If any of the agreements under which we license or acquired intellectual property rights are breached or terminated, we could lose our rights to continue to develop, manufacture, and sell the products covered by such agreements.
Our business depends upon our continuing ability to exploit our intellectual property rights acquired from third parties under product license and purchase agreements covering drugs or other products or technology. We may be required to license additional intellectual property owned by third parties to continue to develop and commercialize our products. This dependence on intellectual property developed by others involves the following risks:
•We may be unable to obtain rights to intellectual property that we need for our business at a reasonable cost or at all;
•If any of our product licenses or purchase agreements are terminated, we may lose our rights to develop, make, and sell the products to which such licenses or agreements relate;
•Our rights to develop and market products to which the intellectual property relates are frequently limited to specific territories and fields of use (such as the treatment of particular diseases); and
•If a licensor of intellectual property fails to maintain the intellectual property licensed, we may lose any ability to prevent others from developing or marketing similar products covered by such intellectual property. In addition, we may be forced to incur substantial costs to maintain the intellectual property ourselves or take legal action seeking to force the licensor to do so.
Limitations on our intellectual property rights may limit our ability to prevent third parties from competing with our products, and we may not prevail in litigation to enforce or defend those rights.
The period under which our commercial and developmental therapies are protected by our patent rights is limited. Our patents related to our individual treprostinil-based products expire at various times through 2042. We entered into settlement agreements with certain generic drug companies in the United States under which generic versions of Remodulin have launched, a generic version of Nebulized Tyvaso is currently permitted to be launched, and generic versions of Orenitram are permitted to be launched in the future. In some instances, the FTC has brought actions against brand and generic companies that have entered into such agreements, alleging that they violate antitrust laws. Even in the absence of an FTC challenge, other governmental or private litigants may assert antitrust or other claims against us relating to such agreements. We have been sued by Sandoz for violating our settlement agreement with them, and we have accrued a liability of $75.7 million in connection with such suit, reflecting the final judgment and post-judgment interest accrued through the end of June 2026, although our ultimate liability may be greater. Other actions against us in the future could result in significant monetary judgments and the imposition of other penalties against us. We have no issued patents or pending patent applications covering the Unituxin drug product. For further details, see Part I, Item 2—Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Generic Competition and Challenges to our Intellectual Property Rights.
Our patents have not prevented competitors from obtaining regulatory approval to market products that compete with our treprostinil-based products, and we cannot be sure that our existing or any new patents will effectively deter or delay competitors’ efforts to bring additional new products to market, or that additional patent applications will result in new patents. When our patents expire, competitors may develop generic versions of our products and market them at a lower price. Competitors may also seek to design around our patents or exclude patented methods of treatment, such as patent-protected indications, from the label for generic versions of our products in an effort to develop competing products that do not infringe our patents. In addition, patent laws of foreign jurisdictions may not protect our patent rights to the same extent as the United States’ laws.
Third parties have challenged, and may in the future challenge, the validity of our patents, through patent litigation and/or initiating proceedings, including re-examinations, IPRs, post-grant reviews, and interference proceedings, before the USPTO or other applicable patent filing offices, or other means. For example, Liquidia is challenging various patents related to Nebulized Tyvaso and our other treprostinil-related products, and has successfully challenged some of them.
Patent litigation has been, and may continue to be, time consuming, distracting, and costly, and the outcome may be difficult to predict and unfavorable to us. We have not always prevailed in the defense of our patents, and if we are unsuccessful in the defense of our remaining patents, our business could be negatively impacted.
52 United Therapeutics, a public benefit corporation
Table of Contents
Part II. Other Information
We also rely on trade secrets to protect our proprietary know-how and other confidential technological advances. Our confidentiality agreements with our employees and others to whom we disclose trade secrets and confidential information may not necessarily prevent our trade secrets from being used or disclosed without our authorization, as we allege happened in our lawsuit against Liquidia and Dr. Roscigno. These agreements may be difficult, time-consuming, and expensive to enforce or may not provide an adequate remedy in the event of unauthorized disclosure. If our trade secrets were lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor, we would have no right to prevent such third party, or those to whom they communicate such technology or information, from using that technology or information to compete with us, and our business and competitive position could be harmed.
Third parties have alleged, and may in the future allege, that our products or services infringe their patents and other intellectual property rights, which could result in the payment of royalties that negatively affect our profits, subject us to costly and time-consuming litigation, or cause us to lose the ability to sell the related products.
To the extent third-party patents to which we currently do not hold licenses are necessary for us to manufacture, use, or sell our products, we would need to obtain necessary licenses to prevent infringement. For products or services that utilize intellectual property of strategic collaborators or other suppliers, such suppliers may have an obligation to secure the needed license to these patents at their cost; if not, we would be responsible for the cost of these licenses. Royalty payments and other fees under these licenses would erode our profits from the sale of related products and services. Moreover, we may be unable to obtain these licenses on acceptable terms or at all. If we fail to obtain a required license or are unable to alter the design of the product to avoid infringing a third-party patent, we would be unable to continue to manufacture or sell related products.
If a third party commences legal action against us for infringement, we may incur significant costs to defend ourselves against the claims made in the action and our management’s attention could be diverted from our day-to-day business operations, whether or not the action has merit. An adverse judgment or settlement resulting from the action could require us to pay substantial amounts in damages for infringement or to obtain a license to continue to use the intellectual property that is the subject of the infringement claim, or could result in injunctive relief limiting our ability to develop, manufacture, or sell our products. In April 2025, Liquidia initiated litigation against us alleging that Tyvaso DPI infringes a patent assigned to Liquidia. While we believe we have meritorious defenses and will vigorously defend against these claims, this litigation could be time consuming and ultimately may not be resolved in our favor, in which case, we could be required to pay substantial damages.
Cybersecurity incidents and other disruptions impacting our networks, systems, or data may have a material adverse effect on our business.
We are increasingly dependent on information technology systems and infrastructure, much of which is outsourced to third parties including in cloud-based platforms. We collect, store, and use sensitive or confidential data, including intellectual property, our proprietary business information and that of our suppliers, patients, healthcare providers, and business partners, and personally identifiable information. We recently launched a new patient relations program, United Therapeutics Cares, which has increased our access to sensitive information about our patients. Actual or alleged cybersecurity incidents, including those caused by employee error, malfeasance, system failures, malware, ransomware, viruses, distributed denial of service attacks, credential harvesting, social engineering, and other forms of unauthorized access or disclosure to, or disrupting the operation of, our networks and systems or those of our customers, suppliers, vendors, and other service providers, can cause the loss, destruction, or unauthorized access or disclosure of data, including personal information of employees or confidential or proprietary information, disruption of our manufacturing and other operations, and damage to our reputation and competitive position, any of which could be costly to address and remediate and adversely affect our business, financial condition, or results of operations. We are also subject to laws and regulations in the United States and abroad, such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 and European Union regulations related to data privacy, which require us to protect the privacy and security of certain types of information. Therefore, cybersecurity incidents could expose us to significant civil and/or criminal penalties, as well as private litigation, all of which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, or results of operations.
In the past we have experienced, and in the future we may again experience, data security incidents. The preventive actions we take to reduce exposure to, and the risks associated with, cybersecurity incidents may be insufficient to prevent or mitigate the effects of material cybersecurity incidents in the future. Because the tools and methods — including those deploying artificial intelligence technology — used by threat actors to damage or obtain unauthorized access to networks, systems, and data change frequently, and are often not known until used against a target, we may be unable to anticipate these tools or methods or implement adequate preventative measures. It is impossible to eliminate all cybersecurity threats and exposure to cybersecurity incidents, and thus our networks and systems, as well as those of our service providers, suppliers, customers and other third parties, remain potentially vulnerable to known or unknown threats.
Quarterly Report 53
Table of Contents
Part II. Other Information
Risks Related to Our Financing Capacity, Indebtedness, and Investments
If we need additional financing and cannot obtain it, our product development and sales efforts may be limited.
We may be required to seek additional sources of financing to meet unplanned or planned expenditures. Unplanned expenditures could be significant and may result from necessary modifications to product development plans or product offerings in response to difficulties encountered with clinical trials. We may also face unexpected costs in preparing products for commercial sale, or in maintaining sales levels of our currently marketed therapeutic products. Our 2025 Credit Agreement contains affirmative and negative covenants that, among other things, limit our ability to incur additional indebtedness. If we are unable to obtain additional funding on commercially reasonable terms or at all, we may be compelled to delay clinical studies, curtail operations, or obtain funds through collaborative arrangements that may require us to relinquish rights to certain products or potential markets.
Our portfolio of investments is subject to market, interest, operational, and credit risk that may reduce its value.
We maintain a portfolio of investments that includes: (1) corporate debt securities; (2) strategic investments in publicly traded equity securities; and (3) strategic equity investments in privately held companies. These investments are subject to general economic conditions, volatility in the financial marketplace, market- and industry-wide dynamics, the current elevated interest rate environment and changes in interest rates, industry- and company-specific developments impacting the business, prospects, and credit ratings of the issuer of the securities, and other factors, each of which has affected, and may in the future affect, the income that we receive from our investments, the net realizable value of our investments, and our ability to sell them. These factors have caused, and could in the future cause, us to: (a) experience a decline in our investment income; (b) record impairment charges to reduce the carrying value of our investment portfolio; or (c) sell investments for less than our acquisition cost; each of which in turn could negatively impact our liquidity and our earnings. Our efforts to mitigate these risks through diversification of our investments and monitoring of our portfolio’s overall risk profile may not be successful and the value of our investments may decline. The privately held companies we have invested in may be particularly susceptible to the factors described above as these companies are typically in the early stages of developing technologies or products that may never materialize, which could result in a loss of all or a substantial part of our investment in these companies.
If we are not able to successfully identify, finance, consummate, and/or integrate acquisitions, our business operations and financial position could be adversely affected.
We seek to expand our business in part through acquisitions of complementary businesses, products, and technologies. The success of this strategy will depend on our ability to identify, and the availability of, suitable acquisition candidates. We may incur costs related to an acquisition but may be unable or unwilling to consummate the proposed transaction. Acquisitions involve numerous risks, including: the ability to realize anticipated synergies and manage the integration of personnel, products, and acquired infrastructure and controls; potential increases in operating costs; managing geographically remote operations; the diversion of management's attention from other business concerns; potential disruptions in ongoing operations during integration; risks inherent in entering markets and sectors in which we have limited or no direct experience; and the potential loss of key employees, customers, or vendors and other business partners of the acquired companies. External factors, such as compliance with law, may also impact the successful integration of an acquired business. Acquisitions could involve dilutive issuances of equity securities, the incurrence of debt, one-time write-offs of goodwill (or in-process research and development assets), and substantial amortization expenses of other intangible assets. We may be unable to obtain financing on favorable terms, or at all, if necessary to finance future acquisitions, which may make acquisitions impossible or more costly. The terms of financing we obtain may be onerous and restrict our operations. Further, certain acquisitions may be subject to regulatory approval, which can be time consuming and costly to obtain or may be denied, and if obtained, the terms of such regulatory approvals may limit our ongoing operations or require us to divest assets.
Risks Related to Our Common Stock
The price of our common stock can be highly volatile and may decline.
The price of common stock can be highly volatile within the pharmaceutical and biotechnology sector. Consequently, significant price and volume fluctuations in the market may not relate to operating performance. The price of our common stock could decline sharply due to general market conditions as well as the following factors, among others:
•quarterly and annual financial results and any failure to meet our expectations or those of securities analysts, including expectations regarding revenues for our existing products, new products, or new indications for existing products;
•timing of enrollment and results of our clinical trials;
•announcements regarding generic or other challenges to the intellectual property related to our products, the launch and successful commercialization of generic versions of our products or other competitive products, and the impact of competition from generic and other products on our revenues;
54 United Therapeutics, a public benefit corporation
Table of Contents
Part II. Other Information
•announcements regarding litigation matters, including our ongoing litigation with Liquidia, among others;
•announcements regarding our efforts to obtain regulatory approval of, and to launch commercial sales of, new products and new indications for existing products;
•physician, patient, investor, or public concerns regarding the efficacy and/or safety of products marketed or being developed by us or by others;
•changes in laws and regulations affecting reimbursement of our therapeutic products by government payers, changes in reimbursement policies of private insurance companies, including the implementation and impacts of the IRA and other governmental efforts to reduce drug prices, and negative publicity surrounding the cost of high-priced therapies;
•announcements of technological innovations or new products or announcements regarding our existing products, including in particular the development of new, competing therapies;
•substantial sales of our common stock by us or our existing shareholders, or concerns that such sales may occur;
•future issuances of common stock by us or other activity which could be viewed as being dilutive to our shareholders;
•rumors or incorrect statements by investors and/or analysts concerning our company, our products, or our operations;
•failures or delays in our efforts to obtain or maintain domestic or international regulatory approvals;
•discovery of previously unknown problems with our marketed products, or problems with our manufacturing, regulatory, compliance, promotional, marketing, or sales activities that result in regulatory penalties or restrictions on our products, up to the withdrawal of our products from the market; and
•accumulation of significant short positions in our common stock by hedge funds or other investors or the significant accumulation of our common stock by hedge funds or other institutional investors with investment strategies that may lead to short-term holdings.
Provisions of Delaware law, our charter, bylaws and employment and license agreements, among other things, could prevent or delay a change of control or change in management that may be beneficial to our public shareholders.
Certain provisions of Delaware law, our restated certificate of incorporation, and bylaws may prevent, delay, or discourage a merger, tender offer, or proxy contest; the assumption of control by a holder of a large block of our securities; and/or the replacement or removal of current management by our shareholders. For example, as a result of our conversion to a PBC, our Board is required to consider and balance the financial interests of shareholders, the interests of stakeholders materially affected by our conduct, and the pursuit of our specific public benefit purpose when evaluating takeover offers. This requirement of Delaware law may make our company a less attractive takeover target than a traditional for-profit corporation.
Non-competition and all other restrictive covenants in most of our employment agreements will terminate upon a change of control that is not approved by our Board. Similarly, a change of control, under certain circumstances, could accelerate the vesting of outstanding stock options, and restricted stock units. Any increase in our stock price resulting from the announcement of a change of control, and our broad-based change of control severance program, under which our employees may be entitled to severance benefits if they are terminated without cause (or they terminate their employment for good reason) following a change of control, could make an acquisition of our company significantly more expensive to the purchaser.
We enter into certain license agreements that generally prohibit our counterparties or their affiliates from taking necessary steps to acquire or merge with us, directly or indirectly throughout the term of the agreements, plus a specified period thereafter. We are also party to certain license agreements that restrict our ability to assign or transfer the rights licensed to us to third parties, including parties with whom we wish to merge, or those attempting to acquire us. These agreements often require that we obtain prior consent of the counterparties if we contemplate a change of control. If these counterparties withhold consent, related agreements could be terminated and we would lose related license rights. For example, MannKind has the right to terminate our license agreements related to Tyvaso DPI and ralinepag DPI, in the event of certain change of control transactions. These restrictive change of control provisions could impede or prevent mergers or other transactions that could benefit our shareholders.
Our shareholders must rely on stock appreciation for any return on their investment in us.
We have never paid, and do not intend to pay, cash dividends. The terms of our current or future debt arrangements we may enter into may restrict us from doing so. As a result, the return on an investment in our common stock depends entirely upon the future appreciation, if any, in the price of our common stock.
Our exclusive forum bylaw may limit our shareholders’ ability to bring a claim in a forum that they find favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers, or other employees.
Our bylaws provide that, to the fullest extent permitted by law, unless we agree in writing to an alternative forum, (1) the Delaware Court of Chancery (or, if such court does not have, or declines to accept, jurisdiction, another state court or a federal court located in Delaware) will be the exclusive forum for any complaint asserting any internal corporate claims, including claims in the right of the corporation based upon a violation of a duty by a current or former director, officer, employee, or shareholder in such capacity, or as to which the Delaware General Corporation Law confers jurisdiction upon the Court of Chancery; and (2) the federal district courts will be the exclusive forum for any complaint asserting a cause of
Quarterly Report 55
Table of Contents
Part II. Other Information
action arising under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. The choice of forum provision may limit our shareholders’ ability to bring a claim in a forum that they find favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers, or other employees, and may discourage such lawsuits. There is uncertainty as to whether a court would enforce this provision. If a court ruled the choice of forum provision was inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs to resolve such action in other jurisdictions. Our choice of forum provision is intended to apply to the fullest extent permitted by law to the above-specified types of actions and proceedings, including any derivative actions asserting claims under state law or the federal securities laws. Our shareholders will not be deemed, by operation of the choice of forum provision, to have waived our obligation to comply with all applicable federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder.
In 2021, we converted to a Delaware PBC. Conversion may not result in the benefits that we anticipate, requires our directors to balance the interest of shareholders with other interests, and may subject us to additional litigation and other risks.
We may not be able to achieve our public benefit purpose or realize the expected positive impacts from being a PBC.
One of the primary distinctions between a PBC and a traditional Delaware for-profit corporation is that, in making decisions, the directors of a PBC have an obligation to balance the financial interests of shareholders, the interests of stakeholders materially affected by the PBC’s conduct, and the pursuit of the corporation’s specific public benefit purpose. The application of this balancing obligation may allow our directors to make decisions that they could not have made pursuant to the fiduciary duties applicable prior to PBC conversion. There is no guarantee that our Board will resolve conflicts among the financial interests of our shareholders, our public benefit purpose, or stakeholders materially affected by our conduct, in favor of our shareholders’ financial interests. For instance, in a sale of control transaction, our Board would be required to consider and balance the factors listed above and might choose to accept an offer that does not maximize shareholder value due to its consideration of other factors. This requirement of Delaware law may make our company a less attractive takeover target than a traditional for-profit corporation.
A Delaware PBC must also provide its shareholders with a statement, at least every other year, as to the PBC’s assessment of the success of its efforts to promote its public benefit purpose and the best interests of those materially affected by the PBC's conduct. If the public perceives that we are not successful in promoting our public benefit purpose, or that our pursuit of our public benefit purpose is having a negative effect on the financial interests of our shareholders, that perception could negatively affect our reputation, which could adversely affect our business, results of operations, and stock price. In addition, Delaware's PBC statute may be amended to require more explicit or burdensome reporting requirements that could increase the time and expense required to comply.
As a Delaware PBC, we may be subject to increased litigation risk.
Shareholders of a Delaware PBC (if they, individually or collectively, own the lesser of (1) two percent of the PBC’s outstanding shares; or (2) shares with a market value of $2 million or more on the date the lawsuit is instituted) can file a derivative lawsuit claiming the directors failed to balance shareholder and public benefit interests. Traditional Delaware for-profit corporations are not subject to this potential liability. As a PBC, we may be subject to increased derivative litigation, which may be costly and require management’s attention, which may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. In addition, there is currently limited case law involving PBCs (including case law interpreting and applying the balancing obligation of PBC directors), which may expose us to additional litigation risk generally until additional case law develops or additional legislative action is taken.
Read original filing text →