# EDGAR Filing Document

**Accession Number:** 0001285785
**File Stem:** 0001618034-23-000003
**Filing Date:** 2023-2
**Character Count:** 1088861
**Document Hash:** d3325cf20e91554a4fecdcb47164f06e
**Contains OCR:** False
**Source Format:** 

## Filing Content

## Filing Summary
**0001618034-23-000003.hdr.sgml**: 20230223

**ACCESSION NUMBER**: 0001618034-23-000003

**CONFORMED SUBMISSION TYPE**: 10-K

**PUBLIC DOCUMENT COUNT**: 208

**CONFORMED PERIOD OF REPORT**: 20221231

**FILED AS OF DATE**: 20230223

**DATE AS OF CHANGE**: 20230223

**FILER**: 

**COMPANY DATA:**
- **COMPANY CONFORMED NAME:** MOSAIC CO
- **CENTRAL INDEX KEY:** 0001285785
- **STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION:** AGRICULTURE CHEMICALS [2870]
- **IRS NUMBER:** 201026454
- **FISCAL YEAR END:** 1231

**FILING VALUES:**
- **FORM TYPE:** 10-K
- **SEC ACT:** 1934 Act
- **SEC FILE NUMBER:** 001-32327
- **FILM NUMBER:** 23658772

**BUSINESS ADDRESS:**
- **STREET 1:** 101 EAST KENNEDY BLVD.
- **STREET 2:** SUITE 2500
- **CITY:** TAMPA
- **STATE:** FL
- **ZIP:** 33602
- **BUSINESS PHONE:** 813-775-4200

**MAIL ADDRESS:**
- **STREET 1:** 101 EAST KENNEDY BLVD.
- **STREET 2:** SUITE 2500
- **CITY:** TAMPA
- **STATE:** FL
- **ZIP:** 33602

**FORMER COMPANY:**
- **FORMER CONFORMED NAME:** GLOBAL NUTRITION SOLUTIONS INC
- **DATE OF NAME CHANGE:** 20040401

?xml version="1.0" ? mos-20221231

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

**UNITED STATES**

**SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION**

**Washington, D.C. 20549**

**______________________________**

**FORM 10-K**

**______________________________**

☒**&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF**

**THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934**

**For the year ended December 31, 2022**

☐ **TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF**

**THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934**

**For the transition period from _____ to _____**

**Commission file number 001-32327**

**______________________________**

**The Mosaic Company**

**(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)**

**______________________________**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **Delaware** | **20-1026454** |
| **(State or other jurisdiction of<br>incorporation or organization)** | **(I.R.S. Employer<br>Identification No.)** |

---

**101 East Kennedy Blvd**

**Suite 2500**

**Tampa, Florida 33602**

**(800) 918-8270**

**(Address and zip code of principal executive offices and registrant's telephone number, including area code)**

**______________________________**

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

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **Title of each class** | **Trading symbol** | **Name of each exchange on which registered** |
| Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share | MOS | New York Stock Exchange |

---

**______________________________** 

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

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Yes ☒&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;No ☐

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Yes ☐&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;No ☒

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files).&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Yes ☒&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of "large accelerated filer," "accelerated filer," "smaller reporting company," and "emerging growth company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one): Large accelerated filer ☒ Accelerated filer ☐ Non-accelerated filer ☐ Smaller reporting company ☐ Emerging growth company ☐

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management's assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☒

If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant's executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to §240.10D-1(b) ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Yes ☐&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;No ☒

As of June 30, 2022, the aggregate market value of the registrant's voting common stock held by stockholders, other than directors, executive officers, subsidiaries of the Registrant and any other person known by the Registrant as of the date hereof to beneficially own ten percent or more of any class of Registrant's outstanding voting common stock, and consisting of shares of Common Stock, was approximately $14.8 billion based upon the closing price of a share of Common Stock on the New York Stock Exchange on that date.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant's classes of common stock: 336,486,715 shares of Common Stock as of February 17, 2023.

***DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE***

1. Portions of the registrant's definitive proxy statement to be delivered in conjunction with the 2023 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (Part III)

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

**2022 ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K CONTENTS**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **Part I:** | | **Page** |
| Item 1. | <u>[Business](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_13)</u> | <u>[1](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_13)</u> |
| | *•&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <u>[Overview](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_16)</u>* | <u>[1](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_16)</u> |
| | *•&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <u>[Business Segment Information](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_19)</u>* | <u>[3](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_19)</u> |
| | *•&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <u>[Sales and Distribution Activities](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_34)</u>* | <u>[14](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_34)</u> |
| | *•&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <u>[Competition](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_37)</u>* | <u>[15](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_37)</u> |
| | *•&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <u>[Factors Affecting Demand](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_40)</u>* | <u>[17](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_40)</u> |
| | *•&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <u>[Other Matters](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_43)</u>* | <u>[17](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_43)</u> |
| | *•&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Executive Officers](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_49)</u>* | <u>[20](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_49)</u> |
| Item 1A. | <u>[Risk Factors](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_52)</u> | <u>[22](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_52)</u> |
| Item 1B. | <u>[Unresolved Staff Comments](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_55)</u> | <u>[35](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_55)</u> |
| Item 2. | <u>[Properties](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_58)</u> | <u>[36](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_58)</u> |
| Item 3. | <u>[Legal Proceedings](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_73)</u> | <u>[85](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_73)</u> |
| Item 4. | <u>[Mine Safety Disclosures](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_76)</u> | <u>[86](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_76)</u> |
| **Part II:** | | |
| Item 5. | <u>[Market for Registrant's Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_82)</u> | <u>[87](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_82)</u> |
| Item 6. | <u>[Reserved](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_85)</u> | <u>[88](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_85)</u> |
| Item 7. | <u>[Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_88)</u> | <u>[88](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_88)</u> |
| Item 7A. | <u>[Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_91)</u> | <u>[88](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_91)</u> |
| Item 8. | <u>[Financial Statements and Supplementary Data](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_94)</u> | <u>[88](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_94)</u> |
| Item 9. | <u>[Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosures](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_97)</u> | <u>[88](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_97)</u> |
| Item 9A. | <u>[Controls and Procedures](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_100)</u> | <u>[88](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_100)</u> |
| Item 9B. | <u>[Other Information](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_103)</u> | <u>[89](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_103)</u> |
| **Part III:** | | |
| Item 10. | <u>[Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_109)</u> | <u>[90](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_109)</u> |
| Item 11. | <u>[Executive Compensation](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_112)</u> | <u>[90](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_112)</u> |
| Item 12. | <u>[Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_115)</u> | <u>[90](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_115)</u> |
| Item 13. | <u>[Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_118)</u> | <u>[90](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_118)</u> |
| Item 14. | <u>[Principal Accounting Fees and Services](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_121)</u> | <u>[90](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_121)</u> |
| **Part IV.** | | |
| Item 15. | <u>[Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_127)</u> | <u>[91](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_127)</u> |
| Item 16. | <u>[Annual Report o](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_130)[n](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_130)[Form 10-K Summary](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_130)</u> | <u>[97](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_130)</u> |
| <u>[Signatures](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_133)</u> | <u>[Signatures](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_133)</u> | <u>S-[1](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_133)</u> |
| <u>[Financial **Table of Contents**](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_136)</u> | <u>[Financial **Table of Contents**](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_136)</u> | <u>F-[1](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_136)</u> |

---

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

**PART I.**

**Item 1. Business.**

**OVERVIEW**

The Mosaic Company is the world's leading producer and marketer of concentrated phosphate and potash crop nutrients. Through our broad product offering, we are a single source supplier of phosphate- and potash-based crop nutrients and animal feed ingredients. We serve customers in approximately 40 countries. We are the second largest integrated phosphate producer in the world and one of the largest producers and marketers of phosphate-based animal feed ingredients in North America and Brazil. We are the leading fertilizer production and distribution company in Brazil. We mine phosphate rock in Florida, Brazil and Peru. We process rock into finished phosphate products at facilities in Florida, Louisiana and Brazil. We are typically one of the top four global potash producers in the world. In 2022, we were the second-largest producer, with our position lifted by reduced production in Belarus and Russia. We mine potash in Saskatchewan, New Mexico and Brazil. We have other production, blending or distribution operations in Brazil, China, India and Paraguay, as well as a strategic equity investment in a joint venture that operates a phosphate rock mine and chemical complexes in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Our operations serve the top four nutrient-consuming countries in the world: China, India, U.S. and Brazil.

The Mosaic Company is a Delaware corporation that was incorporated in March 2004 and serves as the parent company of the business that was formed through the October 2004 combination of IMC Global Inc. ("***IMC***") and the fertilizer businesses of Cargill, Incorporated. We are publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol "MOS" and are headquartered in Tampa, Florida.

We conduct our business through wholly- and majority-owned subsidiaries as well as businesses in which we own less than a majority or a non-controlling interest. We are organized into three reportable business segments: Phosphates, Potash and Mosaic Fertilizantes. Intersegment eliminations, unrealized mark-to-market gains/losses on derivatives, debt expenses, Streamsong Resort<sup>®</sup> results of operations, and the results of the China and India distribution businesses are included within Corporate, Eliminations and Other.

The following charts show the respective contributions to 2022 sales volumes, net sales and gross margin for each of our business segments in effect at December 31, 2022:

![mos-20221231_g1.jpg](mos-20221231_g1.jpg)![mos-20221231_g2.jpg](mos-20221231_g2.jpg)![mos-20221231_g3.jpg](mos-20221231_g3.jpg)

We account for approximately 12% of estimated global annual phosphate production. We also account for approximately 14% of estimated global annual potash production.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

*Phosphates Segment*–We sell phosphate-based crop nutrients and animal feed ingredients throughout North America and internationally. We account for approximately 69% of estimated North American annual production of concentrated phosphate crop nutrients.

*Potash Segment*–We sell potash throughout North America and internationally, principally as fertilizer, but also for use in industrial applications and, to a lesser degree, as animal feed ingredients. We account for approximately 35% of estimated North American annual potash production.

*Mosaic Fertilizantes Segment*–We produce and sell phosphate- and potash-based crop nutrients, and animal feed ingredients, in Brazil. In addition to five phosphate rock mines, four chemical plants and a potash mine in Brazil, this segment consists of sales offices, crop nutrient blending and bagging facilities, port terminals and warehouses in Brazil and Paraguay. The Mosaic Fertilizantes segment also serves as a distribution outlet for our Phosphates and Potash segments. We account for approximately 72% of estimated annual production of concentrated phosphate crop nutrients in Brazil and 93% of estimated annual potash production in Brazil.

As used in this report:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• "***Mosaic***" or "***Company***" means The Mosaic Company;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• "***we****,*" "***us****,*" and "***our***" refer to Mosaic and its direct and indirect subsidiaries, individually or in any combination;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• "***Cargill***" means Cargill, Incorporated and its direct and indirect subsidiaries, individually or in any combination;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• "***Cargill Crop Nutrition***" means the crop nutrient business we acquired from Cargill in the Combination;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• "***Combination***" means the October 22, 2004 combination of IMC and Cargill Crop Nutrition; and

statements as to our industry position reflect information from the most recent period available.

***Business Developments during 2022***

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*•* In the first quarter of 2022, our Board of Directors approved the establishment of a new $1.0 billion share repurchase authorization, which was completed in the second quarter of 2022. Our Board of Directors authorized an additional $2.0 billion share repurchase program in the third quarter of 2022.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• During 2022, we repurchased 30,810,173 shares of Common Stock in the open market for approximately $1.7 billion. This includes 7,056,229 shares we purchased under an accelerated share repurchase agreement in 2022.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• In the first quarter of 2022, our Board of Directors approved a regular dividend increase to $0.60 per share annually from $0.45, beginning with the second quarter of 2022. In the fourth quarter of 2022, our Board of Directors increased the dividend to $0.80 per share annually, beginning with the dividend declared on December 16, 2022.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• In November 2022, we paid the outstanding balance of $550 million on our 3.25% senior notes, due November 15, 2022, without premium or penalty.

On January 12, 2023, we completed the sale of the Streamsong Resort<sup>®</sup> (the "***Resort***") and approximately 7,000 acres of land on which it sits for a purchase price of $160 million. The Resort is a destination resort and conference center, which we developed in an area of previously mined land as part of our long-term business strategy to maximize the value and utility of our extensive land holdings in Florida. In addition to a hotel and conference center, the Resort includes multiple golf courses, a clubhouse and ancillary facilities.

Subsequent to year end, our Board of Directors approved an accelerated share repurchase ("***ASR***") of $300 million which is expected to be initiated in the first quarter of 2023. Also, in February 2023, the Board of Directors approved a special dividend of $0.25 per share to be distributed in March, 2023 to our stockholders of record as of March 15, 2023.

We have included additional information about these and other developments in our business during 2022 in our Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations ("***Management's Analysis***") and in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Throughout the discussion below, we measure units of production, sales and raw materials in metric tonnes, which are the equivalent of 2,205 pounds, or 1.102 tons (U.S. standard), unless we specifically state that we mean short or long ton(s), which are the equivalent of 2,000 pounds and 2,240 pounds, respectively. In addition, we measure natural gas, a raw material

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

used in the production of our products, in MM BTU, which stands for one million British Thermal Units ("***BTU***"). One BTU is equivalent to 1.06 Joules.

Information concerning our mining properties in this Annual Report on Form 10-K has been prepared in accordance with Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K ("***S-K 1300***"). S-K 1300 requires us to disclose our mineral resources, in addition to our mineral reserves, as of the end of our most recently completed fiscal year, both in the aggregate and for each of our individually material mining properties. We have four material properties: Belle Plaine, Esterhazy, Florida and Tapira. See Item 2. "Properties," for further information regarding mineral reserves and resource and discussion of our material mining properties.

This report includes market share and industry data and forecasts that we obtained from publicly available information and industry publications, surveys, market research, internal company surveys and consultant surveys. We believe these sources to be reliable, but there can be no assurance as to the accuracy and completeness of such information. We have not independently verified the data from third-party sources, nor have we ascertained the underlying economic assumptions relied upon therein. Similarly, internal company surveys, industry forecasts and market research, which we believe to be reliable based upon management's knowledge of the industry, have not been verified by any independent sources.

**BUSINESS SEGMENT INFORMATION**

The discussion below of our business segment operations should be read in conjunction with the following information that we have included in this report:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• The risk factors discussed in this report in Part I, Item 1A, "Risk Factors".

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Our Management's Analysis.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• The financial statements and supplementary financial information in our Consolidated Financial Statements ("***Consolidated Financial Statements***").

This information is incorporated by reference into this section from Part II, Item 8, "Financial Statements and Supplementary Data".

**Phosphates Segment**

Our Phosphates business segment owns and operates mines and production facilities in Florida which produce concentrated phosphate crop nutrients and phosphate-based animal feed ingredients, and processing plants in Louisiana which produce concentrated phosphate crop nutrients. We have a 75% economic interest in the Miski Mayo Phosphate Mine in Peru ("***Miski Mayo Mine***"), which is included in the results of our Phosphates segment.

The following map shows the locations of each of our phosphate concentrates plants in the U.S. and each of our active, temporarily idled, and planned phosphate mine locations, including beneficiation plants, in Florida. The reserves associated with our Ona, Florida location have been allocated to other active mines based on our future mining plans:

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

![mos-20221231_g4.jpg](mos-20221231_g4.jpg)

***U.S. Phosphate Crop Nutrients and Animal Feed Ingredients***

Our U.S. Phosphate operations have capacity to produce approximately 4.5 million tonnes of phosphoric acid ("***P2O5***") per year, or about 7% of world annual capacity and about 60% of North American annual capacity. P2O5 is produced by reacting finely ground phosphate rock with sulfuric acid. P2O5 is the key building block for the production of high analysis or concentrated phosphate crop nutrients and animal feed products and is the most comprehensive measure of phosphate capacity and production and a commonly used benchmark in our industry. Our U.S. P2O5 production totaled approximately 3.0 million tonnes during 2022. Our U.S. operations account for approximately 7% of estimated global annual production and 50% of estimated North American annual output.

Our phosphate crop nutrient products are marketed worldwide to crop nutrient manufacturers, distributors, retailers and farmers. Our principal phosphate crop nutrient products are:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• **Diammonium Phosphate (18-46-0):** Diammonium Phosphate ("***DAP***") is the most widely used high-analysis phosphate crop nutrient worldwide. DAP is produced by first combining phosphoric acid with anhydrous ammonia in a reaction vessel. This initial reaction creates a slurry that is then pumped into a granulation plant where it is reacted with additional ammonia to produce DAP. DAP is a solid granular product that is applied directly or blended with other solid plant nutrient products, such as urea and potash.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• **Monoammonium Phosphate (11-52-0):** Monoammonium Phosphate ("***MAP***") is the second most widely used high-analysis phosphate crop nutrient and the fastest growing phosphate product worldwide. MAP is also produced by first combining phosphoric acid with anhydrous ammonia in a reaction vessel. The resulting slurry is then pumped into the granulation plant where it is reacted with additional P2O5 to produce MAP. MAP is a solid granular product that is applied directly or blended with other solid plant nutrient products.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• **MicroEssentials**<sup>®</sup> is a value-added ammoniated phosphate product that is enhanced through a patented process that creates very thin platelets of sulfur and other micronutrients, such as zinc, on the granulated product. The patented process incorporates both the sulfate and elemental forms of sulfur, providing season-long availability to crops.

Production of our animal feed ingredients products is located at our New Wales, Florida facility. We market our feed phosphate primarily under the leading brand names of Biofos<sup>®</sup> and Nexfos<sup>®</sup>.

Annual capacity by plant as of December 31, 2022 and production volumes by plant for 2022 are listed below:

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| *(tonnes in millions)* | **Phosphoric Acid** | **Phosphoric Acid** | **Processed Phosphate**<sup>(a)</sup>**/DAP/MAP/ MicroEssentials**<sup>®</sup>**/Feed Phosphate** | **Processed Phosphate**<sup>(a)</sup>**/DAP/MAP/ MicroEssentials**<sup>®</sup>**/Feed Phosphate** |
|  | **Operational Capacity**<sup>(b)</sup> |  | **Operational Capacity**<sup>(b)</sup> |  |
| **Facility** | **Operational Capacity**<sup>(b)</sup> | **Production**<sup>(c)</sup> | **Operational Capacity**<sup>(b)</sup> | **Production**<sup>(c)</sup> |
| **Florida:** |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Bartow | 1.1 | 0.8 | 2.5 | 1.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;New Wales | 1.7 | 1.1 | 4.0 | 2.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Riverview | 0.9 | 0.6 | 1.8 | 1.3 |
|  | 3.7 | 2.5 | 8.3 | 5.6 |
| **Louisiana:** |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Faustina |  |  | 1.6 | 1.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Uncle Sam | 0.8 | 0.5 |  |  |
|  | 0.8 | 0.5 | 1.6 | 1.1 |
| **Total** | 4.5 | 3.0 | 9.9 | 6.7 |

---

**______________________________**

(a)Our ability to produce processed phosphates has been less than our annual operational capacity stated in the table above, except to the extent we purchase P2O5. Factors affecting actual production are described in note (c) below.

(b)Operational capacity is our estimated long-term capacity based on an average amount of scheduled down time, including maintenance and scheduled turnaround time, and product mix, and no significant modifications to operating conditions, equipment or facilities.

(c)Actual production varies from annual operational capacity shown in the above table due to factors that include, among others, the level of demand for our products, maintenance and turnaround time, accidents, mechanical failure, product mix, and other operating conditions.

The P2O5 produced at Uncle Sam is shipped to Faustina, where it is used to produce DAP, MAP and MicroEssentials<sup>®.</sup> Our Faustina plant also manufactures ammonia that is mostly consumed in our concentrate plants.

We produced approximately 6.3 million tonnes of concentrated phosphate crop nutrients during 2022 and accounted for approximately 69% of estimated North American annual production.

***Phosphate Rock***

Phosphate rock is the key mineral used to produce phosphate crop nutrients and feed phosphate. Our Florida phosphate rock mines produced approximately 10.5 million tonnes in 2022 and accounted for approximately 47% of estimated North American annual production. We are the world's second largest miner of phosphate rock (excluding China) and currently operate four mines in North America with a combined annual capacity of approximately 18.0 million tonnes. Additionally, we own 75% of the Miski Mayo Mine, which has an annual capacity of 4.0 million tonnes. Production of one tonne of DAP requires between 1.6 and 1.7 tonnes of phosphate rock.

All of our wholly-owned phosphate mines and related mining operations in North America are located in central Florida. During 2022, we operated three active mines in Florida: Four Corners, South Fort Meade and Wingate. We plan to explore and develop the DeSoto property and the South Pasture property, which was previously idled, to offset future depletion at our Florida properties. We have a 75% economic interest in the Miski Mayo Mine, which allows us to supplement our other produced rock to meet our overall fertilizer production needs and is the primary source of rock for our Louisiana operations. We have the right to use or sell to third parties 75% of the Miski Mayo Mine's annual production.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

See Item 2. "Properties" for a discussion of our phosphate mining properties, including processing methods, facilities, production and summaries of our mineral resources and reserves, both in the aggregate and for our individual material phosphate mining properties.

***Investment in Ma'aden Wa'ad Al Shamal Phosphate Company ("MWSPC"***)

We own a 25% interest in MWSPC and, in connection with our equity share, we are entitled to market approximately 25% of MWSPC's production. MWSPC consists of a mine and two chemical complexes (the "***Project***") that produce phosphate fertilizers and other downstream phosphates products in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The greenfield project was built in the northern region of Saudi Arabia at Wa'ad Al Shamal Minerals Industrial City and included further expansion of processing plants in Ras Al Khair Minerals Industrial City, which is located on the east coast of Saudi Arabia. Ammonia operations commenced in late 2016 and on December 1, 2018, MWSPC commenced commercial operations of the phosphate plant, thereby bringing the entire project to the commercial production phase. Phosphate production will ramp-up until it reaches an expected 3.0 million tonnes in annual production capacity. Actual phosphate production was 2.6 million tonnes in 2022. The Project benefits from the availability of key raw nutrients from sources within Saudi Arabia.

***Sulfur***

We use molten sulfur at our phosphates concentrates plants to produce sulfuric acid, primarily for use in our production of P2O5. We purchased approximately 3.4 million long tons of sulfur during 2022. We purchase the majority of this sulfur from North American oil and natural gas refiners who are required to remove or recover sulfur during the refining process. Production of one tonne of DAP requires approximately 0.40 long tons of sulfur. We procure our sulfur from multiple sources and receive it by truck, rail, barge and vessel, either directly at our phosphate plants or have it sent for gathering to terminals that are located on the U.S. gulf coast. In addition, we use formed sulfur received through Tampa, Florida ports, which are delivered by truck to our New Wales facility and melted through our sulfur melter.

We own and operate a sulfur terminal in Riverview, Florida. We also lease terminal space in Tampa, Florida and Galveston and Beaumont, Texas. We have long-term time charters on two ocean-going tugs/barges and one ocean-going vessel that transports molten sulfur from the Texas terminals to Tampa. We then further transport by truck to our Florida phosphate plants. In addition, we own Gulf Sulphur Services Ltd., LLLP ("***Gulf Sulphur Services***"), which operates a sulfur transportation and terminaling business in the Gulf of Mexico, and handles these functions for a substantial portion of our Florida sulfur volume. Our sulfur logistic assets also include a large fleet of leased railcars that supplement our marine sulfur logistic system. Our Louisiana operations are served by truck from nearby refineries.

Although sulfur is readily available from many different suppliers and can be transported to our phosphate facilities by a variety of means, sulfur is an important raw material used in our business that has in the past been, and may in the future, be the subject of volatile pricing and availability. Alternative transportation and terminaling facilities might not have sufficient capacity to fully serve all of our facilities in the event of a disruption to current transportation or terminaling facilities. Changes in the price of sulfur or disruptions to sulfur transportation or terminaling facilities could have a material impact on our business. We have included a discussion of sulfur prices in our Management's Analysis.

***Ammonia***

We use ammonia together with P2O5 to produce DAP, MAP and MicroEssentials<sup>®.</sup> We consumed approximately 1.0 million tonnes of ammonia during 2022. Production of one tonne of DAP requires approximately 0.23 tonnes of ammonia. We purchase approximately one-third of our ammonia from various suppliers in the spot market with the remaining two-thirds either purchased through our ammonia supply agreement (the "***CF Ammonia Supply Agreement***") with an affiliate of CF Industries Inc. ("***CF***") or produced internally at our Faustina, Louisiana location.

Our Florida ammonia needs are currently supplied under multi-year contracts with both domestic and offshore producers. Ammonia for our Bartow and Riverview plants is terminaled through owned ammonia facilities at the Port of Tampa and Port Sutton, Florida. Ammonia for our New Wales plant is terminaled through another ammonia facility owned and operated by a third party at Port Sutton, Florida pursuant to an agreement that provides for service through 2022, with automatic renewal for an additional two-year period unless either party terminates, as provided in the agreement. Ammonia is transported by pipeline from the terminals to our production facilities. We have service agreements with the operators of the pipelines for Bartow, New Wales and Riverview, which provide service through June 30, 2023 with annual auto-renewal provisions unless either party objects.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

Under the CF Ammonia Supply Agreement, we purchased 580,000 metric tonnes in 2022. On October 14, 2022, we received notice from CF to exercise the bilateral, contractual right to end the ammonia supply agreement in its current form, effective January 1, 2025. We are confident that we will continue to have adequate sources of supply for ammonia at competitive pricing, including from CF. We expect a majority of the ammonia purchased under the CF Ammonia Supply Agreement to be received by barge at the Port of Tampa and delivered to our Florida facilities as described in the preceding paragraph.

We produce ammonia at Faustina, Louisiana primarily for our own consumption. Our annual capacity is approximately 530,000 tonnes. From time to time, we sell surplus ammonia to unrelated parties and/or may transport surplus ammonia to the Port of Tampa. In addition, under certain circumstances we are permitted to receive ammonia at Faustina under the CF Ammonia Supply Agreement.

Although ammonia is readily available from many different suppliers and can be transported to our Phosphate facilities by a variety of means, ammonia is an important raw material used in our business that has in the past been, and may in the future be, the subject of volatile pricing. In addition, alternative transportation and terminaling facilities might not have sufficient capacity to fully serve all of our facilities in the event of a disruption to existing transportation or terminaling facilities. Changes in the price of ammonia or disruptions to ammonia transportation or terminaling could have a material impact on our business. We have included a discussion of ammonia prices in our Management's Analysis.

***Natural Gas for Phosphates***

Natural gas is the primary raw material used to manufacture ammonia. At our Faustina facility, ammonia is manufactured on site. The majority of natural gas is purchased through firm delivery contracts based on published index-based prices and is sourced from Texas and Louisiana via pipelines interconnected to the Henry Hub. We use over-the-counter swap and/or option contracts to forward price portions of future natural gas purchases. We typically purchase approximately 11.4 million MM BTU of natural gas per year for use in ammonia production at Faustina.

Our ammonia requirements for our Florida operations are purchased rather than manufactured on site. Therefore, while we typically purchase approximately 2.7 million MM BTU of natural gas per year in Florida, it is only used as a thermal fuel for various phosphate production processes.

***Florida Land Holdings***

We are a significant landowner in the State of Florida, which has in the past been considered one of the fastest areas of population growth in the U.S. We own land comprising over 351,000 acres held in fee simple title in central Florida and have the right to mine additional properties which contain phosphate rock reserves. Some of our land holdings are needed to operate our Phosphates business, while a portion of our land assets, such as certain reclaimed properties, are no longer required for our ongoing operations. As a general matter, more of our reclaimed property becomes available for uses other than for phosphate operations each year. Our real property assets are generally comprised of concentrates plants, port facilities, phosphate mines and other property which we have acquired through our presence in Florida. Our long-term future land use strategy is to optimize the value of our land assets. For example, we developed Streamsong Resort<sup>®</sup> (the "***Resort***"), a destination resort and conference center, in an area of previously mined land as part of our long-term business strategy to maximize the value and utility of our extensive land holdings in Florida. In addition to a hotel and conference center, the Resort includes multiple golf courses, a clubhouse and ancillary facilities. On January 12, 2023, we completed the sale of the Resort and approximately 7,000 acres of land on which it sits to Lone Windmill LLC, a subsidiary of Kemper Sports Management LLC, for a purchase price of $160 million. See Note 27, Subsequent Events, in the accompanying consolidated financial statements for further information.

**Potash Segment**

We are one of the leading potash producers in the world. We mine and process potash in Canada and the U.S. and sell potash in North America and internationally. The term "potash" applies generally to the common salts of potassium. Muriate of potash ("***MOP***") is the primary source of potassium for the crop nutrient industry. Red MOP has traces of iron oxide. The granular and standard grade red MOP products are well suited for direct fertilizer application and bulk blending. White MOP has a higher percent potassium oxide ("***K2O***"). White MOP, besides being well suited for the agricultural market, is used in many industrial applications. We also produce a double sulfate of potash magnesia product, which we market under our brand name K-Mag<sup>®</sup>, at our Carlsbad, New Mexico facility.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

Our potash products are marketed worldwide to crop nutrient manufacturers, distributors and retailers and are also used in the manufacturing of mixed crop nutrients and, to a lesser extent, in animal feed ingredients. We also sell potash to customers for industrial use. In addition, our potash products are used for de-icing and as a water softener regenerant.

In 2022, we operated three potash mines in Canada, including two shaft mines and one solution mine, as well as one potash shaft mine in the U.S.. In 2022, the decommissioning of the K1 and K2 shafts at our Esterhazy, Saskatchewan mine was completed after their shutdown in the second quarter of 2021. Capacity and production from these shafts was replaced by the K3 expansion. In the third quarter of 2021, we restarted the Colonsay, Saskatchewan mine to meet market demand for potash.

Mosaic leases approximately 291,500 acres of mineral rights from the government of Saskatchewan, and approximately 99,700 acres of freehold mineral rights in the Kronau/Regina area, which have not been developed.

We pay Canadian resource taxes consisting of the Potash Production Tax and resource surcharge. The Potash Production Tax is a Saskatchewan provincial tax on potash production and consists of a base payment and a profits tax. We also pay a percentage of the value of resource sales from our Saskatchewan mines. In addition to the Canadian resource taxes, royalties are payable to the mineral owners in respect of potash reserves or production of potash. We have included a further discussion of the Canadian resource taxes and royalties in our Management's Analysis.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

The map below shows the location of each of our potash properties:

![mos-20221231_g5.jpg](mos-20221231_g5.jpg)

Our North American potash annualized operational capacity totals 11.2 million tonnes of product per year and accounts for approximately 14% of world annual capacity and 34% of North American annual capacity. Production during 2022 totaled 9.0 million tonnes. We account for approximately 14% of estimated world annual production and 35% of estimated North American annual production.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

The following table shows, for each of our potash mines, annual capacity as of December 31, 2022 and finished product output for 2022:

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| *(tonnes in millions)* |  |  |  |
| **Facility** | **Annualized**<br>**Proven**<br>**Peaking**<br>**Capacity**<br><sup>(a)(c)(d)</sup> | **Annual**<br>**Operational**<br>**Capacity**<br><sup>(a)(b)(d)(e)</sup> | **Finished**<br>**Product**<sup>(b)</sup> |
| **Canada** |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Belle Plaine—MOP | 3.9 | 3.0 | 2.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Colonsay—MOP <sup>(f)</sup> | 2.6 | 1.5 | 0.9 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Esterhazy—MOP<sup>(g)</sup> | 6.3 | 6.0 | 4.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Canadian Total | 12.8 | 10.5 | 8.4 |
| **United States** |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Carlsbad—K-Mag<sup>®(h)</sup> | 0.9 | 0.7 | 0.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;United States Total | 0.9 | 0.7 | 0.6 |
| **Totals** | 13.7 | 11.2 | 9.0 |

---

**______________________________**

(a)Finished product.

(b)Actual production varies from annual operational capacity shown in the above table due to factors that include, among others, the level of demand for our products, maintenance and turnaround time, the quality of the reserves and the nature of the geologic formations we are mining at any particular time, accidents, mechanical failure, product mix, and other operating conditions.

(c)Represents full capacity assuming no turnaround or maintenance time.

(d)The annualized proven peaking capacity shown above is the capacity currently used to determine our share of Canpotex, Limited ("***Canpotex***") sales. Canpotex members' respective shares of Canpotex sales are based upon the members' respective proven peaking capacities for producing potash. When a Canpotex member expands its production capacity, the new capacity is added to that member's proven peaking capacity based on a proving run at the maximum production level. Alternatively, Canpotex members may elect to rely on an independent engineering firm and approved protocols to calculate their proven peaking capacity. The annual operational capacity reported in the table above can exceed the annualized proven peaking capacity until the proving run has been completed. Our entitlement percentage of Canpotex is 36.2%.

(e)Annual operational capacity is our estimated long-term potash capacity based on the quality of reserves and the nature of the geologic formations expected to be mined, milled and/or processed over the long term, average amount of scheduled down time, including maintenance and scheduled turnaround time, and product mix, and no significant modifications to operating conditions, equipment or facilities. Operational capacities will continue to be updated to the extent new production results impact ore grades assumptions.

(f)We have the ability to reach an annual operating capacity of 2.1 million tonnes over time by increasing our staffing levels and investment in mine development activities. Our Colonsay mine operates as a swing mine to meet market demands.

(g)In June, 2021, we permanently ceased operations at the K1 and K2 mine shafts. The annual operational capacity of Esterhazy has remained consistent following the K1 and K2 closures as capacity from the K3 mine shafts has replaced K1 and K2.

(h)K-Mag<sup>®</sup> is a specialty product that we produce at our Carlsbad facility.

See Item 2, "Properties" for a discussion of our potash mining properties, including processing methods, facilities, production and summaries of our mineral resources and reserves, both in the aggregate and for our individual material potash mining properties.

***Natural Gas***

Natural gas is used at our Belle Plaine solution mine as a fuel to produce steam and to dry potash products. The steam is used to generate electricity and provide thermal energy to the evaporation, crystallization and solution mining processes. The Belle Plaine solution mine typically accounts for approximately 80% of our Potash segment's total natural gas requirements for potash production. At our shaft mines, natural gas is used as a fuel to heat fresh air supplied to the shaft mines and for drying potash products. Combined natural gas usage for both the solution and shaft mines totaled 17.7 million MM BTU during 2022. We purchase our natural gas requirements on firm delivery index price-based physical contracts and on short-term spot-priced physical contracts. Our Canadian operations purchase physical natural gas from companies in Alberta and Saskatchewan using AECO price indices references and transport the gas to our plants via the TransGas pipeline system. The U.S. potash operation in New Mexico purchases physical gas in the southwest respective regional market using the El Paso

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

San Juan Basin market pricing reference. We use financial derivative contracts to manage the pricing on portions of our natural gas requirements.

**Mosaic Fertilizantes Segment**

Our Mosaic Fertilizantes segment owns and operates mines, chemical plants, crop nutrient blending and bagging facilities, port terminals and warehouses in Brazil and Paraguay, which produce and sell concentrated phosphates crop nutrients, phosphate-based animal feed ingredients and potash fertilizer. The following map shows the locations of our operations in Brazil and Paraguay:

![mos-20221231_g6.jpg](mos-20221231_g6.jpg)

We are the largest producer and one of the largest distributors of blended crop nutrients for agricultural use in Brazil. We produce and sell phosphate- and potash-based crop nutrients, and animal feed ingredients through our operations. Our operations in Brazil include five phosphate mines, four chemical plants and a potash mine. We own and operate ten blending plants in Brazil and one blending plant and port in Paraguay. In addition, we lease several other warehouses and blending units depending on sales and production levels. We also have a 62% ownership interest in Fospar, S.A. ("***Fospar***"). Fospar owns and operates an SSP (defined below) granulation plant, which produces approximately 0.5 million tonnes of SSP per year, and a deep-water port and throughput warehouse terminal facility in Paranagua, Brazil. The port facility at Paranagua handles approximately 3.6 million tonnes of imported crop nutrients. In 2022, Mosaic Fertilizantes sold approximately 9.4 million tonnes of crop nutrient products and accounted for approximately 22% of fertilizer shipments in Brazil.

We have the capability to annually produce approximately 4.5 million tonnes of phosphate- and potash-based crop nutrients and animal feed ingredients. Crop nutrient products produced are marketed to crop nutrient manufacturers, distributors, retailers and farmers.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

In addition to producing crop nutrients, Mosaic Fertilizantes purchases phosphates, potash and nitrogen products which are either used to produce blended crop nutrients ("***Blends***") or for resale. In 2022, Mosaic Fertilizantes purchased 1.5 million tonnes of phosphate-based products, primarily MicroEssentials<sup>®</sup>, from our Phosphates segment, and 2.3 million tonnes of potash products from our Potash segment and Canpotex.

***Phosphate Crop Nutrients and Animal Feed Ingredients***

Our Brazilian phosphates operations have capacity to produce approximately 1.1 million tonnes of P2O5 per year, or about 70% of Brazilian annual capacity. Phosphoric acid is produced by reacting ground phosphate rock with sulfuric acid. P2O5 is the key building block for the production of high analysis or concentrated phosphate crop nutrients and animal feed products and is the most comprehensive measure of phosphate capacity and production and a commonly used benchmark in our industry. Our Brazilian P2O5 production totaled approximately 1.0 million tonnes in 2022 and accounted for approximately 99% of Brazilian annual output.

Our principal phosphate crop nutrient products are:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**• Monoammonium Phosphate (11-52-0) (**"***MAP***"**):** MAP is a crop nutrient composed of two macronutrients, nitrogen and phosphoric acid. This slurry is added inside a rotary drum type granulator with ammonia to complete the neutralization reaction and produce MAP.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**• Triple superphosphate (**"***TSP***"**):** TSP is a highly concentrated phosphate crop nutrient. TSP is produced from the phosphate rock reaction with phosphoric acid in a kuhlmann type reactor. The process for the production of TSP in Brazil is run of pile where the product undergoes a curing process of approximately seven days for later granulation.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**• Single superphosphate (**"***SSP***"**):** SSP is a crop nutrient with a low concentration of phosphorus that is used in agriculture because of the sulfur content in its formulation. SSP is produced from mixing phosphate rock with sulfuric acid in a kuhlmann or malaxador type reactor. After the reaction, the product goes to the curing process and then feeds the granulation units.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**• Dicalcium phosphate (**"***DCP***"**):** Dicalcium phosphate is produced by the reaction of desulphurized phosphoric acid with limestone. At Uberaba, it is produced from the reaction of concentrated phosphoric acid with limestone slurry. At Cajati the phosphoric acid is diluted with dry limestone. The reaction of the DCP occurs in a kuhlmann or spinden type reactor.

Our primary mines and chemical plants are located in the states of Minas Gerais, São Paulo, and Goias. Production of our animal feed ingredients products is located at our Uberaba, Minas Gerais and Cajati, São Paulo facilities. We market our feed phosphate primarily under the brand name Foscálcio.

Annual capacity and production volume by plant as of December 31, 2022 are listed below:

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| *(tonnes of ore in millions)* | ***Phosphoric Acid*** | ***Phosphoric Acid*** | ***Processed Phosphate***<sup>(a)</sup> ***(MAP/TSP/SSP/DCP/Feed)*** | ***Processed Phosphate***<sup>(a)</sup> ***(MAP/TSP/SSP/DCP/Feed)*** |
| **Facility** | **Capacity**<sup>(b)</sup> | **Production**<sup>(c)</sup> | **Capacity**<sup>(b)</sup> | **Production**<sup>(c)</sup> |
| ***Phosphate*** |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Uberaba | 0.9 | 0.9 | 2.0 | 1.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Cajati | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.5 | 0.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Araxá |  |  | 1.1 | 0.9 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Catalão |  |  | 0.4 | 0.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Total** | 1.1 | 1.0 | 4.0 | 3.2 |

---

**______________________________**

(a)Our ability to produce processed phosphates has been less than our annual operational capacity as stated in the table above, except to the extent we purchase phosphoric acid. Factors affecting actual production are described in note (c) below.

(b)The annual production capacity was calculated using the hourly capacity, days stopped for annual maintenance and OEE (historical utilization factor and capacity factor).

(c)Actual production varies from annual operational capacity shown in the table above due to factors that include, among others, the level of demand for our products, maintenance and turnaround time, accidents and mechanical failure.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

The phosphoric acid produced at Cajati is used to produce DCP. The phosphoric acid produced at Uberaba is used to produce MAP, TSP and DCP.

We produced approximately 2.8 million tonnes of concentrated phosphate crop nutrients during 2022 which accounted for approximately 49% of estimated Brazilian annual production.

***Phosphate Rock***

Phosphate rock is the key mineral used to produce phosphate crop nutrients and animal feed product. Our phosphate rock production in Brazil totaled approximately 4.0 million tonnes in 2022, which accounted for approximately 79% of estimated Brazilian annual production. We are the largest producer of phosphate rock in Brazil and currently operate five properties with a combined annual capacity of approximately 4.6 million tonnes. Production of one tonne of MAP requires 1.6 to 1.7 tonnes of phosphate rock. Production of one tonne of SSP requires between 0.6 to 0.7 tonnes of phosphate rock. Production of one tonne of TSP requires 1.4 tonnes of phosphate rock.

During 2022, we operated five properties; Araxá, Patrocínio and Tapira, in the state of Minas Gerais; Catalão, in the state of Goiás; and Cajati, in the state of São Paulo.

See Item 2, "Properties" for a discussion of our Brazilian mining properties, including processing methods, facilities, production and summaries of our mineral resources and reserves, both in the aggregate and for our individually material Brazilian properties.

We are required to pay royalties to mineral owners and resource taxes to the Brazilian government for phosphate and potash production. The resource taxes, known as Compensação Financeira pela Exploração de Recursos Minerais or CFEM*,* are regulated by the National Mining Agency. In 2022, we paid royalties and resource taxes of approximately $18.0 million.

***Sulfur***

We use molten sulfur at our phosphates concentrates plants to produce sulfuric acid, one of the key components used in the production of phosphoric acid. We consumed approximately 1.2 million long tons of sulfur for our own production during 2022. We purchase approximately 13% of the volume under annual supply agreements from oil and natural gas refiners, who are required to remove or recover sulfur during the refining process. The remaining 87% is purchased in the spot market. Sulfur is imported through the Tiplam port and transported by rail to the Uberaba plant and by truck to the Araxá and Cajati locations.

Although sulfur is readily available from many different suppliers and can be transported to our phosphate facilities by a variety of means, sulfur is an important raw material used in our business that has in the past been, and could in the future be, subject to volatile pricing and availability. Alternative transportation and terminaling facilities might not have sufficient capacity to fully serve all of our facilities in the event of a disruption to current transportation or terminaling facilities. Changes in the price of sulfur or disruptions to sulfur transportation or terminaling facilities could have a material impact on our business.

***Ammonia***

We use ammonia, together with phosphoric acid, to produce MAP, and to a lesser extent for SSP production. We consumed approximately 137,495 tonnes of ammonia during 2022. Production of one tonne of MAP requires approximately 0.137 tonnes of ammonia. We purchase all of our ammonia under a long-term supply agreement with two suppliers. Ammonia is imported through the Tiplam port and transported by truck to Uberaba, Araxá and Catalão.

We own approximately 1% of the Tiplam terminal in Santos, São Paulo. Our ownership percentage, along with a contractual agreement, guarantee us unloading priority for ammonia and also provide us unloading capacity for rock, sulfur and crop nutrients.

Although ammonia is readily available from many different suppliers and can be transported to our phosphates facilities by a variety of means, ammonia is an important raw material used in our business that has in the past been, and in the future could be, subject to volatile pricing. Alternative transportation and terminaling facilities might not have sufficient capacity to fully serve all of our facilities in the event of a disruption to existing transportation or terminaling facilities. Changes in the price of ammonia or disruptions to ammonia transportation or terminaling could have a material impact on our business.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

***Brazilian Potash***

We conduct potash operations through the leased Taquari-Vassouras shaft mine, which is the only potash mine in Brazil, located in Rosário do Catete in the Brazilian state of Sergipe. We also own a related refinery at the site. We produce and sell potash product domestically. MOP is the primary source of potassium for the crop nutrient industry in Brazil. Red MOP has traces of iron oxide. The granular and standard grade red MOP products are well-suited for direct fertilizer application and bulk blending. Our potash product is marketed in Brazil to crop nutrient manufacturers, distributors and retailers and is also used in the manufacturing of crop nutrients.

In 2022, we paid royalties of approximately $11.4 million related to the leasing of potash assets and mining rights for Taquari.

***Land Holdings***

Mosaic Fertilizantes owns the surface rights of certain rural lands comprising over 34,000 hectares (84,000 acres) in the States of São Paulo, Minas Gerais, Goiás, Paraná, Mato Grosso, Santa Catarina, Bahia and Sergipe, and has the right to mine additional properties which contain phosphate rock or potash reserves. Most of our land holdings are needed to operate our phosphate and potash production and fertilizer distribution businesses. A portion of our land assets may no longer be required for our current operations and may be leased to third parties, for agricultural or other purposes, or may be set aside for mineral or environmental conservation. Our real property assets are generally comprised of concentrates plants, port facilities and phosphate and potash mines, crop nutrient blending and bagging facilities and other properties which we have acquired through our presence in Brazil.

**India and China Distribution Businesses**

Our China and India distribution businesses market phosphate-, potash- and nitrogen-based crop nutrients and provide other ancillary services to wholesalers, cooperatives, independent retailers, and farmers in the Asia-Pacific regions. These operations provide our Phosphates and Potash segments access to key markets outside of North and South America and serve as a marketing agent for our Phosphates segment. In 2022, the India and China operations purchased 523,110 tonnes of phosphate-based products from our Phosphates segment and MWSPC, and 1,344,926 tonnes of potash products from our Potash segment and Canpotex. They also purchase phosphates, potash and nitrogen products from unrelated third parties, which we either use to produce blended crop nutrients or for resale.

In China, we own two 300,000-tonne per year capacity blending plants. In 2022, we sold approximately 230,000 tonnes of Blends and distributed another 825,000 tonnes of phosphate and potash crop nutrients in China.

In India, we have distribution facilities to import and sell crop nutrients. In 2022, we distributed approximately 535,000 tonnes of phosphate and potash crop nutrient products in India.

**SALES AND DISTRIBUTION ACTIVITIES**

***United States and Canada***

We have a U.S. and Canada sales and marketing team that serves our business segments. We sell to wholesale distributors, retail chains, cooperatives, independent retailers and national accounts.

Customer service and the ability to effectively minimize the overall supply chain costs are key competitive factors in the crop nutrient and animal feed ingredients businesses. In addition to our production facilities, to service the needs of our customers, we own or have contractual throughput or other arrangements at strategically located distribution warehouses along or near the Mississippi and Ohio Rivers, as well as in other key agricultural regions of the U.S. and Canada. From these facilities, we distribute Mosaic-produced phosphate and potash products for customers who in turn resell the product into the distribution channel or directly to farmers in the U.S. and Canada.

We own port facilities in Tampa, Florida which have deep water berth capabilities providing access to the Gulf of Mexico. We also own warehouse distribution facilities in: Rosemount, Minnesota; Pekin, Illinois; and Henderson, Kentucky. In 2022, we sold our warehouse facility in Savage, Minnesota.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

In addition to the facilities that we own, our U.S. distribution operations also include leased distribution space or contractual throughput agreements in other key geographical areas including California, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas and Wisconsin.

Our Canadian customers include independent dealers and national accounts. We also lease or own warehouse facilities in Saskatchewan, Ontario, Quebec and Manitoba in Canada.

***International***

Outside of the U.S. and Canada, we market our Phosphates segment's products through our Mosaic Fertilizantes segment and our China and India distribution businesses, as well as a salesforce focused on geographies outside of North America. The countries that account for the largest amount of our phosphates sales outside the U.S., by volume, are Brazil, Canada, Argentina and Mexico.

Our sales of potash products outside of the U.S. and Canada are made through Canpotex. Canpotex sales are allocated among its members based on peaking capacity. In 2022, our entitlement percentage of Canpotex was 36.2%.

Our potash exports from Carlsbad are sold through our own sales force. We also market our Potash segment's products through our Mosaic Fertilizantes segment and our China and India distribution businesses, which acquire potash primarily through Canpotex. The countries that account for the largest amount of international potash sales, by volume, are Brazil, China, Indonesia, India and Malaysia.

To service the needs of our customers, our Mosaic Fertilizantes segment includes a network of strategically located sales offices, crop nutrient blending and bagging facilities, port terminals and warehouse distribution facilities that we own and operate. The blending and bagging facilities primarily produce Blends from phosphate, potash and nitrogen. The average product mix in our Blends (by volume) contains approximately 24% nitrogen, 51% phosphate and 25% potash, although this mix differs based on seasonal and other factors. All of our production in Brazil is consumed within the country.

Our India and China distribution businesses also includes a network of strategically located sales offices, crop nutrient blending and bagging facilities, port terminals and warehouse distribution facilities. These businesses serve primarily as a sales outlet for our North American phosphates production, as well as additional phosphate production we market from our MWSPC joint venture, both for resale and as an input for Blends. Our Potash segment also has historically furnished the majority of the raw materials needs for the production of Blends, primarily via Canpotex, and is expected to continue to do so in the future.

***Other Products***

With a strong brand position in a multi-billion dollar animal feed ingredients global market, our Phosphates segment supplies animal feed ingredients for poultry and livestock to customers in North America, Latin America and Asia. Our potash sales to non-agricultural users are primarily to large industrial accounts and the animal feed industry. Additionally, in North America, we sell potash for de-icing and as a water softener regenerant. In Brazil, we also sell phosphogypsum.

**COMPETITION**

Because crop nutrients are global commodities available from numerous sources, crop nutrition companies compete primarily on the basis of delivered price. Other competitive factors include product quality, cost and availability of raw materials, customer service, plant efficiency and availability of product. As a result, markets for our products are highly competitive. We compete with a broad range of domestic and international producers, including farmer cooperatives, subsidiaries of larger companies, and independent crop nutrient companies. Foreign competitors may have access to less expensive raw materials, may not have to comply with as stringent regulatory requirements or are owned or subsidized by governments and, as a result, may have cost advantages over North American companies. We believe that our extensive North American and international production and distribution system provides us with a competitive advantage by allowing us to achieve economies of scale, transportation and storage efficiencies, and obtain market intelligence. Also, we believe our performance products, such as MicroEssentials<sup>®</sup>, provide us a competitive advantage with customers in North and South America.

Unlike many of our competitors, we have our own distribution system to sell phosphate- and potash-based crop nutrients and animal feed ingredients, whether produced by us or by other third parties, around the globe. In North America, we have one of the largest and most strategically located distribution systems for crop nutrients, including warehouse facilities in key

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

agricultural regions. We also have an extensive network of distribution facilities internationally, including in the key growth regions of South America and Asia, with port terminals, warehouses, and blending plants in Brazil, Paraguay, China, and India. Our global presence allows us to efficiently serve customers in approximately 40 countries.

***Phosphates Segment***

Our Phosphates segment operates in a highly competitive global market. Among the competitors in the global phosphate industry are domestic and foreign companies, as well as foreign government-supported producers in Asia and North Africa. Phosphate producers compete primarily based on price, as well as product quality, service and innovation. Major integrated producers of feed phosphates are located in the U.S., Europe and China. Many smaller producers are located in emerging markets around the world. Many of these smaller producers are not miners of phosphate rock or manufacturers of phosphoric acid and are required to purchase this material on the open market.

We believe that we are a low-cost integrated producer of phosphate-based crop nutrients, due in part to our scale, vertical integration and strategic network of production and distribution facilities. As the world's second largest producer of concentrated phosphates, as well as the second largest miner of phosphate rock in the world and the largest in the U.S., we maintain an advantage over some competitors as the scale of operations effectively reduces production costs per unit. We are also vertically integrated to captively supply one of our key inputs, phosphate rock, to our phosphate production facilities. We believe that our position as an integrated producer of phosphate rock provides us with a significant cost advantage over competitors that are non-integrated phosphate producers. In addition, our ownership in the Miski Mayo Mine allows us to supplement our overall phosphate rock needs. We also sell approximately 25% of Miski Mayo Mine production to third parties. MWSPC enables us to not only further diversify our sources of phosphates but also improve our access to key agricultural countries in Asia and the Middle East.

We produce ammonia at our Faustina, Louisiana concentrates plant in quantities sufficient to meet approximately one third of our total ammonia needs in North America. We do not have ammonia production capacity within Florida to serve our Florida operations, but we have capacity to supply a portion of our requirements by transporting produced ammonia from Louisiana to Florida. We purchase additional ammonia from world markets and thus are subject to significant volatility in our purchase price of ammonia. The CF Ammonia Supply Agreement provides us with a supply of a substantial volume of ammonia at prices based on the price of natural gas.

With our dedicated sulfur transportation barges and tugs, and our ownership interest in Gulf Sulphur Services, we are also well-positioned to source an adequate, flexible and cost-effective supply of sulfur, our third key input, to our Florida and Louisiana phosphate production facilities. We believe that our investments in sulfur logistical and melting assets continue to afford us a competitive advantage compared to other producers in cost and access to sulfur.

With facilities in both central Florida and Louisiana, we are logistically well positioned to fulfill our material needs at very competitive prices. Those multiple production points also afford us the flexibility to optimally balance supply and demand.

***Potash Segment***

Potash is a commodity available from several geographical regions around the world and, consequently, the market is highly competitive. Through our participation in Canpotex, we compete outside of North America against various independent and state-owned potash producers. Canpotex has substantial expertise and logistical resources for the international distribution of potash, including strategically located export assets in Portland, Oregon, St. John, New Brunswick and Vancouver, British Columbia. Our principal methods of competition with respect to the sale of potash include product pricing and offering consistent, high-quality products and superior service. We believe that our potash cost structure is competitive in the industry and should improve as we continue to complete our potash expansion projects.

***Mosaic Fertilizantes***

The Mosaic Fertilizantes segment operates in a highly competitive market in Brazil. We compete with a broad range of domestic and international producers, including farmer cooperatives, subsidiaries of larger companies, and independent crop nutrient companies. We believe that having a vertically integrated business, internationally but also in Brazil, provides us with a competitive advantage by allowing us to achieve economies of scale, transportation and storage efficiencies, and obtain market intelligence.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

Mosaic Fertilizantes has a wide variety of customers including farmers, blenders, and other local distributors. We compete with local businesses that offer a wide variety of products that are available from many sources. We believe the strategic location of our mines and chemical plants, in close proximity to our customers, and the benefit of our own distribution network, gives us an advantage over most of our competitors. The vertical integration of our wholly-owned production, along with our distribution network, as well as our focus on product innovation and customer solutions, position us with an advantage over many of our competitors. We have a strong brand in Brazil. In addition to having access to our own production, our distribution activities have the capability to supply a wide variety of crop nutrients to our dealer and farmer customer base.

**FACTORS AFFECTING DEMAND**

Our results of operations historically have reflected the effects of several external factors which are beyond our control and have in the past produced significant downward and upward swings in operating results. Revenues are highly dependent upon conditions in the agriculture industry and can be affected by, among other factors: crop conditions; changes in agricultural production practices; worldwide economic conditions, including the increasing world population, household incomes, and demand for more protein-rich food, particularly in developing regions such as China, India and Latin America; changing demand for biofuels; variability in commodity pricing; governmental policies; the level of inventories in the crop nutrient distribution channels; customer expectations regarding farmer economics, future crop nutrient prices and availability, and transportation costs, among other matters; market trends in raw material costs; market prices for crop nutrients; and weather. Furthermore, our crop nutrients business is seasonal to the extent farmers and agricultural enterprises in the markets in which we compete purchase more crop nutrient products during the spring and fall. The international scope of our business, spanning the northern and southern hemispheres, reduces to some extent the seasonal impact on our business. The degree of seasonality of our business can change significantly from year to year due to conditions in the agricultural industry and other factors. The seasonal nature of our businesses requires significant working capital for inventory in advance of the planting seasons.

We sell products throughout the world. Unfavorable changes in trade protection laws, policies and measures, government policies and other regulatory requirements affecting trade; unexpected changes in tax and trade treaties; and strengthening or weakening of foreign economies as well as political relations with the U.S. may cause sales trends to customers in one or more foreign countries to differ from sales trends in the U.S.

Our international operations are subject to risks from changes in foreign currencies, or government policy, which can affect local farmer economics.

**OTHER MATTERS**

***Employees***

We had 13,570 employees as of December 31, 2022, consisting of approximately 9,868 salaried and 3,702 hourly employees. There are also approximately 198 salaried and 493 hourly employees at the Miski Mayo Mine, of which we own 75% and its results are consolidated within our results of operations.

***Labor Relations***

As of December 31, 2022:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• We had ten collective bargaining agreements with unions covering certain hourly employees in the U.S. and Canada. Of these employees, approximately 5% are covered under agreements that expire in 2023. All are expected to collectively bargain for new contracts in 2023.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• We had agreements with 35 unions covering all employees in Brazil. More than one agreement may govern our relations with each of these unions. In general, the agreements are renewable on an annual basis.

Failure to renew any of our union agreements could result in a strike or labor stoppage that could have a material adverse effect on our operations. However, we have not experienced a significant work stoppage in many years and historically have had good labor relations.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

***Information Available on our Website***

Our Annual Report Form on 10-K **(**"***Form 10-K***"***)***, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q **(**"***Form 10-Q***"**)**, Current Reports on Form 8-K ("***Form 8-K***"), and amendments thereto, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("***SEC***") pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the rules and regulations thereunder are made available free of charge on our website (www.mosaicco.com) as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the SEC. These reports are also available on the SEC's website (www.sec.gov). The information contained on our website and the SEC's website is not being incorporated in this report.

**HUMAN CAPITAL**

Our employees are the foundation of our Company. Our 13,570 colleagues embody Mosaic's core values of innovation, collaboration, drive and responsibility, and are the key to enabling us to execute our mission to help the world grow the food it needs.

As of December 31, 2022, our regular employee base was made up of the following:

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Country** | **Male** | **Female** | **Total** |
| Brazil | 5710 | 1174 | 6884 |
| United States | 3206 | 603 | 3809 |
| Canada | 1630 | 288 | 1918 |
| Peru | 623 | 68 | 691 |
| China | 103 | 48 | 151 |
| India | 58 | 8 | 66 |
| Paraguay | 37 | 13 | 50 |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 |  | 1 |
| Total | 11368 | 2202 | 13570 |

---

Mosaic is committed to the well-being and development of our employees by creating and cultivating an innovative and collaborative workplace that welcomes, values and respects diversity of people, thoughts, and perspectives; a workplace free of discrimination and intolerant of bias. As part of Mosaic's strategic priorities, we are committed to prioritizing our internal culture and external partnerships to meet our commitments to our employees and stakeholders and to be an employer of choice for generations to come.

*Employee Health and Safety*–safety is non-negotiable. We strive for zero harm to people and zero environmental incidents. Through the implementation of the Mosaic Management System, we have established a structured approach to effectively manage and control risk for the safety and well-being of our colleagues, the environment and our stockholders. The management system defines processes that help support a safe work environment and establish a continuous improvement cycle to adjust for changing conditions and identified risks.

*Global Worker Wellness*–extending beyond safety, our wellness programs seek to improve the well-being of our employees – and their families – in the areas of physical and psychological health, and financial security. These programs include health screenings, insurance plans, psychological health training and mental health resources, as well as our Environmental, Health and Safety (*"****EHS****"*) Risk Reduction Program, various trainings and flexible schedules.

*Development*–Mosaic believes in continually investing in people and their lifelong learning. Mosaic holds training events throughout the year across all of our locations, and hosts an online education platform, GrowingU, which all employees are encouraged to access. Mosaic offers companywide educational reimbursement programs to help employees in each of our operating companies acquire new skills and capabilities to better meet their job responsibilities and provide for future career opportunities within the Company. Mosaic supports membership in numerous professional associations and encourages participation in work-related external networking groups.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• In 2022, Mosaic continued its pilot programs to help employees gain the knowledge and skills that we believe will be necessary for the next evolution of our business. Like any company, Mosaic experiences turnover and the need to

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

replace talent related to retirement and succession. Mosaic seeks to minimize unwanted turnover through its talent review, succession management, performance management, and compensation processes. For certain roles critical to our operations, such as engineering, operations, and employee health and safety professionals, we maintain specific talent programs, internal development strategies, and recruitment pipelines.

*Community*–Mosaic is a thoughtful and engaged neighbor who invests carefully and generously through long-term partnerships with organizations that are making a difference. We are proud to support organizations and initiatives that create growth and leave a lasting impact in our communities in three main focus areas: food, water and local community. Each year, we invest an average of $15 million. In addition to philanthropic grants and sponsorships of local programs, we also support and facilitate volunteerism by our employees. Similarly, we participate on local committees and associations focused on contributing to the vitality of the people and communities around us.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• 2022 was the second year of the Mosaic Employee Giving Program (the"Program") that provides employees with flexibility to connect their personal causes to corporate giving, matching and volunteerism opportunities. The Program aligns to Mosaic's strategic priorities, our 2025 Environmental, Social and Governance performance targets, and companywide 2030 global diversity and inclusion goals. Employees can take advantage of Company matching funds through financial contributions, volunteering on personal time, or both - In North America this can be up to $2,000 annually. Our 2030 diversity and inclusion target for community investment provides intentional focus to support underserved or underrepresented populations in regions where we operate.

*Diversity, Inclusion and Equal Opportunities*–in 2022, Mosaic's Diversity and Inclusion Program engaged in several initiatives to advance Mosaic's commitments to our employees and stakeholders, increase accountability and promote a more diverse and inclusive environment. Initiatives included establishing a governance structure that will provide for increased global visibility, and improved efficiencies and collaboration in identifying, developing and executing strategies to increase diversity and inclusion. We announced global 2030 diversity goals and are driving accountability into the business units by establishing business-level initiatives and programs to address opportunities to progress toward the goals. We also established our first executive-led Employee Inclusion Networks to create community and allyship, develop awareness and enhance workforce engagement.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• In 2022, Mosaic continued to evolve and build upon foundational learning by driving conscious inclusion education deeper into the organization and providing an enhanced, self-directed learning platform to our leaders. We refocused our recruitment efforts on creating a more diverse talent pipeline, partnering with a U.S.-based public historically black college to create an immersive internship program; and identifying additional opportunities to attract and retain diverse talent. Additional information about our human capital, including our diversity and inclusion goals for 2030, is available in the sustainability report posted on our website. The information contained on our website is not being incorporated in this report.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Pay equity is fundamental to our compensation philosophy and our commitment to diversity and inclusion. Mosaic annually evaluates pay equity and compensation practices to ensure fair and equitable treatment of employees based on our pay-for-performance framework. In 2022, Mosaic retained an independent consultant to assist with our pay equity analysis across our global operations and to help us enhance our internal capabilities to annually assess pay disparities. The results revealed 19 outliers without adequate business justifications. Mosaic intends to address each of the instances during our 2023 compensation cycle. Pay equity will be reviewed internally every year and we expect to conduct external independent reviews every three years.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

**INFORMATION ABOUT OUR EXECUTIVE OFFICERS** 

Information regarding our executive officers as of February 23, 2023 is set forth below:

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **Name** | **Age** | **Position** |
| Philip E. Bauer | 50 | Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary |
| Bruce M. Bodine Jr. | 51 | Senior Vice President - North America |
| Clint C. Freeland | 54 | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
| Christopher A. Lewis | 60 | Senior Vice President - Human Resources |
| James "Joc" C. O'Rourke | 62 | Chief Executive Officer, President and Director |
| Benjamin J. Pratt | 56 | Senior Vice President - Government and Public Affairs |
| Walter F. Precourt III | 58 | Senior Vice President - Strategy and Growth |
| Corrine D. Ricard | 59 | Senior Vice President - Mosaic Fertilizantes |
| Karen A. Swager | 52 | Senior Vice President - Supply Chain |
| Yijun ("Jenny") Wang | 55 | Senior Vice President - Global Strategic Marketing, Head of China and India |

---

*Philip E. Bauer.* Mr. Bauer was promoted to Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary in January 2023. Since joining Mosaic in 2007, Mr. Bauer has managed legal support for business development activities, potash operations, offshore finance, commercial transactions and corporate governance. Most recently, he was the Vice President—Growth and Development where he helped drive strategic vision across the organization. Prior to Mosaic, he was a partner at an international law firm where he focused his practice on mergers and acquisitions, public and private securities offerings and public company compliance matters, as well as general business advising. Mr. Bauer earned his Juris Doctor degree from The George Washington University Law School in Washington D.C., his Bachelor of Science in Foreign Service with honors from Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service where he majored in international politics, and his Master of Business Administration from the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University.

*Bruce M. Bodine Jr.* Mr. Bodine was named Senior Vice President - North America effective April 1, 2020. From January 1, 2019 until his appointment as Senior Vice President - North America, Mr. Bodine served as our Senior Vice President - Phosphates and also provided executive oversight for the corporate procurement organization. Prior to that, he served as Senior Vice President - Potash (from June 2016 to December 31, 2018); as Vice President - Potash (from April to May 2016); as Vice President - Supply Chain (from August 2015 to March 2016); as Vice President - Operations Business Development (from October 2014 to August 2015); as Vice President - Operations for our Esterhazy and Colonsay potash production facilities (from July 2013 to October 2014); as the General Manager, Esterhazy (from September 2012 to June 2013); and as the General Manager, Four Corners (from March 2010 to August 2012). Before that, Mr. Bodine held various plant and mine development management positions in the Phosphates segment beginning with Mosaic's formation in 2004. Mr. Bodine serves as a director of MVM Resources International, B.V., the general partner of Compañia Minera Miski Mayo S.R.L., the joint venture that operates the mines in Peru.

*Clint C. Freeland.* Mr. Freeland was named Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer in June 2018. Prior to joining Mosaic, Mr. Freeland served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Dynegy Inc. from July 2011 until Dynegy's merger with Vistra Energy Corp. in April 2018. Mr. Freeland was responsible for Dynegy's financial affairs, including finance and accounting, treasury, tax and banking and credit agency relationships. In November 2011, as part of a reorganization of its subsidiaries, certain of Dynegy's affiliates filed voluntary petitions for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code (the "***Code***") and, in July 2012, Dynegy filed a voluntary petition for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Code. Dynegy emerged from bankruptcy in October 2012. Prior to joining Dynegy, Mr. Freeland served as Senior Vice President, Strategy & Financial Structure of NRG Energy, Inc ("***NRG***"). from February 2009 to July 2011. Mr. Freeland served as NRG's Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer from February 2008 to February 2009 and its Vice President and Treasurer from April 2006 to February 2008. Prior to joining NRG, Mr. Freeland held various key financial roles within the energy sector.

*Christopher A. Lewis.* Mr. Lewis was named Senior Vice President - Human Resources in June 2019. Prior to joining Mosaic, Mr. Lewis held the role of Vice President, Project Execution for Spectra Energy Corporation's merger into Calgary, Alberta, Canada-based Enbridge, Inc. where he led construction of the company's energy assets throughout North America, as well as a synergy capture program post acquisition. Prior to that role, Mr. Lewis held roles at DCP Midstream, LLC

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

("**DCP**"), a natural gas company based in Denver, Colorado where he started as the head of Human Resources while the company was formed as a spin-off from Duke Energy in 2007. From 2010 to 2016, he was DCP's Chief Corporate Officer, a multi-functional role that included leadership of the human resources function. Earlier in his career, Mr. Lewis held regional and global senior human resources positions at Thomson Multimedia (formerly RCA, GE consumer electronics) and DHL, Inc.

*James* "*Joc*" *C. O'Rourke.* Mr. O'Rourke was promoted to President and Chief Executive Officer effective in August 2015. Previously, he served as Executive Vice President - Operations and Chief Operating Officer since August 2012 and before that as Executive Vice President - Operations since January 2009. Prior to joining Mosaic, Mr. O'Rourke was President, Australia Pacific for Barrick Gold Corporation, the largest gold producer in Australia, since May 2006, where he was responsible for the Australia Pacific Business Unit, consisting of ten gold and copper mines in Australia and Papua, New Guinea. Before that, Mr. O'Rourke was Executive General Manager and Managing Director of Placer Dome Asia Pacific Ltd., the second largest gold producer in Australia, from December 2004, where he was responsible for the Australia Business Unit, consisting of five gold and copper mines; and General Manager of Western Australia Operations for Iluka Resources Ltd., the world's largest zircon and second largest titanium producer, from September 2003, where he was responsible for six mining and concentrating operations and two mineral separation/synthetic rutile refineries. Mr. O'Rourke had previously held various management, engineering and other roles in the mining industry in Canada and Australia since 1984. Mr. O'Rourke has served on our Board of Directors since May 2015 and is also a director of The Toro Company.

*Benjamin J. Pratt.* Ben Pratt was named Senior Vice President - Government and Public Affairs in April 2020. Previously, Mr. Pratt held the position of Vice President - Corporate Public Affairs, leading corporate communications and U.S. Federal Government relations, as well as Mosaic's corporate social responsibility activities. Mr. Pratt serves on several community and business boards, including the Streamsong Resort<sup>®</sup> Advisory Board and the boards of directors of The Florida Aquarium, the Tampa Bay Economic Development Council and the Tampa Bay Partnership. Prior to joining Mosaic in February 2012, Mr. Pratt was Senior Vice President, Corporate Communications at Ameriprise Financial, Inc., in Minneapolis. Earlier in his career, he worked in a variety of communications and investor relations capacities at The PNC Financial Services Group in Pittsburgh, and at Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns, both in New York.

*Walter F. Precourt III.* Mr. Precourt was named Senior Vice President - Strategy and Growth effective January 1, 2019. From June 2016 through March 2020 he also provided executive oversight for the EHS organization. He previously served as Senior Vice President - Phosphates and provided executive oversight for the corporate procurement organization from June 2016 until January 1, 2019, as Senior Vice President - Potash Operations from May 2012 to June 2016, and before that he led the Environment, Health and Safety organization since joining Mosaic in 2009. Prior to joining Mosaic, Mr. Precourt was employed by cement and mineral component producer Holcim (U.S.) where he initially led its safety transformation and later became Vice President of Environment and Government Affairs. Mr. Precourt started his career at The Dow Chemical Company where he served in a variety of roles in Operations, Technology, Capital Project Management, and Environmental, Health and Safety. Mr. Precourt served as a director and was the past Chairman of the Board of the Saskatchewan Potash Producers Association and was a director of Fertilizer Canada.

*Corrine D. Ricard.* Ms. Ricard was appointed Senior Vice President - Mosaic Fertilizantes effective November 15, 2019. Prior to that she served as Senior Vice President - Commercial since February 2017, Senior Vice President - Human Resources from April 2012 to February 2017, and before that she held a number of other leadership positions at Mosaic, including Vice President - International Distribution, Vice President - Business Development and Vice President - Supply Chain. Prior to Mosaic's formation, Ms. Ricard worked for Cargill in various roles, including risk management, supply chain and commodity trading.

*Karen A. Swager.* Ms. Swager was named Senior Vice President - Supply Chain effective April 1, 2020, and also provides executive oversite for the Procurement and corporate EHS teams. From January 1, 2019 until her appointment as Senior Vice President - Supply Chain, she served as Senior Vice President - Potash. Previously, Ms. Swager held leadership positions at Mosaic, including Vice President - Minerals, Vice President - Mining Operations and General Manager in our Phosphates business. She also led the mine planning and strategy group for the Phosphates business.

*Yijun (*"*Jenny*"*) Wang.* Ms. Wang was named Senior Vice President - Global Strategic Marketing, Head of China and India effective January 1, 2022. From October 15, 2020 until her current appointment, Ms. Wang served as Vice President - Global Strategic Marketing. Prior to October 2020, Ms. Wang served as Vice President - Global Product Management and International Distribution and before May 2019, Ms. Wang served as Country Head for China. Ms. Wang has served on the Board of Directors at Canpotex.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

Our executive officers are generally elected to serve until their respective successors are elected and qualified or until their earlier death, resignation or removal. No "family relationships," as that term is defined in Item 401(d) of Regulation S-K, exist among any of the listed officers or between any such officer and any member of our board of directors.

**Item 1A. Risk Factors.**

*Our business, financial condition or results of operations could be materially adversely affected by any of the risks and uncertainties described below.*

**<u>Operational Risks</u>**

**Our operating results are highly dependent upon and fluctuate based upon business and economic conditions and governmental policies affecting the agricultural industry in which we or our customers operate. These factors are outside of our control and may significantly affect our profitability.**

The most important of these factors are:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• weather and field conditions (particularly during periods of traditionally high crop nutrients application);

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• quantities of crop nutrients imported and exported;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• current and projected inventories and prices, which are heavily influenced by U.S. exports and world-wide markets; and

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• governmental policies, including farm and biofuel policies, which may directly or indirectly influence the number of acres planted, the level of inventories, the mix of crops planted or crop prices or otherwise negatively affect our operating results.

International market conditions and the success of our countervailing duty petitions, which are also outside of our control, may also significantly influence our operating results. The international market for crop nutrients is influenced by such factors as the relative value of the U.S. dollar and its impact upon the cost of importing crop nutrients, foreign agricultural policies, including subsidy policies, the existence of, or changes in, import or foreign currency exchange barriers in certain foreign markets, changes in the hard currency demands of certain countries and other regulatory policies of foreign governments, as well as the laws and policies of the U.S. affecting foreign trade and investment, including use of tariffs. In 2020, we filed petitions with the DOC and ITC that requested the initiation of countervailing duty investigations into imports of phosphate fertilizers from Morocco and Russia. The purpose of the petitions was to remedy the distortions that we believe foreign subsidies have caused or are causing in the U.S. market for phosphate fertilizers, and thereby restore fair competition. During the first quarter of 2021, the DOC made final affirmative determinations that countervailable subsidies were being provided by the Russian and Moroccan governments and the ITC made final affirmative determinations that the U.S. phosphate fertilizer industry is materially injured by reason of subsidized phosphate fertilizer imports from Morocco and Russia. As a result of these determinations, the DOC issued countervailing duty orders on phosphate fertilizer imports from Russia and Morocco, which are scheduled to remain in place for at least five years. Currently, the cash deposit rates for such imports are approximately 20 percent for Moroccan producer OCP, 9 percent and 47 percent for Russian producers PhosAgro and Eurochem, respectively, and 17 percent for all other Russian producers. The final determinations in the DOC and ITC investigations are subject to possible challenges before U.S. federal courts and the World Trade Organization, and Mosaic has initiated actions at the U.S. Court of International Trade contesting certain aspects of the DOC's final determinations that, we believe, failed to capture the full extent of Moroccan and Russian phosphate fertilizer subsidies. Moroccan and Russian producers have also initiated U.S. Court of International Trade actions, seeking lower cash deposit rates and revocation of the countervailing duty orders. Further, the cash deposit rates and the amount of countervailing duties owed by importers on such imports could change based on the results of the DOC's annual administrative review proceedings. If the final determinations are challenged and subsequently reversed, the results could have an adverse effect on our business, and/or our financial condition or operating results.

**The Covid-19 pandemic may materially adversely affect our business operations and financial condition.**

The Covid-19 pandemic continues to impact the global economy and could significantly disrupt our operations, key suppliers or third-party logistics providers, customers and ultimate end-users due to the spread of the virus, shelter in place orders, quarantines or other measures implemented to prevent the spread of the virus. In some instances, the pandemic has impacted our business. Our businesses have been impacted by short-term labor shortages due to illness and transportation issues such

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

as trucking delays and port congestion which are slowing delivery of inputs to facilities and products to end customers. At this time, the Company has only experienced limited adverse financial and operational Covid-19 related conditions.

Other effects of the Covid-19 pandemic that are not currently foreseeable could materially increase our costs, negatively impact our revenue and/or adversely impact our results of operations and liquidity, possibly to a significant degree. We cannot predict the severity or duration of any such impacts. The Covid-19 pandemic could also have the effect of heightening many of the other risks described in this Item 1A of this Form 10-K.

**Unfavorable worldwide economic and market conditions could adversely affect our business, financial condition or operating results.** 

Economic and market conditions, including inflation, supply chain challenges, high interest rates and foreign exchange volatility, have and may continue to have an impact on our business. Our production costs have also increased due to higher prices for raw materials, including purchased nitrogen, sulfur and ammonia, as well as supply chain challenges, including increased costs and delays caused by transportation and labor shortages. These adverse economic events have adversely affected, and may continue to adversely affect our operating results.

**Our crop nutrient business is seasonal and varies based on application rates, which may result in carrying significant amounts of inventory and seasonal variations in working capital, and our inability to predict future seasonal crop nutrient demand accurately may result in excess inventory or product shortages.**

The use of crop nutrients is seasonal and varies based on application rates. Farmers tend to apply crop nutrients during two short application periods, the strongest one in the spring, before planting, and the other in the fall, after harvest. As a result, the strongest demand for our products typically occurs during the spring planting season, with a second period of strong demand following the fall harvest. In contrast, we and other crop nutrient producers generally produce our products throughout the year. As a result, we and/or our customers generally build inventories during the low demand periods of the year in order to provide timely product availability during the peak sales seasons. The seasonality of crop nutrient demand results in our sales volumes and net sales typically being the highest during the North American spring season and our working capital requirements typically being the highest just prior to the start of the spring season. Our quarterly financial results can vary significantly from one year to the next due to weather-related shifts in planting schedules and purchasing patterns.

If seasonal demand exceeds our projections, we will not have enough product and our customers may acquire products from our competitors, which would negatively impact our profitability. If seasonal demand is less than we expect, we will have excess inventory and higher working capital and liquidity requirements. The degree of seasonality of our business can change significantly from year to year due to conditions in the agricultural industry and other factors.

**Changes in transportation costs can affect our sales volumes and selling prices.**

The cost of delivery is a significant factor in the total cost to customers and farmers of crop nutrients. As a result, changes in transportation costs, or in customer expectations about them, can affect our sales volumes and prices.

**A disruption to our production, distribution or terminaling facilities could have a material adverse impact on our business. The risk of material disruption increases when demand for our products results in high operating rates at our facilities.**

We conduct our operations through a limited number of key production, distribution and terminaling facilities. These facilities include our phosphate mines and concentrates plants; our potash mines; and the ports and other distribution facilities through which we, Canpotex and the other joint ventures in which we participate, conduct our respective businesses, as well as other commercial arrangements with unrelated third parties. Any disruption of operations at any one of these facilities has the possibility of significantly negatively affecting our production or our ability to distribute our products.

Examples of the types of events that could result in a disruption at one of these facilities include: adverse weather; strikes or other work stoppages; civil unrest; deliberate, malicious acts, including acts of terrorism and armed conflict; political or economic instability; cyberattacks; changes in permitting, financial assurance or certain environmental, health and safety laws or other changes in the regulatory environment in which we operate; legal and regulatory proceedings; our relationships with the other member of Canpotex and the other joint ventures in which we participate and their or our exit from participation in such joint ventures; other changes in our commercial arrangements with unrelated third parties; brine inflows at our

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

Esterhazy, Saskatchewan mine or our other shaft mines; mechanical failure and accidents or other failures occurring in the course of operating activities, including at our gypstacks, clay settling areas and tailing dams; accidents occurring in the course of operating activities; lack of truck, rail, barge or ship transportation; and other factors.

**Reduced oil refinery operating rates in North America could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition or operating results.**

Reduced oil refinery operating rates in the U.S. and Canada could result in decreased availability of molten sulfur, which could increase costs of sulfur procurement or decrease availability of sulfur needed in our phosphate fertilizer production operations. We have not yet become subject to such results in the sulfur procurement markets, if it becomes necessary to procure sulfur at higher costs, and if we are unable to pass those costs on in our product prices, or if we are unable to procure sulfur at volumes necessary for our operations, such events could have a material adverse effect on our phosphate business, and/or our financial condition or operating results.

**Key inputs for the production of our finished goods, including fertilizer, sulfur and ammonia, and energy used in our businesses in the past have been and may in the future be the subject of volatile pricing and availability. Changes in the price or availability of these key inputs for production of finished goods have had, and could again have, a material adverse impact on our businesses.**

Fertilizer is a key input for production of our finished goods. Natural gas, ammonia and sulfur are key raw materials used in the manufacture of phosphate crop nutrient products. Natural gas is used as both a chemical feedstock and a fuel to produce anhydrous ammonia, which is a raw material used in the production of concentrated phosphate products. Natural gas is also a significant energy source used in the potash solution mining process. From time to time, our profitability has been and may in the future be adversely impacted by the price and availability of these key inputs and other energy costs. For example, the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine and the related sanctions have led, and may continue to lead, to disruption and instability in global markets, supply chains and volatile pricing and availability of these key inputs and raw materials. Because most of our products are commodities, there can be no assurance that we will be able to pass through increased costs to our customers. A significant increase in the price of fertilizer, natural gas, ammonia, sulfur or energy costs that is not recovered through an increase in the price of our related crop nutrients products could have a material adverse impact on our business. In addition, under an ammonia supply agreement with CF, we have agreed to purchase approximately 545,000 to 725,000 tonnes of ammonia per year at a price to be determined by a formula based on the prevailing price of U.S. natural gas. If the price of natural gas rises or the market price for ammonia falls outside of the range anticipated at execution of this agreement, we may not realize a cost benefit from the natural gas-based pricing over the term of the agreement, or the cost of our ammonia under the agreement could become a competitive disadvantage. At times, we have paid considerably more for ammonia under the agreement than what we would have paid had we purchased it in the spot market. On October 14, 2022, we received notice from CF to exercise the bilateral, contractual right to end the ammonia supply agreement in its current form, effective January 1, 2025. The contract allows for either party to exercise rights on certain dates through 2032 that can result in changes to terms and conditions.

**We are subject to risks associated with our international sales and operations, which could negatively affect our sales to customers in foreign countries as well as our operations and assets in foreign countries. Some of these factors may also make it less attractive to distribute cash generated by our operations outside the U.S. to our stockholders, or to utilize cash generated by our operations in one country to fund our operations or repayments of indebtedness in another country or to support other corporate purposes.**

For 2022, we derived approximately 75% of our net sales from customers located outside of the U.S. As a result, we are subject to numerous risks and uncertainties relating to international sales and operations, including:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• difficulties and costs associated with complying with a wide variety of complex laws, treaties and regulations;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• unexpected changes in regulatory environments;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• increased government ownership and regulation of the economy in the countries we serve;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• political and economic instability, including the possibility for terrorism, armed conflict, civil unrest, inflation and adverse economic conditions resulting from governmental attempts to reduce inflation, such as imposition of higher interest rates and wage and price controls;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• unpredictable tax audit practices of various governments;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• nationalization of properties by foreign governments;

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• the imposition of tariffs, exchange controls, trade barriers or other restrictions, or government-imposed increases in the cost of resources and materials necessary for the conduct of our operations or the completion of strategic initiatives, including with respect to our joint ventures; and

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• currency exchange rate fluctuations between the U.S. dollar and foreign currencies, particularly the Brazilian real and the Canadian dollar.

The occurrence of any of the above in the countries in which we operate or elsewhere could jeopardize or affect our ability to transact business there and could adversely affect our revenues and operating results and the value of our assets located outside of the U.S.

In addition, tax regulations and tax audit practices, currency exchange controls and other restrictions may also make it economically unattractive to:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• distribute cash generated by our operations outside the U.S. to our stockholders; or

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• utilize cash generated by our operations in one country to fund our operations or repayments of indebtedness in another country or to support other corporate purposes.

**Our assets outside of North America are located in countries with volatile conditions, which could subject us and our assets to significant risks.**

We are a global business with substantial assets located outside of the U.S. and Canada. Our operations in Brazil, China, India and Paraguay are fundamental to our business. We have a majority interest in the joint venture entity operating the Miski Mayo Mine that supplies phosphate rock to us. We also have a minority joint venture investment in MWSPC, which operates a mine and chemical complexes that produce phosphate fertilizers and other downstream products in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Volatile economic, market and political conditions may have a negative impact on our operations, operating results and financial condition. In addition, unfavorable changes in trade protection laws, policies and measures, or governmental actions and policies and other regulatory requirements affecting trade and the pricing and sourcing of our raw materials, may also have a negative impact on our operations, operating results and financial condition.

Natural resource extraction is an important part of the economy in Peru, and, in the past, there have been protests against other natural resource operations in Peru. There remain numerous social conflicts that exist within the natural resource sector in Peru. As a result, there is potential for active protests against natural resource extraction companies. If the Government of Peru's proactive efforts to address the social and environmental issues surrounding natural resource activities are not successful, protests could extend to or impact the Miski Mayo Mine and adversely affect our interest in the Miski Mayo joint venture or the supply of phosphate rock to us from the mine.

**Adverse weather conditions, including the impact of hurricanes, and excess heat, cold, snow, rainfall and drought, have in the past, and may in the future, adversely affect our operations, and result in increased costs, decreased sales or production and potential liabilities.**

Adverse weather conditions, including the impact of hurricanes and excess heat, cold, snow, rainfall and drought, have in the past and may in the future adversely affect our operations, particularly our Phosphates business. In the past, hurricanes have resulted in physical damage to our facilities in Florida and Louisiana.

Additionally, water treatment costs tend to increase significantly following excess rainfall from hurricanes or other adverse weather. Some of our Florida and Louisiana facilities have had, and others could have, high water levels that have required, or may require, treatment. High water balances in the past at phosphate facilities in Florida also led the Florida Department of Environmental Protection ("***FDEP***") to adopt rules requiring phosphate production facilities to meet more stringent process water management objectives for phosphogypsum stack systems. In addition to the FDEP, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("***EPA***") and the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality ("***LDEQ***") also have similar requirements for water management objectives as outlined in our U.S. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ("***RCRA***") CD's.

If excess rainfall or hurricanes occur in coming years, our facilities may be required to take additional measures to manage process water to comply with existing or future requirements and these measures could potentially have a material effect on our business and financial condition.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

Adverse weather may also cause a loss of production and may disrupt our supply chain or adversely affect delivery of our products to our customers. For example, oil refineries that supply sulfur to us may suspend operations as a result of a hurricane, and incoming shipments of ammonia can be delayed, disrupting production at our Florida or Louisiana facilities and delivery of our products. In the second half of 2021, we experienced production impacts related to Hurricane Ida on our Louisiana operations. We also experienced down time and delayed shipments caused by impacts from Hurricane Ian which occurred at the end of the third quarter in 2022.

Excess rainfall and drought have in the past, and may in the future, adversely affect us. For example, in 2019 we experienced the wettest year in North America in nearly 50 years which reduced fertilizer applications by farmers. Excess rainfall also resulted in higher river levels which adversely affected delivery of our products. Drought can reduce farmers' crop yields and the uptake of phosphates and potash, reducing the need for application of additional phosphates and potash for the next planting season. Drought can also lower river levels, adversely affecting delivery of our products to our customers.

**Climate change could adversely affect us.**

The impact of climate change on our operations and those of our customers and farmers remains uncertain. Scientists have hypothesized that the impacts of climate change could include changes in rainfall patterns, water shortages, changing sea levels, changing storm patterns and intensities, and changing temperature levels and that these changes could be severe. These impacts could vary by geographic location. Severe climate change could impact our costs and operating activities, the location and cost of global grain and oilseed production, and the supply and demand for grains and oilseeds. At the present time, we cannot predict the prospective impact of climate change on our results of operations, liquidity or capital resources, or whether any such effects could be material to us.

**We do not own a controlling equity interest in our non-consolidated companies, some of which are foreign companies, and therefore our operating results and cash flow may be materially affected by how the governing boards and majority owners operate such businesses. There may also be limitations on monetary distributions from these companies that are outside of our control. Together, these factors may lower our equity earnings or cash flow from such businesses and negatively impact our results of operations.**

In 2013, we entered into an agreement to form MWSPC, a joint venture in which we hold a 25% interest, to develop a mine and chemical complexes for an estimated $8.0 billion that produces phosphate fertilizers and other downstream products in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The success of MWSPC will depend on, among other matters, the availability and affordability of necessary resources and materials and access to appropriate infrastructure, availability and affordability of transportation, operational decisions of MWSPC management, ability to operate without material disruption to the facilities, as well as the general economic and political stability of the region.

We also hold minority ownership interests in other companies that are not controlled by us. The operations and results of MWSPC will be, and the operations or results of some of the other companies are, significant to us, and their operations can affect our earnings. Because we do not control these companies either at the board or stockholder levels and because local laws in foreign jurisdictions and contractual obligations may place restrictions on monetary distributions by these companies, we cannot ensure that these companies will operate efficiently, pay dividends, or generally follow the desires of our management by virtue of our board or stockholder representation. As a result, these companies may contribute less than anticipated to our earnings and cash flow, negatively impacting our results of operations and liquidity.

**Strikes or other forms of work stoppage or slowdown could disrupt our business and lead to increased costs.**

Our financial performance is dependent on a reliable and productive work force. A significant portion of our workforce, and that of the joint ventures in which we participate, is covered by collective bargaining agreements with unions. Unsuccessful contract negotiations or adverse labor relations could result in strikes or slowdowns. Any disruption may decrease our production and sales or impose additional costs to resolve disputes. The risk of adverse labor relations may increase as our profitability increases because labor unions' expectations and demands generally rise at those times.

**Our underground potash shaft mines are subject to risks of water inflows.**

Over the past century, several potash mines experiencing water inflow problems have flooded. Since December 1985, we have had inflows of brine water into our Esterhazy, Saskatchewan K1 and K2 potash mines. Due to an acceleration of brine inflows, on June 4, 2021, the Company announced a closure of our K1 and K2 potash mine shafts. Our potash mines at Colonsay, Saskatchewan, Carlsbad, New Mexico and our Esterhazy, Saskatchewan K3 mine (though not contiguous with the

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

K1/K2 underground inflow region) are also subject to risks from the inflow of water as a result of our underground shaft mining operations. Though minor inflows are regularly managed, it is possible that significant water inflows could occur which may present risks to our employees and our operations, and which may require us to incur brine management costs, change our mining processes, or abandon our operating mines.

See the "Key Factors that can Affect Results of Operations and Financial Condition" and "Potash Net Sales and Gross Margin" sections of our Management's Analysis in this Form 10-K and the Esterhazy closure costs in Note 26 of this Form 10-K, which sections are incorporated herein by reference, for a discussion of costs, risks and other information relating to the brine inflows.

**Accidents or equipment failures occurring in the course of our operating activities could result in significant liabilities, interruptions or shutdowns of facilities or the need for significant safety or other expenditures.**

We engage in mining and industrial activities that can result in serious accidents or experience equipment failures. If our procedures are not effective, or if an accident or equipment failure were to occur, we could be subject to liabilities arising out of property damage, personal injuries or death, our operations could be interrupted and we might have to shut down or abandon affected facilities. Accidents could cause us to expend significant amounts to remediate safety issues or to repair damaged facilities and could result in significant liabilities and/or impact on the financial performance of the Company, including material adverse effects on our results of operations, liquidity or financial condition. For example:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**• Some of our facilities are subject to potential damage from seismic activity.**

The excavation of mines in some parts of the world can result in potential seismic events or can increase the likelihood or potential severity of a seismic event. Our Esterhazy mine and southern Louisiana facilities have experienced minor seismic events from time to time. A significant seismic event at one our facilities or mines could result in serious injuries or death, or damage to or flooding of operations, or damage to adjoining properties or facilities of unrelated third parties.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• **Our underground potash shaft mines are subject to risk from fire. In addition, fire at one of our underground shaft mines could halt our operations at the affected mine while we investigate the origin of the fire or for longer periods for remedial work or otherwise.**

Our underground potash shaft mines at Esterhazy and Colonsay, Saskatchewan, Carlsbad, New Mexico and Taquari-Vassouras, Brazil are subject to risk from fire. In the event of a fire, if our emergency procedures are not successful, we could have significant injuries or deaths, or shutdowns of our facilities, or could cause us to expend significant amounts to remediate safety issues or repair damaged facilities.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• **We handle significant quantities of ammonia at several of our facilities. If our safety procedures are not effective, an accident involving our ammonia operations could result in serious injuries or death, or result in the shutdown of our facilities.**

We produce ammonia at our Faustina, Louisiana phosphate concentrates plant, use ammonia in significant quantities at all of our Florida and Louisiana phosphates concentrates plants and store ammonia at some of our distribution facilities. In Florida, ammonia is received at terminals in Tampa and transported by pipelines and trucks to our facilities. We also use ammonia in our Brazil phosphate operations. Our ammonia is generally stored and transported at high pressures or cryogenically. Accidents at any of our ammonia facilities could result in serious injury or death and could adversely impact our operations.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• **We also use or produce other hazardous chemicals at some of our facilities. If our safety procedures are not effective, an accident involving these other hazardous chemicals could result in serious injuries or death, or result in the shutdown of our facilities.**

We use sulfuric acid in the production of concentrated phosphates in our Florida and Louisiana operations and our Brazil operations. We also use or produce other hazardous chemicals at some of our facilities. An accident involving any of these chemicals could result in serious injuries or death, or evacuation of areas near an accident. An accident could also result in property damage or shutdown of our facilities, or cause us to expend significant amounts to remediate safety issues or to repair damaged facilities.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

**<u>Regulatory Risks</u>**

**The environmental, health and safety regulations and requirements to which we are subject may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.**

We are subject to numerous environmental, health and safety laws and regulations in the U.S., Canada, China, Brazil and other countries in which we operate. These laws and regulations govern a wide range of matters, including environmental controls, land reclamation, discharges to air and water, remediation of hazardous substance releases and in some cases, demonstration of financial assurance. They significantly affect our operating activities as well as the level of our operating costs and capital expenditures. In some jurisdictions, environmental laws change frequently and it may be challenging for us to achieve and maintain compliance with all material environmental laws at all times. If we are not in compliance, we may be subject to enforcement or third-party claims, and may require new investment in our business. In those circumstances, our financial condition and results of operations may be materially adversely affected.

The U.S. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act ("***CERCLA***") imposes liability, including for cleanup costs, without regard to fault or to the legality of a party's conduct, on certain categories of persons, including current and former owners and operators of a site and parties who are considered to have contributed to the release of "hazardous substances" into the environment. Under CERCLA, or various U.S. state analogues, a party may, under certain circumstances, be required to bear more than its proportional share of cleanup costs at a site where it has liability if payments cannot be obtained from other responsible parties. As a crop nutrient company producing and managing chemicals, we periodically have incurred and may incur liabilities and cleanup costs, under CERCLA and other environmental laws, with regard to our current or former facilities, adjacent or nearby third-party facilities or offsite disposal locations.

**Our operations are dependent on having the required permits and approvals from governmental authorities. Denial or delay by a government agency in issuing any of our permits and approvals or imposition of restrictive conditions on us with respect to these permits and approvals may impair our business and operations.**

Our operations, including our mines, are dependent on having the required permits and approvals from governmental authorities. Denial or delay by a government agency in issuing, modifying or renewing any of our permits and approvals or imposition of restrictive or cost prohibitive conditions on us with respect to these permits and approvals may impair our business and operations and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations. For example, In Florida, local community involvement has become an increasingly important factor in the permitting process for mining companies, and various counties and other parties in Florida have in the past filed and continue to file lawsuits challenging the issuance or renewal of some of the permits we require. These actions can significantly delay issuance of the permits we need to operate or expand operations.

We have included additional discussion about permitting for our phosphate mines in Florida under "Environmental, Health, Safety and Security Matters–Operating Requirements and Impacts–Permitting" in our Management's Analysis.

**We are, and may in the future be, involved in legal and regulatory proceedings that could be material to us.**

We have in the past been, are currently and, in the future may be, subject to legal and regulatory proceedings that could be material to our business, results of operations, liquidity or financial condition. Joint ventures in which we participate could also become subject to these sorts of proceedings. These proceedings may be brought by the government or private parties and may arise out of a variety of matters, including:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Allegations that we have violated environmental, health and safety laws and regulations or that we are responsible for adversely affecting nearby properties. We are currently involved in proceedings alleging that, or to review whether, we have violated environmental laws in the U.S. and Brazil.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Allegations by private parties that our operations have resulted in personal injury, property damage or damage to business operations.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Antitrust, commercial, tax (including tax audits) and other disputes.

The legal and regulatory proceedings to which we are currently or may in the future be subject may, depending on the circumstances, result in monetary damage awards, fines, penalties, other liabilities, injunctions or other court or administrative rulings that interrupt, impede or otherwise materially affect our business operations or criminal sanctions.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

We have included additional information with respect to pending legal and regulatory proceedings in Note 23 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements and in this Form 10-K in Part I, Item 3, "Legal Proceedings".

**Environmental, health and safety and food and crop laws and regulations to which we are subject may become more stringent over time. This could increase the effects on us of these laws and regulations, and the increased effects could be materially adverse to our business, operations, liquidity and/or results of operations.**

Heightened regulation on food and crop inputs (including crop nutrients) and environmental, health and safety issues in the U.S., Canada, China, Brazil, Paraguay and other countries where we operate can be expected to result in requirements that apply to us and our operations that may be more stringent than those described elsewhere in this report. These requirements may include:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Increased levels of future investments and expenditures for environmental controls at ongoing operations, which will be charged against income from future operations; increased levels of the financial assurance requirements to which we are subject, and increased efforts or costs to obtain permits or denial of permits.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• New or interpretations of existing statutes or regulations that impose new or more stringent standards, restrictions or liabilities related to elevated levels of naturally-occurring radiation that arise on formerly mined land and other matters that could increase our expenses, capital requirements or liabilities or adversely affect our business, liquidity or financial condition.

**Environmental justice considerations could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.** 

The U.S. federal and some state governments increasingly are adopting standards or policies requiring environmental justice reviews in some permitting actions. In general, they require governmental agencies to evaluate projects for disproportionate impacts to disadvantaged or already burdened communities. If such conditions are found, they might result in a permit denial, or restrictive or cost prohibitive conditions imposed on our operations and may impair our business and operations and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

**We are subject to financial assurance requirements as part of our routine business operations. If we were unable to satisfy financial assurance requirements, we might not be able to obtain or maintain permits we need to operate our business as we have in the past. In addition, our compliance with these requirements could materially affect our business, results of operations or financial condition.**

In many cases, as a condition to obtaining or maintaining permits and approvals or otherwise, we are required to comply with financial assurance requirements of governmental authorities. The purpose of these requirements is to provide comfort to the government that sufficient funds will be available for the ultimate closure, post-closure care or reclamation of our facilities.

In some cases, we comply through the satisfaction of applicable state financial strength tests. But, if we are unable to do so, we must utilize alternative methods of complying with these requirements; if we do not, we would be prevented from continuing our operations and also could be subject to enforcement proceedings brought by relevant government agencies. Alternative compliance methods include providing credit support in the form of cash escrows or trusts, surety bonds from surety or insurance companies, letters of credit from banks, or other forms of financial instruments or collateral to satisfy the financial assurance requirements. Use of alternative means of financial assurance imposes additional expense on us. Some of them, such as letters of credit, also use a portion of our available liquidity. Other alternative means of financial assurance, such as surety bonds, generally require us to obtain a discharge of the bonds or to post additional collateral (typically in the form of cash or letters of credit) at the request of the issuer of the bonds. Collateral that is required may be in forms that utilize a portion of our available liquidity, or in the form of assets such as real estate, which reduces our flexibility to manage or sell assets.

We have included additional discussion about financial assurance requirements under "Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements and Obligations–Other Commercial Commitments" in our Management's Analysis.

**Regulatory restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions and climate change regulations in the U.S., Canada or elsewhere could adversely affect us, and these effects could be material.**

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

Various governmental initiatives to limit greenhouse gas emissions are under way or under consideration around the world. These initiatives could restrict our operating activities, require us to make changes in our operating activities that would increase our operating costs, reduce our efficiency or limit our output, require us to make capital improvements to our facilities, increase our energy, raw material and transportation costs or limit their availability, or otherwise adversely affect our results of operations, liquidity or capital resources, and these effects could be material to us.

Governmental greenhouse gas emission initiatives include, among others, the December 2015 agreement (the "***Paris Agreement***") which was the outcome of the 21<sup>st</sup> session of the Conference of the Parties under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change ("***UNFCCC***"). The Paris Agreement, which was signed by nearly 200 nations, including the U.S. and Canada, entered into force in late 2016 and sets out a goal of limiting the average rise in temperatures for this century to below 2 degrees Celsius. Each signatory is expected to develop its own plan (referred to as a Nationally Determined Contribution, or "***NDC***") for reaching that goal.

In May 2017, the U.S. announced that the it would withdraw from the Paris Agreement. In January 2021, the U.S. rejoined. Previously, the U.S. had submitted an NDC aiming to achieve, by 2025, an economy-wide target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 26-28% below its 2005 level. The NDC also aims to use best efforts to reduce emissions by 28%. The U.S. target covers all greenhouse gases that were a part of the 2014 Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks. While the extent of the U.S.'s involvement in the Paris Agreement and the status of this NDC is unclear, various legislative or regulatory initiatives relating to greenhouse gases have been adopted or considered by the U.S. Congress, the EPA or various states and those initiatives already adopted may be used to implement a U.S. NDC. Additionally, more stringent laws and regulations may be enacted to accomplish the goals set out in the NDC.

Brazil ratified the Paris Agreement in September 2016, committing to an NDC that includes an economy-wide target of 1.3 GtCO2e by 2025 and 1.2 GtCO2e by 2030. In 2020, Brazil submitted a new NDC, which reaffirms the country's commitment to reducing total net greenhouse gas emissions by 37% in 2025 and by 43% in 2030. The NDC further commits to achieving climate neutrality in 2060. Complete details surrounding Brazil's plan for achieving the greenhouse gas emissions reductions and climate neutrality are uncertain. The government of Brazil may intervene with new or different policy instruments to meet the goals set out in the 2020 NDC.

Canada's intended NDC aims to achieve, by 2030, an economy-wide target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 40-45% below 2005 levels. The Canadian federal government has also introduced legislation establishing a long-term target of "net-zero" greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. More stringent laws and regulations may be enacted to accomplish the goals set out in Canada's NDC and Canada's own long-term emissions reduction targets.

In March, 2022, the SEC issued proposed rules on climate change disclosure requirements that, if adopted as proposed, will require disclosure of extensive detailed climate-related information. It is possible that such legislation and other future legislation or regulation addressing climate change, including the Paris Agreement or any new international agreements, could adversely affect our operating activities, energy, raw material and transportation costs, results of operations, liquidity or capital resources, and these effects could be material or adversely impact our competitive advantage. In addition, to the extent climate change restrictions imposed in countries where our competitors operate, such as India, former Soviet Union countries or Morocco, are less stringent than in the U.S., Canada or Brazil our competitors could gain cost or other competitive advantages over us.

**We use tailings, sediments and water to manage residual materials generated by our facilities, including Brazilian mining operations. If our safety procedures are not effective, an accident involving these impoundments could result in serious injuries or death, damage to property or the environment, or result in the shutdown of our facilities, any of which could materially adversely affect our results of operations.**

Mining and processing of potash and phosphate generate residual materials that must be managed both during the operation of the facility and upon facility closure. Potash tailings, consisting primarily of salt and clay, are stored in surface disposal sites. Phosphate residuals from mining or processing are deposited in large tailing dams and in clay settling areas and phosphogypsum stacks. They are regularly monitored to evaluate structural stability and for leaks. The failure of or a breach at any of our impoundments at any of our operations could cause severe property and environmental damage and loss of life, could result in the shut down or idling of our facilities and could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

Legislation at both Brazilian federal and state levels has introduced new rules regarding tailings dam safety, construction, licensing and operations. We cannot predict the full impact of these legislative or potentially related judicial actions, or future actions, or whether or how it would affect our Brazilian operations or customers.

Any accident involving our tailings or other dams, or any shut down or idling of our related mines, could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

**<u>Competitive Risks</u>**

**Our competitive position could be adversely affected if we are unable to participate in continuing industry consolidation.**

Most of our products are readily available from a number of competitors, and price and other competition in the crop nutrient industry is intense. In addition, crop nutrient production facilities and distribution activities frequently benefit from economies of scale. As a result, particularly during pronounced cyclical troughs, the crop nutrient industry has a long history of consolidation. Mosaic itself is the result of a number of industry consolidations. We expect consolidation among crop nutrient producers could continue. Our competitive position could suffer to the extent we are not able to expand our own resources either through consolidations, acquisitions, joint ventures or partnerships. In the future, we may not be able to find suitable companies to combine with, assets to purchase or joint venture or partnership opportunities to pursue. Even if we are able to locate desirable opportunities, we may not be able to enter into transactions on economically acceptable terms. If we do not successfully participate in continuing industry consolidation, our ability to compete successfully could be adversely affected and result in the loss of customers or an uncompetitive cost structure, which could adversely affect our sales and profitability.

**Our strategy for managing market and interest rate risk may not be effective.**

Our businesses are affected by fluctuations in market prices for our products, the purchase price of natural gas, ammonia and sulfur consumed in operations, freight and shipping costs, foreign currency exchange rates and interest rates. We periodically enter into derivatives and forward purchase contracts to mitigate some of these risks. However, our strategy may not be successful in minimizing our exposure to these fluctuations. See "Market Risk" in our Management's Analysis and Note 15 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements that is incorporated by reference in this report in Part II, Item 8.

**A shortage or unavailability of trucks, railcars, tugs, barges and ships for carrying our products and the raw materials we use in our business could result in customer dissatisfaction, loss of production or sales and higher transportation or equipment costs.**

We rely heavily upon truck, rail, tug, barge and ocean freight transportation to obtain the raw materials we need to distribute raw materials among our mines and concentrates facilities and to deliver our products to our customers. In addition, the cost of transportation is an important part of the final sale price of our products. Finding affordable and dependable transportation is important in obtaining our raw materials and to supply our customers. Higher costs for these transportation services or an interruption or slowdown due to factors including high demand, high fuel prices, labor disputes, layoffs or other factors affecting the availability of qualified transportation workers, adverse weather or other environmental events, or changes to rail, barge or ocean freight systems, could negatively affect our ability to produce our products or deliver them to our customers, which could affect our performance and results of operations.

Strong demand for grain and other products and a strong world economy increases the demand for and reduces the availability of transportation, both domestically and internationally. Shortages of railcars, barges and ocean transport for carrying product and increased transit time may result in customer dissatisfaction, loss of sales and higher equipment and transportation costs. In addition, during periods when the shipping industry has a shortage of ships, the substantial time needed to build new ships prevents rapid market response. Delays and missed shipments due to transportation shortages, including vessels, barges, railcars and trucks, could result in customer dissatisfaction or loss of sales potential, which could negatively affect our performance and results of operations.

**Our success will continue to depend on our ability to attract and retain highly qualified and motivated employees.**

We believe our continued success depends on the collective abilities and efforts of our employees. Like many businesses, a significant number of our employees, including some of our most highly skilled employees with specialized expertise in general corporate matters, potash and phosphates operations, will be approaching retirement age throughout the next decade

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

and beyond. In addition, we compete for a talented workforce with other businesses, particularly within the mining and chemicals industries, in general, and the crop nutrients industry, in particular. Our expansion plans are highly dependent on our ability to attract, retain and train highly qualified and motivated employees who are essential to the success of our ongoing operations as well as to our expansion plans. If we were to be unsuccessful in attracting, retaining and training the employees we require, our ongoing operations and expansion plans could be materially and adversely affected.

**Our most important products are global commodities, and we face intense global competition from other crop nutrient producers that can affect our prices and volumes.**

Our most important products are concentrated phosphate crop nutrients, including diammonium phosphate, or DAP, monoammonium phosphate, or MAP, MicroEssentials<sup>®</sup> and muriate of potash, or MOP. We sell most of our DAP, MAP and MOP in the form of global commodities. Our sales of these products face intense global competition from other crop nutrient producers.

Changes in competitors' production or shifts in their marketing focus have in the past significantly affected both the prices at which we sell our products and the volumes that we sell, and are likely to continue to do so in the future. Increases in the global supply of DAP, MAP and MOP or competitors' increased sales into regions in which we have significant sales could adversely affect our prices and volumes.

Competitors and new entrants in the markets for both concentrated phosphate crop nutrients and potash have in recent years expanded capacity, or begun, or announced plans, to expand capacity or build new facilities. The extent to which current global or local economic and financial conditions, changes in global or local economic and financial conditions, or other factors may cause delays or cancellation of some of these ongoing or planned projects, or result in the acceleration of existing or new projects, is unclear. In addition, certain of our products sold to China may be subject to additional tariffs due to ongoing trade tensions between China and the U.S.. The level of exports by Chinese producers of concentrated phosphate crop nutrients depends to a significant extent on Chinese government actions to curb exports through, among other measures, prohibitive export taxes at times when the government believes it desirable to assure ample domestic supplies of concentrated phosphate crop nutrients to stimulate grain and oilseed production.

In addition, the other member of Canpotex is among our competitors who may, in the future, independently expand its potash production capacity at a time when each Canpotex member's respective shares of Canpotex sales is based upon that member's respective proven peaking capacity for producing potash. When a Canpotex member expands its production capacity, the new capacity is added to that member's proven peaking capacity based on a proving run at the maximum production level. Alternatively, Canpotex members may elect to rely on an independent engineering firm and approved protocols to calculate their proven peaking capacity. Antitrust and competition laws prohibit the members of Canpotex from coordinating their production decisions, including the timing of their respective proving runs. Worldwide potash production levels could exceed then-current market demand, resulting in an oversupply of potash and lower potash prices.

All of the foregoing events are beyond our control. The effects of any of these events occurring could be materially adverse to our results of operations.

**Some of our competitors and potential competitors have greater resources than we do, which may place us at a competitive disadvantage and adversely affect our sales and profitability. These competitors include state-owned and government-subsidized entities in other countries.**

We compete with a number of producers throughout the world, including state-owned and government-subsidized entities. Some of these entities have greater total resources than we do, and may be less dependent on earnings from crop nutrients sales than we are. In addition, some of these entities have access to lower cost or government-subsidized natural gas supplies, mining rights and reserves, financing, transportation and tax incentives, placing us at a competitive disadvantage. Furthermore, certain governments as owners of some of our competitors may be willing to accept lower prices and profitability on their products in order to support domestic employment or other political or social goals. To the extent other producers of crop nutrients enjoy competitive advantages or are willing to accept lower profit levels, the price of our products, our sales volumes and our profits may be adversely affected.

**<u>Industry Risks</u>**

**Future product or technological innovation could affect our business.**

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

Future product or technological innovations by third parties, such as the development of seeds that require less crop nutrients, the development of substitutes for our products or developments in the application of crop nutrients, if they occur, could have the potential to adversely affect the demand for our products and our results of operations, liquidity and capital resources.

**The success of our strategic initiatives depends on our ability to effectively manage these initiatives, and to successfully integrate and grow acquired businesses.**

We have significant ongoing strategic initiatives, including our plans to expand the annual production capacity of our potash business and MWSPC. These strategic initiatives involve capital and other expenditures and require effective project management and, in the case of potential strategic acquisitions, successful integration. To the extent the processes we (or, for our joint venture, we together with our joint venture partners) put in place to manage these initiatives or integrate and grow acquired businesses are not effective, our capital expenditure and other costs may exceed our expectations or the benefits we expect from these initiatives might not be fully realized, or both, thereby resulting in adverse effects on our operating results and financial condition.

**Cyberattacks could disrupt our operations and have a material adverse impact on our business.**

As a global company, we utilize and rely upon information technology systems in many aspects of our business, including internal and external communications and the management of our accounting, financial, production and supply chain functions. As we become more dependent on information technologies to conduct our operations, and as the number and sophistication of cyberattacks increase, the risks associated with cyber security increase. These risks apply to us, our employees, and to third parties on whose systems we rely for the conduct of our business. We have experienced cyberattacks but to our knowledge, we have not experienced any material breaches of our technology systems. Failure to effectively anticipate, prevent, detect and recover from the increasing number and sophistication of cyberattacks could result in theft, loss or misuse of, or damage or modification of our information, and cause disruptions or delays in our business, reputational damage and third-party claims, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition.

**Our crop nutrients and other products are subject to price and demand volatility resulting from periodic imbalances of supply and demand, which may cause our results of operations to fluctuate.**

Historically, the market for crop nutrients has been cyclical, and prices and demand for our products have fluctuated significantly. Periods of high demand, increasing profits and high capacity utilization tend to lead to new plant investment and increased production in the industry. This growth increases supply until the market is over-saturated, leading to declining prices and declining capacity utilization until the cycle repeats.

As a result, crop nutrient prices and volumes have been, and are expected to continue to be, volatile. This price and volume volatility may cause our results of operations to fluctuate and potentially deteriorate. The price at which we sell our crop nutrient products and our sales volumes could fall in the event of industry oversupply conditions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In contrast, high prices may lead our customers and farmers to delay purchasing decisions in anticipation of future lower prices, thus impacting our sales volumes.

Due to reduced market demand, depressed agricultural economic conditions and other factors, we and our predecessors have at various times suspended or curtailed production at some of our facilities. The extent to which we utilize available capacity at our facilities will cause fluctuations in our results of operations, as we will incur costs for any temporary or indefinite shutdowns of our facilities. In addition, lower sales tend to lead to higher fixed costs as a percentage of sales.

**<u>Financial Risks</u>**

**During periods when the prices for our products are falling because of falling raw material prices, we could be required to write-down the value of our inventories. Any such write-down could adversely affect our results of operations and the value of our assets.**

We carry our inventories at the lower of cost or market. In periods when the market prices for our products are falling rapidly, including in response to falling market prices for raw materials, it is possible that we could be required to write-down the value of our inventories if market prices fall below our costs. Any such write-down could adversely affect our results of operations and the value of our assets. Any such effect could be material.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

Our estimates of future selling prices reflect in part the purchase commitments we have from our customers. As a result, defaults on these existing purchase commitments because of the global or local economic and financial conditions or for other reasons could adversely affect our estimates of future selling prices and require additional inventory write-downs.

**We may incur significant non-cash charges if our goodwill or long-lived assets become impaired in the future.**

Under accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S. ("***GAAP***"), we review goodwill for impairment on an annual basis or more frequently if events or circumstances indicate that their carrying value may not be recoverable. Other long-lived assets, including property, plant and equipment, are reviewed if events or circumstances indicate that their carrying value may not be recoverable. The process of impairment testing involves a number of judgments and estimates made by management, including the fair values of assets and liabilities, future cash flows, our interpretation of current economic indicators and market conditions, overall economic conditions and our strategic operational plans with regard to our business units. If the judgments and estimates used in our analysis are not realized or change due to external factors, then actual results may not be consistent with these judgments and estimates, and our goodwill and intangible assets may become impaired in future periods. If our goodwill or long-lived assets are determined to be impaired in the future, we may be required to record non-cash charges to earnings during the period in which the impairment is determined, which could be significant and have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. We have, in the past, and may in the future, be required to write down the value of our goodwill or other long-lived assets, and such future write downs could be material. See Note 10, Goodwill and Note 26, Mine Closure Costs, in the accompanying consolidated financial statements for further information related to charges incurred in 2019.

**Changes in tax laws or regulations or their interpretation, or exposure to additional tax liabilities, could materially adversely affect our operating results and financial condition.**

We are subject to taxes, including income taxes, resource taxes and royalties, and non-income based taxes in the U.S., Canada, China, Brazil and other countries where we operate. Changes in tax laws or regulations or their interpretation could result in higher taxes, which could materially adversely affect our operating results and financial condition.

In 2018, U.S. federal tax law changes took effect. This was a significant change to the U.S. system of taxation resulting in numerous areas open to interpretation given the newness and breadth of changes to the rules. As a result, risk exists related to developing interpretation and application of the rules that could result in higher taxes which could materially adversely affect our operating results and financial condition.

We are subject to periodic audits by various levels of tax authorities in all countries where we have meaningful operations. The due process, audit and appeal practices and procedures of such authorities may vary significantly by jurisdiction, may be unpredictable (and unreliable) in nature and may result in significant risk to us. For various reasons, some governments may issue significant reassessments on audit based positions not fully grounded in law or fact, even though, upon disputing the reassessments, a great many are overturned on administrative appeal and through the court system. Certain systems involve tax litigation as a common practice. In certain countries, there are requirements to pay a reassessment (even though the matter has not been finally decided by the tax administration or a court of law) while the taxpayer has a well-supported objection and appeals administratively or in court. This may result in tying up significant funds and/or creating adverse treasury and credit risks that may interrupt, impede or otherwise materially affect our business operations.

**We extend trade credit to our customers and guarantee the financing that some of our customers use to purchase our products. Our results of operations may be adversely affected if these customers are unable to repay the trade credit from us or financing from their banks. Increases in prices for crop nutrient, other agricultural inputs and grain may increase this risk.**

We extend trade credit to our customers in the U.S. and throughout the world, in some cases for extended periods of time. In Brazil, where there are fewer third-party financing sources available to farmers, we also have several programs under which we guarantee customers' financing from financial institutions that they use to purchase our products. As our exposure to longer trade credit extends throughout the world and use of guarantees in Brazil increases, we are increasingly exposed to the risk that some of our customers will not pay us or the amounts we have guaranteed. Additionally, we become increasingly exposed to risk due to weather and crop growing conditions, fluctuations in crop nutrient prices, commodity prices or foreign currencies, and other factors that influence the price, supply and demand for agricultural commodities. Significant defaults by our customers could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

**Due to the global nature of our operations, we are exposed to currency exchange rate changes, which may cause fluctuations in earnings and cash flows.**

Our primary foreign currency exposures are the Canadian dollar and Brazilian real. The functional currency for our Brazilian subsidiaries is the Brazilian real. However, we finance our Brazilian inventory purchases with U.S. dollar-denominated liabilities. The functional currency of several of our Canadian entities is the Canadian dollar. For those entities, sales are primarily denominated in U.S. dollars, but the costs are paid principally in Canadian dollars. Canadian entities have significant U.S. dollar denominated intercompany loans and U.S. entities, with the U.S. dollar as functional currency, have Brazilian real denominated loans. During periods of local or global economic crises, local currencies may be devalued significantly against the U.S. dollar. During times of a strengthening dollar, our net earnings can be reduced due to transaction currency losses arising from these exposures of U.S. dollar denominated liabilities held in the Brazilian and Canadian entities and Brazilian real denominated assets held in U.S. entities. To reduce economic risk and volatility on expected cash flows that are denominated in the Canadian dollar and Brazilian real, we use financial instruments that may include forward contracts, options or collars when unable to naturally offset the exposures.

**Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.**

None.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

**Item 2. Properties.**

**SUMMARY OVERVIEW OF MINING**

As used in this Form 10-K, the terms "mineral resource," "measured mineral resource," "indicated mineral resource," "inferred mineral resource," "mineral reserve," "proven mineral reserve" and "probable mineral reserve" are defined and used in accordance with S-K 1300. All mineral resources and mineral reserves have been prepared by qualified persons. Under S-K 1300, mineral resources may not be classified as "mineral reserves" unless the determination has been made by a qualified person that the mineral resources can be the basis of an economically viable project. Mineral resources are not mineral reserves and do not meet the threshold for mineral reserve modifying factors, such as estimated economic viability, that would allow for conversion to mineral reserves. There is no certainty that any part of the mineral resources estimated will be converted into mineral reserves.

Except for that portion of mineral resources classified as mineral reserves, mineral resources have not demonstrated economic value. Inferred mineral resources are estimates based on limited geological evidence and sampling and have too high of a degree of uncertainty to apply relevant technical and economic factors likely to influence the prospects of economic extraction in a manner useful for evaluation of economic viability. Estimates of inferred mineral resources may not be converted to a mineral reserve. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource will be upgraded to a higher category. A significant amount of exploration must be completed to determine whether an inferred mineral resource may be upgraded to a higher category. Therefore, you are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource exists, that it can be the basis of an economically viable project, or that it will be upgraded to a higher category.

**<u>Properties</u>**

The subsections below describe the property locations, overviews and mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates. Our material properties, as determined pursuant to S-K 1300, are Florida Phosphates, Esterhazy, Belle Plaine and Tapira. Further information about these properties can be found in the technical report summaries ("***TRSs***" or "***TRS***") filed as exhibits to this Form 10-K.

***Property Locations***

Figure 2.1 and Figure 2.2 show the locations of each resource and reserve property:

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

**<u>Figure 2.1: North America Resource and Reserve Location Map</u>**

![mos-20221231_g7.jpg](mos-20221231_g7.jpg)

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

**<u>Figure 2.2: South America Resource and Reserve Location Map</u>**

![mos-20221231_g8.jpg](mos-20221231_g8.jpg)

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

**<u>Property Overview</u>**

*Annual Production*

Table 2.1 shows the production tonnage and grade for all phosphate properties for 2022, 2021 and 2020.

---

| | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **<u>Table 2.1 Summary of Production - Phosphate Properties</u>** | **<u>Table 2.1 Summary of Production - Phosphate Properties</u>** | **<u>Table 2.1 Summary of Production - Phosphate Properties</u>** | **<u>Table 2.1 Summary of Production - Phosphate Properties</u>** | **<u>Table 2.1 Summary of Production - Phosphate Properties</u>** | | | |
| *(in millions of tonnes)* | | **December 31,** | **December 31,** | **December 31,** | **December 31,** | **December 31,** | **December 31,** |
| **Mine Property** | **Annual Operational Capacity (tonnes)**<sup>(a)(b)</sup> | **2022** | **2022** | **2021** | **2021** | **2020** | **2020** |
| **Mine Property** | **Annual Operational Capacity (tonnes)**<sup>(a)(b)</sup> | **Production (tonnes)** | **%P2O5**<sup>(c)</sup> | **Production (tonnes)** | **%P2O5**<sup>(c)</sup> | **Production (tonnes)** | **%P2O5**<sup>(c)</sup> |
| **Phosphate (Grade: P2O5)**<sup>(c)</sup> |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Florida | 14.0 | 9.6 | 27.6 | 11.1 | 28.0 | 12.8 | 28.4 |
| **Total United States** | 14.0 | 9.6 | 27.6 | 11.1 | 28.0 | 12.8 | 28.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Miski Mayo <sup>(d)</sup> | 4.0 | 4.2 | 29.7 | 4.2 | 29.8 | 3.3 | 29.6 |
| **Total Peru** | 4.0 | 4.2 | 29.7 | 4.2 | 29.8 | 3.3 | 29.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Araxá / Patrocinio | 1.3 | 0.9 | 34.5 | 0.8 | 34.9 | 0.9 | 35.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Cajati | 0.6 | 0.3 | 34.3 | 0.3 | 34.1 | 0.4 | 33.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Catalão | 1.0 | 1.1 | 34.8 | 1.1 | 34.9 | 1.1 | 34.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Tapira | 2.1 | 1.9 | 35.1 | 1.8 | 35.1 | 1.9 | 35.3 |
| **Total Brazil** | 5.0 | 4.2 | 34.8 | 4.0 | 34.9 | 4.3 | 34.7 |
| **Total Phosphate** | **23.0** | **18.0** | **29.8** | **19.3** | **29.8** | **20.4** | **29.9** |

---

**______________________________**

(a)Annual operational capacity is the expected average long-term annual capacity for finished goods considering constraints represented by the grade, quality and quantity of the reserves being mined as well as equipment performance and other operational factors.

(b)Actual production varies from annual operational capacity shown in the above table due to factors that include, among others, the level of demand for our products, the quality of the reserves, the nature of the geologic formations we are mining at any particular time, maintenance and turnaround time, accidents, mechanical failure, weather conditions, and other operating conditions.

(c)The percent of P2O5 represents a measure of the phosphate content in phosphate rock or a phosphate ore body. A higher percentage corresponds to a higher percentage of phosphate content in phosphate rock or a phosphate ore body.

(d)We have a 75% economic interest in the Miski Mayo Mine and consolidate their results. Annual operational capacity and production tonnes for Miski Mayo are presented at 100% economic interest. These amounts are presented on a wet tonne basis based on average moisture levels of 3.5% to 4.5% as it exits the drying process and is prepared for shipping. Operational capacity and production on a dry tonne basis would be 3.8 million tonnes and 4.1 million tonnes, respectively.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

Table 2.2 shows the production tonnage and grade for the potash properties for 2022, 2021 and 2020.

---

| | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **<u>Table 2.2 Summary of Production - Potash Properties</u>** | **<u>Table 2.2 Summary of Production - Potash Properties</u>** | **<u>Table 2.2 Summary of Production - Potash Properties</u>** | **<u>Table 2.2 Summary of Production - Potash Properties</u>** | | | | | |
| *(in millions of tonnes)* | *(in millions of tonnes)* | | **December 31,** | **December 31,** | **December 31,** | **December 31,** | **December 31,** | **December 31,** |
| **Facility** | **Annualized Proven Peaking Capacity (tonnes)**<sup>(a)(b)</sup> | **Annual Operational Capacity (tonnes)** <sup>(b)(c)(d)</sup> | **2022** | **2022** | **2021** | **2021** | **2020** | **2020** |
| **Facility** | **Annualized Proven Peaking Capacity (tonnes)**<sup>(a)(b)</sup> | **Annual Operational Capacity (tonnes)** <sup>(b)(c)(d)</sup> | **Ore Mined (tonnes)** | **Grade % K2O**<sup>(e)</sup> | **Ore Mined (tonnes)** | **Grade % K2O**<sup>(e)</sup> | **Ore Mined (tonnes)** | **Grade % K2O**<sup>(e)</sup> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Belle Plaine – MOP<sup>(f)</sup> | 3.9 | 3.0 | 11.3 | 19.3 | 11.0 | 19.3 | 12.6 | 18.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Esterhazy – MOP | 6.3 | 6.0 | 13.7 | 24.5 | 13.3 | 23.9 | 15.0 | 24.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Colonsay – MOP<sup>(g)</sup> | 2.6 | 1.5 | 2.6 | 26.4 | 1.0 | 26.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Total Canada** | **12.8** | **10.5** | **27.6** | **22.5** | **25.3** | **22.0** | **27.6** | **21.3** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Carlsbad – K-Mag<sup>®(h)</sup> | 0.9 | 0.7 | 3.0 | 6.2 | 3.1 | 6.3 | 3.4 | 5.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Total United States** | **0.9** | **0.7** | **3.0** | **6.2** | **3.1** | **6.3** | **3.4** | **5.7** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Taquari – MOP | 0.7 | 0.5 | 1.5 | 14.3 | 1.8 | 15.1 | 1.8 | 16.6 |
| **Total Brazil** | **0.7** | **0.5** | **1.5** | **14.3** | **1.8** | **15.1** | **1.8** | **16.6** |
| **Total Potash** | 14.4 | 11.7 | 32.1 | 20.6 | 30.2 | 20.0 | 32.8 | 19.4 |

---

**______________________________**

(a)Represents full capacity based on 350 operating days per annum.

(b)Capacity is based on finished goods capacity, not ore mined. The annualized proven peaking capacity shown above is the capacity currently used to determine our share of Canpotex sales. Canpotex members' respective shares of Canpotex sales are based upon the members' respective proven peaking capacities for producing potash. When a Canpotex member expands its production capacity, the new capacity is added to that member's proven peaking capacity based on a proving run at the maximum production level. Alternatively, after January 2017, Canpotex members may elect to rely on an independent engineering firm and approved protocols to calculate their proven peaking capacity. The annual operational capacity reported in the table above can exceed the annualized proven peaking capacity until the proving run has been completed.

(c)Annual operational capacity is the expected average long-term annual capacity considering constraints represented by the grade, quality and quantity of the reserves being mined as well as equipment performance and other operational factors.

(d)Actual production varies from annual operational capacity shown in the above table due to factors that include, among others, the level of demand for our products, the quality of the reserves, the nature of the geologic formations we are mining at any particular time, maintenance and turnaround time, accidents, mechanical failure, weather conditions, and other operating conditions, as well as the effect of recent initiatives intended to improve operational excellence.

(e)Grade % K2O is a traditional reference to the percentage (by weight) of potassium oxide contained in the ore. A higher percentage corresponds to a higher percentage of potassium oxide in the ore.

(f)Equivalent to hoisted tonnes at a conventional mine. Ore mined for Belle Plaine is a calculated value (KCl concentrate mined by solution divided by the estimated global grade of the deposit). The calculation is based on actual KCl tonnes mined for January 1, 2022 through October 31, 2022 and estimated KCl tonnes mined for November 1, 2022 through December 31, 2022).

(g)We have the ability to reach an annual operating capacity of 2.1 million tonnes over time at Colonsay by increasing our staffing levels and investment in mine development activities.

(h)K-Mag<sup>®</sup> is a specialty product that we produce at our Carlsbad facility.

***Overview***

Overviews for Phosphates, Potash and Mosaic Fertilizantes are shown in Table 2.3, Table 2.4, and Table 2.5 below. All properties are operated by Mosaic. All properties listed below are production stage, except Araxá/Patrocinio. Araxá/Patrocinio is an operating mine that is an exploration stage mine because Mosaic is extracting minerals from this mine without having determined there are mineral reserves under S-K 1300. Information concerning our material properties is located in this Item 2 under the headings "Florida Phosphates," "Esterhazy," "Belle Plaine" and "Tapira".

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

**<u>Table 2.3: Phosphates Overview</u>**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **<u>Florida Phosphates</u>** | **<u>Florida Phosphates</u>** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*See Florida Phosphates Individual Property Disclosure below.* | &nbsp;&nbsp;*See Florida Phosphates Individual Property Disclosure below.* |
| **<u>Peru - Compañía Minera Miski Mayo S.R.L. ("</u>*<u>Miski Mayo</u>*<u>")</u>** | **<u>Peru - Compañía Minera Miski Mayo S.R.L. ("</u>*<u>Miski Mayo</u>*<u>")</u>** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Location* | Sechura Province in the Piura Region, Peru |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Type and amount of ownership interests* | 75% owned by Compañía Minera Miski Mayo S.R.L., a wholly-owned indirect subsidiary of Mosaic. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Titles, mineral rights, leases or options and acreage* | Miski Mayo is the holder of 20 non-metallics mining concessions (76,000 hectares). |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Key permit conditions* | Permit conditions are dictated by operating licenses, which are maintained and renewed on a regular basis. As of December 31, 2022, all environmental licenses were either still valid or were being renewed pursuant to applications with the Peruvian Environmental Agency within the legal deadlines.<br>In general, environmental commitments are being met; however, there are environmental requirements and commitments related to the expansion of Miski Mayo Line 3 of the Second Amendment of the EIA (2015) that have to be verified and implemented.<br>Miski Mayo's environmental controls are related to monitoring the quality of wastewater, surface water, groundwater and air, as well as waste management. Additional environmental controls are in place for air emissions, air quality and noise.<br>Tailings storage facilities and other impoundment's stability are monitored through specified routine internal and third party inspections. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Mine types and mineralization styles* | Miski Mayo is a surface mine. The phosphate deposits of Peru are located within the shallow north-trending Sechura Basin, in the Piura region, hosting successive inter-layered marine sediments of phosphate. We extract phosphate ore from Miski Mayo using excavators. The ore is then transported by truck for beneficiation in a plant that we own. The beneficiated concentrate is then shipped to North America for use in our own production or sold to third parties. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Processing plants and other facilities* | Beneficiation plant |

---

**<u>Table 2.4: North America Potash Overview</u>**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **<u>Belle Plaine Potash Facility ("</u>*<u>Belle Plaine Facility</u>*<u>")</u>** | **<u>Belle Plaine Potash Facility ("</u>*<u>Belle Plaine Facility</u>*<u>")</u>** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*See Belle Plaine Individual Property Disclosure below.* | &nbsp;&nbsp;*See Belle Plaine Individual Property Disclosure below.* |
| **<u>Esterhazy Potash Facility ("</u>*<u>Esterhazy Facility</u>*<u>")</u>** | **<u>Esterhazy Potash Facility ("</u>*<u>Esterhazy Facility</u>*<u>")</u>** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*See Esterhazy Individual Property Disclosure below.* | &nbsp;&nbsp;*See Esterhazy Individual Property Disclosure below.* |
| **<u>Colonsay Potash Facility ("</u>*<u>Colonsay Facility</u>*<u>")</u>** | **<u>Colonsay Potash Facility ("</u>*<u>Colonsay Facility</u>*<u>")</u>** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Location* | Saskatchewan, Canada |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Type and amount of ownership interests* | 100% owned by Mosaic Potash Colonsay ULC, a wholly-owned, indirect subsidiary of Mosaic. |

---

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Titles, mineral rights, leases or options and acreage* | We lease approximately 118,378 acres of mineral rights for the Colonsay Facility from the Province of Saskatchewan (the "***Crown***") under Subsurface Mineral Lease KL 108. The lease term is for a period of 21 years, with renewals at our option for additional 21-year lease periods.<br>In addition, we own or lease approximately 14,451 acres of mineral rights within the Colonsay area. All mineral properties owned or leased by Mosaic are for the "subsurface mineral" commodity as defined in The Subsurface Mineral Tenure Regulations (Saskatchewan).<br>We own approximately 5,972 acres of surface rights in the Colonsay area. All infrastructure including the processing plant and tailings management areas ("***TMAs***" or "***TMA***") are located on our owned land. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Key permit conditions* | A water rights license issued by the Saskatchewan Water Security Agency is in place and expires in 2032. The license is associated with the allocation of surface water rights for the site. An Approval to Operate Pollutant Control Facilities, issued by the Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment, is also in place and expires in July 2028. It is expected to be renewed at or before expiration.<br>There are no other significant encumbrances, including permitting requirements (existing or anticipated in the future) associated with the Colonsay Facility. Except for the royalties, we do not anticipate any future significant encumbrances based on current known regulations and existing permitting processes. There are no outstanding violations and fines. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Mine types and mineralization styles* | The intracratonic Elk Point Basin is a major sedimentary geological feature in western Canada and the northwest U.S. It contains one of the world's largest stratabound potash resources that represents almost 25% of the global potash production. The Prairie Evaporite hosts rich deposits of evaporite minerals including NaCl, KCl and locally, carnallite that occur in three potash deposits: the Esterhazy, Belle Plaine and Patience Lake members.<br>The Colonsay deposit includes two potash-bearing members within its local stratigraphy; the Patience Lake Member and the Belle Plaine Member. Mining at Colonsay is conducted within the upper portion of the Patience Lake Member using a room and pillar mining method.<br>The Colonsay Facility uses an underground room and pillar mining method to extract potash. After being transported along a network of conveyor systems to the shaft, it is hoisted to the surface for onsite processing. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Processing plants and other facilities* | Mill facility, beneficiation plant |
| **<u>Carlsbad Potash Facility ("</u>*<u>Carlsbad Facility</u>*<u>")</u>** | **<u>Carlsbad Potash Facility ("</u>*<u>Carlsbad Facility</u>*<u>")</u>** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Location* | New Mexico, U.S. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Type and amount of ownership interests* | 100% owned by Mosaic Potash Carlsbad Inc., a wholly-owned, indirect subsidiary of Mosaic. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Titles, mineral rights, leases or options and acreage* | The property consists of 89% federally owned and 11% state owned land, and 40 acres of privately owned mineral rights that Mosaic leases. We lease approximately 64,267 acres of mineral rights from the U.S. Department of Interior Bureau of Land Management (the "***BLM***"). These lease terms are for a period of 20 years and are reviewed and renewed at their end of term.<br>Surface rights are subject to separate ownership and title from subsurface mineral rights.<br>We own 8,370 acres of surface rights. All infrastructure, including the processing plant, TMA, cluster sites, and pipeline rights of way, are located on Mosaic-owned land. |

---

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Key permit conditions* | Primary environmental resource areas identified include groundwater quality and shorebird habitat. Environmental monitoring for effluents, air and surface/groundwater is in place.<br>Currently, 11 permits or approvals are active for the property. We are in compliance with all such permits or approvals. One of the 11, groundwater discharge permit (DP-1399) issued by the New Mexico Environmental Department ("***NMED***"), is currently being renewed. The discharge permit governs operation of the TMA. A tailings management and inspection plan is in place and active. The permit includes closure and post-closure requirements and financial assurance requirements.<br>A mining and reclamation plan has been developed and approved by the BLM. This plan includes standards for operation and closure of the mine that comply with federal and state of New Mexico environmental regulations. Current and final mine closure plans and reclamation cost estimates are completed and the closure plans have been approved by NMED and the BLM.<br>There are no significant environmental permitting encumbrances (existing or anticipated in the future) associated with the Carlsbad Facility. We do not anticipate any future encumbrances based on current known regulations and existing permitting processes. There are no outstanding violations and fines. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Mine types and mineralization styles* | The Carlsbad potash district is located within the northern New Mexico portion of the Delaware Basin. The Delaware Basin is the western subdivision of the greater Permian Basin, one of the deepest intracratonic basins in North America.<br>Potash mineralization at Carlsbad occurs in the Ochoan Epoch (Upper Permian Age) Salado Formation. The Salado Formation, up to a maximum of 2,200 feet (671 m) ft. thick, is an evaporite sequence dominated by 650 to 1,300 feet (198 to 396 m) of halite and muddy halite. It hosts 12 ore zones, 11 in the middle or McNutt Member and the 12th in the Upper Member. The area underlain by the 12 ore zones is about 1,900 sq. miles (4,920 sq. km). The 400 foot (122 m) thick McNutt Member is at a depth of 300 to 1,500 feet (91 to 457 m) below the surface.<br>The Carlsbad Facility utilizes an underground room-and-pillar mining method.<br>Pillars are cut in a manner that creates a panel; panel sizes can be changed based on grade, ground conditions and lease or oil and gas boundaries. The mine currently has five mine panels that consist of nine to 11 rooms. Drum-style continuous miners are utilized for mining. As the continuous miner advances, ore is fed off a boom located at the back of the miner into battery-powered ore haulage units. These units transport the ore through the open mine workings and dump it onto an extensive belt system that conveys the ore to the surface for milling. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Processing plants and other facilities* | Langbeinite (K-Mag<sup>®</sup>) refinery and a granulation plant |

---

**<u>Table 2.5: Mosaic Fertilizantes Overview</u>**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **<u>Complexo Mineroquímic de Araxá ("</u>*<u>Araxá</u>*<u>") / Complexo de Mineração de Patrocínio ("</u>*<u>Patrocínio</u>*<u>")</u>** | **<u>Complexo Mineroquímic de Araxá ("</u>*<u>Araxá</u>*<u>") / Complexo de Mineração de Patrocínio ("</u>*<u>Patrocínio</u>*<u>")</u>** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Location* | Near Araxá / Patrocínio, Minas Gerais, Brazil |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Type and amount of ownership interests* | 100% owned by Mosaic Fertilizantes P&K S.A., a wholly-owned indirect subsidiary of Mosaic. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Titles, mineral rights, leases or options and acreage* | Mining rights in Brazil are governed by the Mining Code, Decree 227, dated February 27, 1967, and further regulation enacted by Agência Nacional de Mineração (the "***ANM***"). All subsoil situated within Brazilian territory is deemed state property, with the mining activities subject to specific permits granted by the ANM. |

---

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Key permit conditions* | Mosaic currently holds a total of four mining permits within the Araxá area (2,769 hectares) and four mining permits and one exploration permit within the Patrocínio area (3,478 hectares). Permit conditions are dictated by operating licenses, which are maintained and renewed on a regular basis. As of December 31, 2022, all environmental licenses were valid or were being renewed pursuant to applications filed with the Brazilian Environmental Agency.<br>There are action plans in progress to comply with the environmental conditions of the permits that are not met yet within the applicable regulations. Araxá and Patrocínio's environmental controls are related to monitoring the quality of wastewater, surface water, groundwater and air, as well as waste management. Additional environmental controls are in place for air emissions, air quality and noise.<br>Tailings storage facilities and other impoundment's stability are monitored through a continuous monitoring program, as well as routine inspections. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Mine types and mineralization styles* | The Araxá and Patrocínio phosphate deposits are part of a series of Late-Cretaceous, carbonatite-bearing alkaline ultramafic plutonic complexes belong to the Alto Paranaiba Igneous Province.<br>The tropical weather regime prevailing in the region and the inward drainage patterns developed from the weather-resistant quartzite margins of the dome structures resulted in the development of an extremely thick soil cover in most of the complexes. The extreme weathering was responsible for the residual concentration of apatite.<br>The phosphate ore is extracted through surface mining by limited drilling and blasting, loaded into trucks and transported to the beneficiation plants. Patrocinio does not have its own beneficiation plant, so the ore is transported by rail to Araxá for processing. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Processing plants and other facilities* | Two beneficiation plants at Araxá |
| **<u>Complexo Mineroquímico de Cajati ("</u>*<u>Cajati</u>*<u>")</u>** | **<u>Complexo Mineroquímico de Cajati ("</u>*<u>Cajati</u>*<u>")</u>** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Location* | Near Cajati, São Paulo, Brazil |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Type and amount of ownership interests* | 100% owned by Mosaic Fertilizantes P&K S.A., a wholly-owned indirect subsidiary of Mosaic. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Titles, mineral rights, leases or options and acreage* | Mining rights in Brazil are governed by the Mining Code, Decree 227, dated February 27, 1967, and further regulation enacted by the ANM. All subsoil situated within Brazilian territory is deemed state property, with the mining activities subject to specific permits granted by the ANM. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Key permit conditions* | Mosaic currently holds a total of eight mining permits within the Cajati area (5,183 hectares). Permit conditions are dictated by operating licenses, which are maintained and renewed on a regular basis. As of December 31, 2022, all environmental licenses were still valid or were being renewed pursuant to applications filed with the Brazilian Environmental Agency.<br>There are action plans in progress to comply with the environmental conditions of the permits that are not met yet within the environmental permits. Cajati's environmental controls are related to monitoring the quality of wastewater, surface and groundwater and air, as well as waste management. Additional environmental controls are in place for air emissions, air quality and noise.<br>Tailings storage facilities and other impoundment's stability are strictly monitored through a continuous monitoring program as well as routine inspections. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*Mine types and mineralization styles* | The primary alkaline intrusive complex of interest for Cajati is the Jacupiranga Ultramafic-Carbonatitic Mesozoic Complex. The economically exploitable portion of the Jacupiranga Alkaline Complex is focused on phosphate mineralization within the carbonatite domain of the complex.<br>The phosphate ore is extracted through surface mining by drilling and blasting, loaded into trucks and transported to the beneficiation plant onsite at Cajati. |

---

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Processing plants and other facilities* | Beneficiation plant |
| **<u>Complexo Mineração de Catalão ("</u>*<u>CMC</u>*<u>")</u>** | **<u>Complexo Mineração de Catalão ("</u>*<u>CMC</u>*<u>")</u>** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Location* | Near Catalão, Minas Gerais (and Goias), Brazil |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Type and amount of ownership interests* | 100% owned by Mosaic Fertilizantes P&K S.A., a wholly-owned indirect subsidiary of Mosaic. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Titles, mineral rights, leases or options and acreage* | Mining rights in Brazil are governed by the Mining Code, Decree 227, dated February 27, 1967, and further regulation enacted by the ANM. All subsoil situated within Brazilian territory is deemed state property, with the mining activities subject to specific permits granted by the ANM. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Key permit conditions* | Mosaic currently holds a total of 18 permits within the CMC area (2,131 hectares). Permit conditions are dictated by operating licenses, which are maintained and renewed on a regular basis. As of December 31, 2022, all environmental licenses were either valid or were being renewed pursuant to applications filed with the Brazilian Environmental Agency.<br>There are action plans in progress to comply with the environmental conditions that are not met yet within the environmental permits. CMC's environmental controls are related to monitoring the quality of wastewater, surface and groundwater and air, as well as waste management. Additional environmental controls are in place for air emissions, air quality and noise.<br>Tailings storage facilities and other impoundment's stability are monitored through a continuous monitoring program as well as routine inspections. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Mine types and mineralization styles* | The CMC phosphate deposit is part of a series of Late-Cretaceous, carbonatite-bearing alkaline ultramafic plutonic complexes belong to the Alto Paranaiba Igneous Province.<br>The tropical weather regime prevailing in the region and the inward drainage patterns developed from the weather-resistant quartzite margins of the dome structures resulted in the development of an extremely thick soil cover in most of the complexes. The extreme weathering process was responsible for the residual concentration of apatite.<br>The phosphate ore is extracted through surface mining by limited drilling and blasting, loaded into trucks and transported to the beneficiation plant onsite at CMC. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Processing plants and other facilities* | Beneficiation plant |
| **<u>Complexo Mineração de Tapira ("Tapira")</u>** | **<u>Complexo Mineração de Tapira ("Tapira")</u>** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*See the Tapira Individual Property Disclosure below.* | &nbsp;&nbsp;*See the Tapira Individual Property Disclosure below.* |
| **<u>Complexo Mineroquímico de Taquari-Vassouras ("</u>*<u>Taquari</u>*<u>")</u>** | **<u>Complexo Mineroquímico de Taquari-Vassouras ("</u>*<u>Taquari</u>*<u>")</u>** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Location* | Near Rosario de Catete, Sergipe, Brazil |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Type and amount of ownership interests* | 100% owned by Mosaic Potássio Mineração Ltda, a wholly-owned indirect subsidiary of Mosaic. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Titles, mineral rights, leases or options and acreage* | Mining rights in Brazil are governed by the Mining Code, Decree 227, dated February 27, 1967, and further regulation enacted by the ANM. All subsoil situated within Brazilian territory is deemed state property, with the mining activities subject to specific permits granted by the ANM. |

---

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Key permit conditions* | Mosaic currently holds one mining permit within the Taquari area (92,498 hectares). Permit conditions are dictated by operating licenses, which are maintained and renewed on a regular basis. As of December 31, 2022, all environmental licenses were either valid or being renewed pursuant to applications filed with the Brazilian Environmental Agency within the legal deadlines. Licenses are managed through national and state databases.<br>There are action plans in progress to comply with the environmental conditions that are not met yet within the environmental permits. Taquari's environmental controls are related to monitoring the quality of wastewater, surface water, groundwater and air, as well as waste management. Additional environmental controls are in place for air emissions, air quality and noise.<br>The brine pipeline and other impoundment's stability are monitored through a monitoring program as well as routine inspections. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Mine types and mineralization styles* | The deposit is in the Taquari-Vassouras sub-basin and is a bedded evaporite where sylvinite is mined in an underground room and pillar mine at depths of 500-700m below surface using continuous miners. The beneficiation process operation begins at the run-of-mine stockpile. The material is conveyed to the processing circuit where it is divided into seven major units: crushing, concentration, dissolution, drying, compaction, storage and shipping. |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Processing plants and other facilities* | Beneficiation plant |

---

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

***Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Estimates***

Table 2.6 shows the Mineral Resource tonnage and grade for all properties as of December 31, 2022.

**<u>Table 2.6 Summary of Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2022</u>**<sup>(a)</sup>

---

| | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| ***(in millions of tonnes)*** | ***(in millions of tonnes)*** | | | | | | | |
| **Commodity/Geography/Mine Property Name** | **Measured Mineral<br>Resources** | **Measured Mineral<br>Resources** | **Indicated Mineral Resources** | **Indicated Mineral Resources** | **Measured + Indicated Mineral Resources** | **Measured + Indicated Mineral Resources** | **Inferred Mineral <br>Resources** | **Inferred Mineral <br>Resources** |
| **Commodity/Geography/Mine Property Name** | **tonnes** | **Grade** | **tonnes** | **Grade** | **tonnes** | **Grade** | **tonnes** | **Grade** |
| **Phosphate (Grade: P2O5)**<sup>(b)</sup> | | | | | | | | |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**United States** | | | | | | | | |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Florida<sup>(c</sup><sup>)</sup> | 102.0 | 30.0 | 415.0 | 30.1 | 517.0 | 30.0 | 83.0 | 30.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Peru** |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Miski Mayo<sup>(d)</sup> | 157.7 | 16.7 | 139.0 | 16.3 | 296.7 | 16.5 | 27.7 | 16.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Brazil** |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Araxá/Patrocínio<sup>(e)(f)</sup> | 132.1 | 12.1 | 458.8 | 13.0 | 590.9 | 12.8 | 169.4 | 13.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Cajati<sup>(e)(g)</sup> | 28.3 | 5.3 | 33.8 | 5.0 | 62.1 | 5.2 | 5.2 | 4.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Catalão<sup>(e)(h)</sup> | 53.3 | 10.4 | 97.6 | 10.5 | 150.9 | 10.5 | 60.1 | 9.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Tapira<sup>(e)(i)</sup> | 62.8 | 8.0 | 67.0 | 7.8 | 129.8 | 7.9 | 112.8 | 8.6 |
| **Total Phosphate** | **536.2** | **16.0** | **1211.2** | **18.4** | **1747.4** | **17.7** | **458.2** | **14.8** |
| **Potash (Grade: K2O)**<sup>(j)</sup> |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Canada** |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Belle Plaine<sup>(k)</sup> |  |  |  |  |  |  | 4647.0 | 19.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Esterhazy<sup>(l)</sup> | 255.0 | 23.3 | 2092.0 | 22.8 | 2347.0 | 22.9 |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Colonsay<sup>(l)</sup> |  |  |  |  |  |  | 977.0 | 29.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**United States** |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Carlsbad<sup>(m)</sup> |  |  |  |  |  |  | 39.0 | 6.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Brazil** |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Taquari<sup>(n)</sup> |  |  | 6.8 | 23.6 | 6.8 | 23.6 | 58.0 | 22.9 |
| **Total Potash** | **255.0** | **23.3** | **2098.8** | **22.8** | **2353.8** | **22.8** | **5721.0** | **20.7** |

---

**______________________________**

(a)Mineral resources are reported exclusive of mineral reserves, and except as otherwise noted, are stated in-situ. Mineral resources are not mineral reserves and do not meet the threshold for mineral reserve modifying factors, such as estimated economic viability, that would allow for conversion to mineral reserves. There is no certainty that any part of the mineral resources estimated will be converted into mineral reserves.

(b)The percentage of P2O5 represents a measure of the phosphate content in phosphate rock or a phosphate ore body. A higher percentage corresponds to a higher percentage of phosphate content in phosphate rock or a phosphate ore body. Brazilian grades, except for Cajati, are P2O5ap, which represents the P2O5 associated with apatite and was calculated by the evaluation of the CaO / P2O5 ratio. Where CaO / P2O5 ratio was greater than or equal to 1.34, P2O5ap was equal to the total of P2O5; where the CaO / P2O5 ratio was less than 1.35, P2O5ap was equal to the CaO / 1.35 ratio.

(c)Mineral resource tonnages and grade are reported as a beneficiation plant product (phosphate rock) tonnage and P2O5 grade. The cut-offs used to estimate mineral resources include: minimum beneficiation plant concentrate BPL (27.45% P2O5), minimum pebble BPL (18.30% P2O5, except 22.88% P2O5 for Desoto and Pioneer), maximum pebble magnesium oxide concentration and a maximum clay content cut-off for a logged matrix layer and the composite matrix volume. A Life of Mine ("***LOM***") commodity price of US$68.0/tonne of phosphate rock was used to assess prospects for economic extraction but is not used for cut-off purposes.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

(d)Mineral resources are presented on the basis of our 75% interest. Cut-off grade of > 8% P2O5 was applied for mineral resources. A breakeven pit shell was developed with costs, grade requirements and a sales price of US $57.9/tonne of phosphate concentrate (2022 price evaluation) to develop the mineral resource pit shell.

(e)Measured, indicated and inferred blocks were included in mineral resource estimates if they were inside mining concessions and exploration permits with a final report approved by the ANM, but exclusive of physical structures. For example, depending on the site, a physical structure may consist of a beneficiation plant, crusher or waste pile.

(f)Araxá Oxidized Cut-off grade: Mass Recovery (rend_t) > 0, P2O5 ≥ 4.78, Fe2O3 ≥ 1.34, SiO2 ≥ 0.05, BaO ≤ 18.83, CaO to P2O5 ratio 0.7 to 1.40. Araxá Micaceous Cut-off grade: Cut-off grade for Micaceous: Mass Recovery (rend_t) > 0, P2O5 ≥ 3.11, Al2O3 ≤ 13.15. For Araxá, a revenue factor of 1.0 with sales price in Brazilian real ($R) of R$1,798.21 per tonne of phosphate concentrate (2019 price evaluation) was used to develop mineral resource pit shell. Patrocínio BEB-OXI Cut-off grade: P2O5 ≥ 3.5, Fe2O3 ≤ 53.0. Patrocínio CBN-OXI Cut-off grade: P2O5 ≥ 4.0, SiO2 ≥ 0.2. Patrocínio BEB-MIC Cut-off grade: P2O5 ≥ 3.4, Fe2O3 < 50.0, SiO2 < 57.5, MgO < 17.0, TiO2 < 27.0. Patrocinio FET Cut-off grade: P2O5 > 0.0. Patrocínio RSI Cut-off grade: P2O5 ≥ 3.0, CaO to P2O5 ratio < 2.6. For Patrocínio, a revenue factor of 1.0 with a sales price of R$1,635.29 per tonne of phosphate concentrate (2020 LOM price evaluation) was used to develop mineral resource pit shell.

(g)Cut-off grade of > 3% P2O5 and < 11% SiO2 was applied for mineral resources. A revenue factor of 1.0 with sales price of R$1,944.5 per tonne of phosphate concentrate (2020 LOM price evaluation) was used to develop mineral resource pit shell.

(h)Cut-off grade of P2O5ap ≥ 5.2% and 0.8 ≤ RCP ≤ 1.6 and MgO < 12% was applied to mineral resources. A revenue factor of 1.0 with a constant sales price of R$1,537.92 per tonne of phosphate concentrate (2020 LOM price evaluation) was used to develop mineral resource pit shell.

(i)Cut-off grade of P2O5ap ≥ 5.0% and 0.9 ≤ RCP ≤ 3.0 was applied to mineral resources. A revenue factor of 1.0 with a sales price of R$1,492.92 per tonne of phosphate concentrate (2020 LOM price evaluation) was used to develop the mineral resource pit shell.

(j)%K2O refers to the total %K2O of the samples.

(k)No cut-off grade is used to estimate mineral resources as the solution mining method used at the Belle Plaine Facility is not selective. At no point in the cavern development and mining process can a decision be made to mine or not mine the potash mineralization that is in contact with the mining solution. The mining solution dissolves the potash, regardless of its grade, to make a concentrate that is pumped to surface from the mining caverns for processing.

(l)No cut-off grade or value based on commodity price is used to estimate mineral resources as the mining method used at Colonsay or Esterhazy is not grade selective. The potash mineralization is mined on one level by continuous miners following the well-defined and continuous beds of mineralization with relatively consistent grades. The following KCl commodity prices were used to assess prospects for economic extraction for the mineral resources but are not used for cut-off purposes: US $103.4/tonne for Esterhazy, US $108.7/tonne for Belle Plaine, and US $130.7/tonne for Colonsay, A US$/CAD$ exchange rate of 1.30 was used to assess prospects for economic extraction for the mineral resources but was not used for cut-off purposes.

(m)A 4% K2O cut-off grade with less than 2% kieserite is used to estimate mineral resources. This is consistent with the definition of mineable potash established by the U.S. Geological Survey. A US $195.6/tonne price was used to assess economic viability for the mineral resources, but was not used for cut-off purposes.

(n)Cut-off grade of > 20% KCl, a minimum Sylvinite thickness of 1.8m, and a minimum Sylvinite percentage per block of 50% was applied for mineral resources.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

Table 2.7 shows the Mineral Reserve tonnage and grade for all properties as of December 31, 2022.

**<u>Table 2.7: Summary of Mineral Reserves as of December 31, 2022</u>**<sup>(a)</sup>

---

| | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| *(in millions of tonnes)* | *(in millions of tonnes)* | | | | | |
| **Commodity/Geography/Mine Property Name** | **Proven Mineral Reserves** | **Proven Mineral Reserves** | **Probable Mineral Reserves** | **Probable Mineral Reserves** | **Total Mineral Reserves** | **Total Mineral Reserves** |
| **Commodity/Geography/Mine Property Name** | **tonnes** | **Grade** | **tonnes** | **Grade** | **tonnes** | **Grade** |
| **Phosphate (Grade: P2O5)**<sup>(b)</sup> |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;United States |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Florida<sup>(c)</sup> | 56.0 | 28.0 | 70.0 | 27.1 | 126.0 | 27.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Peru |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Miski Mayo<sup>(d)</sup> | 109.8 | 16.2 | 54.1 | 15.1 | 164.0 | 15.9 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Brazil |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Cajati<sup>(e)</sup> | 39.6 | 5.2 | 29.6 | 5.0 | 69.2 | 5.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Catalão<sup>(f)</sup> | 61.8 | 10.8 | 16.3 | 10.6 | 78.1 | 10.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Tapira<sup>(g)</sup> | 182.7 | 9.4 | 274.6 | 9.1 | 457.3 | 9.2 |
| **Total Phosphate** | **449.9** | **13.2** | **444.6** | **12.4** | **894.5** | **12.8** |
| **Potash (Grade: K2O)** |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Canada |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Belle Plaine<sup>(h)</sup> | 272.0 | 19.3 | 388.0 | 19.3 | 660.0 | 19.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Esterhazy<sup>(i)</sup> | 110.0 | 23.3 | 433.0 | 20.9 | 543.0 | 21.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Colonsay<sup>(i)</sup> | 101.0 | 25.3 | 163.0 | 27.2 | 264.0 | 26.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;United States |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Carlsbad<sup>(j)</sup> | 172.9 | 6.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 172.9 | 6.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Brazil |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Taquari<sup>(k)</sup> | 0.0 | 0.0 | 26.9 | 14.7 | 26.9 | 14.7 |
| **Total Potash** | **655.9** | **17.7** | **1010.9** | **21.1** | **1666.8** | **19.7** |

---

**______________________________**

(a)A mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of a measured or indicated mineral resource, which includes diluting materials and allowances for losses that may occur when the material is mined or extracted. Reserves are measured as Run of Mine ("***ROM***") unless otherwise noted.

(b)Brazil grades except for Cajati are P2O5ap, which represents the P2O5 associated with apatite and was calculated by the evaluation of the CaO / P2O5 ratio. Where CaO / P2O5 ratio was greater than or equal to 1.34, P2O5ap was equal to the total of P2O5; where the CaO / P2O5 ratio was less than 1.35, P2O5ap was equal to the CaO / 1.35 ratio.

(c)Mineral reserve tonnages and grade are reported as a beneficiation plant product (phosphate rock) tonnage and P2O5 grade. A LOM commodity price of US$68.0/tonne of phosphate rock was used to assess prospects for economic extraction but is not used for cut-off purposes. Cut-off based on productivity factors per site have been applied to estimate mineral reserves. Recoverable Finished Product tonnes vs. Matrix Volume Mined ranges from 9.4-9.9%. Recoverable Finished Product tonnes vs. Total Volume Mined is 2.2%.

(d)Mineral reserves are presented on the basis of our 75% interest. The reference point for cut-off grade and pit optimization analysis is tonnes of concentrate at a price of US$57.9/tonne concentrate (2022 LOM price evaluation). We applied a cut-off grade of > 8% P2O5 mineral reserves. Additionally, we used a phosphate concentrate grade limitation of a minimum P2O5 concentrate grade of 29.5% in the LOM plan.

(e)The reference point for cut-off grade and pit optimization analysis is tonnes of concentrate at a price of R$1,944.47/tonne concentrate (2020 price evaluation). Cut-off grade of > 3% P2O5 and < 11% SiO2 was applied to mineral reserves. Mineral reserves were proven to be economic based on an internal transfer price of R$754/tonne of phosphate rock (2021 LOM price evaluation) that was derived in the discounted cash flow and compared to the gross margin available.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

(f)The reference point for cut-off grade and pit optimization analysis is tonnes of concentrate at a price of R$1,537.92/tonne concentrate (2020 price evaluation). Cut-off grade of P2O5ap ≥ 5.2% and 0.8 ≤ RCP ≤ 1.6 and MgO < 12% was applied to mineral reserves. Mineral reserves were proven to be economic based on internal transfer price of R$357/tonne of phosphate rock (2021 LOM price evaluation) that was derived in the discounted cash flow and compared to the gross margin available.

(g)The reference point for cut-off grade and pit optimization analysis is tonnes of concentrate at a price of R$1,492.92/tonne concentrate (2020 price evaluation). Cut-off grade of P2O5ap ≥ 5.0% and 0.9 ≤ RCP ≤ 3.0 was applied to mineral reserves. Mineral reserves were proven to be economic based on internal transfer price of R$336/tonne of phosphate rock (2021 LOM price evaluation) that was derived in the discounted cash flow and compared to the gross margin available.

(h)No cut-off grade is used to estimate mineral reserves as the solution mining method used at the Belle Plaine Facility is not selective. At no point in the cavern development and mining process can a decision be made to mine or not mine the potash mineralization that is in contact with the mining solution. The mining solution dissolves the potash, regardless of its grade, to make a concentrate that is pumped to surface from the mining cavities for processing. Mine designs based on a solution mining method and design criteria are used to constrain mineral reserves within mineable shapes. The following KCl commodity prices were used to assess economic viability for the mineral reserves, but were not used for cut-off purposes, 2022-$271/tonne, 2023-$231/tonne, 2024-$219/tonne, 2025-$185/tonne, 2026-$188/tonne and for the LOM $219/tonne. A US$/CAD$ exchange rate of 1.31 was used to assess economic viability for the mineral reserves but was not used for cut-off purposes.

(i)No cut-off grade or value based on commodity price is used to estimate mineral resources as the mining method used at Colonsay or Esterhazy is not grade selective. The potash mineralization is mined on one level by continuous miners following the well-defined and continuous beds of mineralization with relatively consistent grades. The following KCl commodity prices were used to assess prospects for economic extraction for the mineral resources but are not used for cut-off purposes: US $103.4/tonne for Esterhazy, US $108.7/tonne for Belle Plaine, and US $130.7/tonne for Colonsay, A US$/CAD$ exchange rate of 1.30 was used to assess prospects for economic extraction for the mineral resources but was not used for cut-off purposes.

(j)A 4% K2O cut-off grade with less than 2% kieserite is used to estimate mineral resources. This is consistent with the definition of mineable potash established by the U.S. Geological Survey. A US $195.6/tonne price was used to assess economic viability for the mineral resources, but was not used for cut-off purposes.

(k)A tonnage reduction of 20% has been applied to the probable mineral reserves to account for geological uncertainty. A KCl grade downgrade of -10% was applied to the probable mineral reserves in order to adjust in-situ grades to ROM grades. A mean density of 2.10 g/cc was applied to all mineral reserve volumes to convert to tonnages. Cut-off grade of ≥ 20% KCl and a minimum Sylvinite thickness of 1.8m was applied for mineral reserves. The reference point for the discounted cash flow utilized K2O commodity prices (US$) of $418/tonne for 2022, $369/tonne for 2023, $353/tonne for 2024, $324/tonne for 2025, $330/tonne for 2026 and $359/tonne for the remaining LOM. Mineral reserves were proven to be economic based on a positive discounted cash flow.

**FLORIDA PHOSPHATES**

Our three phosphate production stage mining facilities (South Fort Meade, Four Corners and Wingate) and three exploration properties (DeSoto, Pioneer and South Pasture) in Florida consist of over 210,000 acres of property in central Florida (Table 2.8 and Figure 2.3). We idled the mining and beneficiation activities at South Pasture. The facilities and properties are in DeSoto, Hardee, Hillsborough, Manatee and Polk counties. Even though we continue to add real property to one or more of these locations, most of the property currently being mined or planned for future mining have been in industry ownership for over 50 years. The mining facilities and exploration properties are owned by or have controlling interest granted to Mosaic Fertilizer LLC, South Ft. Meade Land Management or South Ft. Meade Land Partnership, L.P. ("***SFMLP***"), each a subsidiary of Mosaic.

We either own or have a controlling interest in the mineral rights to the current and future facilities. Mineral and surface rights are joined at the Four Corners, Wingate, Pioneer and South Pasture properties. Portions of the DeSoto property and South Fort Meade facility have the surface and mineral interests severed.

The net book value for our Florida phosphate mining facilities and exploration properties is $1.3 billion as of December 31, 2022.

Table 2.9 lists the land status and acreages for the facilities and properties.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

**<u>Table 2.8: Property Locations</u>**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **Property** | **Location** |
| South Fort Meade Facility | Straddles the county line road beginning 1.3 miles (2.1 km) east of the City of Bowling Green and continuing another five miles (8 km). Located at 27.667195 N, 81.761349 W. |
| Four Corners Facility | Located in southeast Hillsborough County, northeast Manatee County and southwest Polk County. Located at 27.646144 N, 82.087305 W. |
| Wingate Facility | Most of the property associated with this mine is west of Duette Road and north of State Road 64. There is a portion of this property that exists on the east side of Duette Road that begins approximately three miles (2 km) north of State Road 64. Located at 27.504452 N, 82.132221 W. |
| DeSoto Property | This exploration property is bisected by State Road 70 and State Road 72 running east and west and the county line running north and south. A portion of the DeSoto property is owned fee simple and the mining interests on the remaining portion is secured by mineral rights. Located at 27.263018 N, 82.035208 W. |
| Pioneer Property | This exploration property is bisected by County Road 663 running north and south. Several local roads (Murphy, Bridges, Bennett and Post Plant) cross this parcel. Located at 27.439391 N, 81.940020 W. |
| South Pasture Property | The property is situated along a 10 mile stretch of State Road 64 and a seven mile stretch along Country Road 663. All parcels are bisected by County Road 663, State Road 62, State Road 64 and several local roads. The mining and beneficiation activities at this location have been idled. Located at 27.585787 N, 81.942888 W. |

---

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

**<u>Figure 2.3: Location Plan</u>**

![mos-20221231_g9.jpg](mos-20221231_g9.jpg)

The table below includes only land holdings associated with our mining properties.

**<u>Table 2.9: Property Status and Acreages</u>**

---

| | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Status (Acres)** | **Status (Acres)** | **Status (Acres)** | **Status (Acres)** | **Status (Acres)** | **Status (Acres)** |
| | **Florida Phosphate Property Status and Acreages** | **Florida Phosphate Property Status and Acreages** | **Florida Phosphate Property Status and Acreages** | **Florida Phosphate Property Status and Acreages** | **Florida Phosphate Property Status and Acreages** | **Florida Phosphate Property Status and Acreages** |
| | **Fee Simple** | **Mining Agreement** | | **Mineral Rights** <sup>(b)</sup> | **Lease** | **Total** |
| South Fort Meade Facility | 15333 | 25528 | <sup>(a)</sup> | 92 | 571 | 41524 |
| Four Corners Facility | 54671 |  |  |  |  | 54671 |
| Wingate Facility | 8761 |  |  |  |  | 8761 |
| DeSoto Property | 24113 | 8 |  | 18943 |  | 43064 |
| Pioneer Property | 26017 |  |  |  |  | 26017 |
| South Pasture Property | 38723 |  |  |  |  | 38723 |
| Total | 167618 | 25536 |  | 19035 | 571 | 212760 |

---

**______________________________**

(a)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The mining agreement relates to the SFMLP which is 100% controlled by Mosaic or its subsidiaries.

(b)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;All acres include surface rights with the exception of the DeSoto mineral rights.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

Governmental permits and approvals for mining are obtained from federal, state and county authorities, including the Environmental Resource Permit ("***ERP***") issued by FDEP and permits required by Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act. In connection with these permits, we are required to develop a reclamation plan with respect to these areas. The ERP is associated with a FDEP-approved reclamation plan that requires "acre for acre and type for type" reclamation to reclaim mined areas. Mitigation may also be required by ERP conditions which may also require conservation easements to provide permanent protection.

The integrated water use permit ("***IWUP***") issued by the Southwest Florida Water Management District ("***SWFWMD***") in 2012 authorizes the withdrawal of groundwater from underground aquifers through permitted wells to provide potable and production-water supplies in support of mining and other operations. The IWUP addresses all of our active mining operations. A separate water use permit ("***WUP***") was issued by SWFWMD for the South Pasture property in 2017. The IWUP and the South Pasture WUP also regulate mine dewatering to avoid adverse impacts to wetlands and offsite properties. Both the IWUP and the WUP are 20 year permits expiring in 2032 and 2037, respectively.

Pre-mining development follows the issuance of regulatory permits. This involves ditch and berm construction for stormwater control, groundwater draw down mitigation where applicable, land clearing, installation of infrastructure and pre-mining dewatering (only for dragline mining).

There are no significant environmental permitting encumbrances, existing or anticipated, associated with the mining facilities and exploration properties. We do not anticipate any future encumbrances based on current known regulations and existing permitting processes. There are no material outstanding violations and fines.

***Existing Infrastructure***

The three mining facilities are in rural central Florida located southeast of Tampa in Hardee, Hillsborough, Manatee and Polk counties. The sites are located in agricultural zones with associated population centers and easy access to multiple transportation hubs in central Florida. The three exploration properties are located south of the mining facilities. Each will utilize the same water, electrical, railway, and road networks as the active mines.

The mining facilities at South Fort Meade, Four Corners, Wingate and South Pasture commenced operations between 1981 and 1995, as noted below under "History and Exploration". The phosphate mines have the infrastructure to meet our current production plans and long-range production goals. The current infrastructure includes major roads and highway access, railway support from CSX Transportation and electricity supplied by Duke Energy, TECO, PRECO, Florida Power and Mosaic cogeneration in associated distribution areas. Water supply is from Mosaic-owned deep wells and recycle sources. Current clay and tailings management areas footprints are expected to meet present demands, with additional capacity planned to meet the maximum volume and deposition rates from the LOM plan, which covers the period between 2022 and 2035. An integrated operations center remotely controls certain functions at our Florida phosphate mines.

Additional infrastructure may be added to increase production reliability or flexibility. The assets currently in place are maintained through a workflow process that focuses on proactive inspections and preventative maintenance, while trying to minimize reactive maintenance. Except for South Pasture, which is currently idled, minimal infrastructure is currently in place at the other exploration properties.

We expect the sites to continue to operate effectively during the LOM while continuing to maintain the built infrastructure and renewing the long-term agreements in place for the site's water, electricity, and logistics needs.

We focus on reliability-centered maintenance with the goal of extending the life of the majority of assets to align with the LOM plan. We expect that some infrastructure will need to be replaced as it reaches end of life and has been factored into the relevant capital cost requirements.

Phosphate mining in central Florida is a mature industry. A network of suppliers, machine shops, fabricators, and specialty contractors exist to support mining, and post-mining, land reclamation activities. Many large component vendors have branch offices in either Lakeland or Tampa, Florida. Engineering, design, and technical services are readily available in Bartow, Lakeland and Tampa, Florida.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

***Mining Method***

Our mining operations in central Florida extract phosphate using surface mining techniques. The active mines utilize either electric walking draglines or dredges to remove overburden and mine phosphate ore (matrix). Matrix is hydraulically transported via centrifugal pumping systems to the beneficiation plant.

Pre-mining development follows the issuance of regulatory permits. This involves ditch and berm construction for stormwater control, groundwater draw down mitigation where applicable, land clearing, installation of infrastructure and pre-mining dewatering (only for dragline mining).

Development of the mine plan is based on several factors, including geological data, equipment, property boundaries, geotechnical considerations, clay impoundment, reclamation schedule, production (volume and quality) demands, permits (local, state and federal) and third-party agreements, such as agreements with local community groups, neighboring properties or NGO's which do not materially impair the mine plan. Production is monitored through dragline/dredge monitoring systems, mass-flow instrumentation on slurry pumping systems and pit surveys. In addition to draglines and dredges, heavy mobile equipment is used to support mining activities. While each mine is staffed with Mosaic personnel to handle production and maintenance, contractors are used on an as-needed basis.

***Processing Recovery Method***

Phosphate matrix mined at the three mining facilities is processed through onsite beneficiation plants. The principal production components of the beneficiation plants consist of a washer, sizing system and flotation plant.

Matrix at each mine is slurried for transport to the beneficiation plant. After receiving matrix, washers separate minerals into four separate material groups. These are debris, pebbles, clay, and under-sized flotation feed. The pebble is one of the final products and the under-sized flotation feed material contains recoverable phosphate rock. The washers separate >1.0 mm phosphate product and the <1.0 mm slurry of liberated clay, sand and phosphate particles. The clay is removed with hydrocyclones and pumped to clay settling areas while the >0.1 mm sand and phosphate move on to the sizing section.

The >0.1 mm sand and phosphate is separated into different size fractions using hydrosizers. An upward flow of water is injected into the hydrosizer that forces the fine particles to rise and overflow the sizer, while the coarse particles gently fall and flow out the sizer's underflow. The segregated fine and coarse particles are then sent to the flotation plant so the phosphate can be separated from the sand.

The two-step flotation process, rougher flotation and cleaning flotation, is next utilized to separate phosphate from the sand. In the rougher flotation process, the phosphate mineral is recovered using flotation machines by adding fatty acid, oil, soda ash, and sodium silicate. To increase the recovered rougher phosphate grade, a second cleaning flotation process is used to remove the residual sand using amine.

***History and Exploration***

Table 2.10 lists the important historical dates and events relevant to the mining facilities and exploration properties:

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

**<u>Table 2.10: History</u>**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **Date** | **Event/Activity** |
| 1881 | Pebble phosphate discovered along the Peace River south of Fort Meade by Captain J. Francis LeBaron, chief engineer of a detachment of the Engineering Corps, United States Army. |
| 1888 | Phosphate rock first commercially mined along the Peace River. |
| 1977 | Farmland Industries purchased the Pioneer (eastern portion a.k.a. Hickory Creek) property. |
| 1981 | Beker Phosphate Company opened Wingate. |
| 1983 | Four Corners construction was completed. The operation was an equal partnership between IMC and W.R. Grace Corporation. |
| 1985 | Wingate was closed after Beker Phosphate Company filed for bankruptcy. |
| 1985 | Four Corners started production. |
| 1986 | IMC purchased Brewster Phosphates and closed the Lonesome Mine which would later be consolidated into Four Corners. |
| 1986 | Four Corners is idled due to market conditions. |
| 1986 | The DeSoto (also known as Pine Level) property is sold by AMAX Chemical Company to Consolidated Minerals, Incorporated. |
| 1988 | IMC gained 100% control of Four Corners. |
| 1989 | IMC restarted Four Corners. |
| 1990 | Wingate is acquired by Nu-Gulf. |
| 1992 | Wingate is reopened after a joint venture by Nu-Gulf and Royster Industries but closed later that year. |

| 1995 | CF Industries opened and started production at South Pasture. |
| 1995 | Mobil Chemical Corporation opened and started production at South Fort Meade. |
| 1996 | Cargill Fertilizer (later Cargill Crop Nutrition) acquired South Fort Meade. |
| 1996 | DeSoto (a.k.a. Pine Level) and Ona (includes western portion of the Pioneer property) properties are sold by CMI to IMC-Agrico. |
| 1997 | IMC acquired Freeport McMoRan's share of IMC-Agrico. |
| 1998 | Wingate is reopened. |
| 1999 | Wingate is closed. |
| 2002 | Cargill Crop Nutrition acquired the Pioneer property (eastern portion a.k.a. Hickory Creek) from Farmland-Hydro. |
| 2004 | Cargill Crop Nutrition acquired and reopened the Wingate Facility. |
| 2004 | Mosaic created out of a merger between IMC and Cargill Crop Nutrition. |
| 2005 | Wingate is shutdown. |
| 2006 | The Fort Green site is closed permanently, and the property is consolidated into Four Corners and Wingate. |
| 2008 | Wingate is reopened. |
| 2014 | Mosaic acquired CF Industries' phosphate business in Florida, which included the South Pasture property. |
| 2018 | South Pasture Facility is idled. |
| 2018 | Ona (western portion) property is consolidated into Four Corners. |
| 2020 | South Fort Meade acquired the Eastern Reserves Phase I. |
| 2022 | South Fort Meade acquired the Eastern Reserves Phase II. |

---

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

***Geology and Mineralization***

The phosphate deposits of Florida are sedimentary in origin and part of a phosphate-bearing province that extends from southern Florida north along the Atlantic coast into southern Virginia. Sedimentary phosphate deposits consist of rock in which the phosphate mineral(s) occur in grains, pellets, nodules, and as phosphate replacement of calcium in the remains of animal skeletal material and excrement.

Florida has phosphate rock distributed along the entire peninsula with varying lateral extents and abundance. There are five phosphate districts recognized in Florida identified as Northern, Northeast, Hardrock, Southeast and Central. The phosphates of Florida occur in sedimentary rocks and are of secondary origin, having been redeposited either by mechanical or chemical action. During deposition, most of the carbonate platform was drowned, and deposition was widespread. The intensity of reworking by marine processes allows some deposits to remain relatively near their origins and contribute to massive deposits while others were transported and winnowed into deposits of nodules, grains and pellets.

All our phosphate deposits are located in the central Florida Phosphate District. The general description of the phosphatic deposits in central Florida consist of two geological facies. The phosphate bearing units are within the Bone Valley Member of the Peace River Formation and the Undifferentiated Member of the Peace River Formation within the South Florida Extension region of the Central District. The deposit characteristics transition from north east to the south west. The major phosphate bearing units in the north east consist of a productive Bone Valley Member with limited production in the Undifferentiated Member. The phosphate bearing units in the south west exhibit limited production in the Bone Valley Member and a productive Undifferentiated Member of the Peace River Formation.

The phosphate stratigraphy consists of 5 to 50 feet (1.5 to 15.2 m) thick, white to brown poorly graded quartz sand with varying abundance of reworked phosphate grains as waste overburden. The economic zone is 13 to 50 feet (4.0 to 15.2 m) thick, with a grade ranging from 27 to 35% P2O5. It consists of tan-gray to gray quartz sands, dark gray to dark gray-blue-green clays and silts with phosphate nodules and pellets present with phosphate grains and clasts predominate. There can be interbedded waste zones of 0 to 15 feet (0.0 to 4.6 m) thick comprised of beds of cream to green barren sandy clay, clays or dense dolomitic clays. The basal units are dark gray to black clays to phosphatic limestone rubble to beds of phosphatic limestone.

***Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Assumptions and Modifying Factors***

The key mineral resource and mineral reserve assumptions and modifying factors are listed in Table 2.11.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

**<u>Table 2.11: Key Assumptions and Modifying Factors</u>:**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **Parameter** | **Value** | **TRS Section** |
| Supporting Information | Regional geologic studies, 56,201 drill holes and greater than 40 years of mining history. | Section 7 |
| Average total thickness of the phosphate mineralization | 13 to 50 feet (4 to 15 m) | Section 6 |
| Minimum Concentrate %P2O5 | 0.2745 | Section 11 |
| Minimum Pebble %P2O5 | 18.3 to 22.9% | Section 11 |
| Maximum pebble magnesium oxide ("***MgO***") cut-off volume | 0.025 | Section 11 |
| Maximum Clay Content | 40 to 50% | Section 11 |
| Maximum Dragline Mining depth | 85 feet (26 m) | Section 11 |
| Maximum dredge mining depth | 109 feet (33 m) | Section 11 |
| Production Days per Year | 365 days | Section 11 |
| Mining Method | Dredge and dragline mining | Section 13 |
| Production Rate | Approximately 9 to 13 million tonnes per year (2022-2030). | Section 13 |
| Mineral Resource Cut-offs | The cut-offs used to estimate mineral resources by site include, the minimum beneficiation plant concentrate BPL (%P2O5), minimum pebble BPL (%P2O5), maximum pebble magnesium oxide concentration and a maximum clay content cut-off for a logged matrix layer and the composite matrix volume. | Section 11 |
| Mineral Reserve Cut-off | Cut-off based on productivity factors per site have been applied to estimate mineral reserves. | Section 12 |
| Mining Dilution | 13.5 to 19.4% minimum pebble volume dilution and 9.5 to 12.6% minimum concentrate volume dilution. | Section 11 |
| Mineral Resource Impurity Recovery | 100% | Section 11 |
| Mineral Reserve Pebble Impurity Recovery | 88 to 97% Fe2O3, 104 to 115% aluminum oxide ("***Al2O3***"), 94 to 100% CaO, 123 to 169% MgO | Section 12 |
| Mineral Reserve Concentrate Impurity Recovery | 86 to 96% Fe2O3, 91 to 104% Al2O3, 90 to 100% CaO, 82 to 102% MgO | Section 12 |
| Processing Method | Beneficiation plants at the facilities consisting of washer, sizing and flotation processes. | Section 14 |
| Mineral Resource Beneficiation Plant Recovery | 100% | Section 11 |
| Mineral Reserves Beneficiation Plant Recovery | Pebble: 87.8 to 97.2%, Concentrate: 68.5 to 79.5% | Section 12 |
| Deleterious Elements and Impact | Major elements include MgO, pyrite (FeS2) and Al2O3 affecting flotation and filtering processes. | Section 10, 11,12 |
| Environmental Requirements, Permits etc. | No significant environmental permitting encumbrances. | Section 17 |
| Geotechnical Factors (if any) | No concerns. | Section 13 |
| Hydrological or hydrogeological factors (if any) | Water inflow onto mining areas can impact recovery and dilution. | Section 13 |
| Commodity Price | $102.72/tonne of phosphate rock. | Section 16 |

---

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

***Mineral Resource Estimates***

Mosaic's phosphate mineral resources are reported as a beneficiation plant product (phosphate rock) tonnage and P2O5 grade, including a total primary impurities ratio ("***MER***").

The geological information used to estimate the phosphate mineral resources for the mining facilities and exploration properties is based on drilling and sampling. The mineral resource estimates are completed using a proprietary software that applies specific grade, physical and impurity limits to the raw drill data of the property. These factors are used to select material that contains sufficient grade, limited impurities and is physically extractable to be included in the mineral resource estimate. The confidence and classification of the mineral resources is estimated based on the drill density of the evaluated area.

Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves have not demonstrated economic viability utilizing the criteria and assumptions required.

The methodology for estimating mineral resources consists of interpreting the available geological data to create composites of lithological units that meet the specified criteria. These composites are then mapped to determine the mineral resource boundary. The boundary is then trimmed to account for permit and mine boundary limitations. The composite data is also used to create a geologic model composed of volume, density, grade, and impurity grids created using inverse distance weighted as the interpolation method. Elevation grids are created using triangulation based on LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) or survey data assigned to each drill hole. A utility macro is used to adjust elevations to account for holes with no matrix that meets the mine requirements. The data from each grid is then volumetrically combined using product volumes for the specific mineral resource shape and mineral resource classification creating a block of uniform constituents. Estimation of mineralization tonnage, grade and impurities is done by applying the volume weight percent of pebble, feed, and clay for the given mineral resource shape.

Additional details regarding the estimation methodology are listed in Section 11 of the 2022 Florida Phosphate Mining TRS filed as an Exhibit to this Form 10-K.

Table 2.12 lists the total mineral resource estimates. Mineral resources are reported exclusive of the mineral reserves.

**<u>Table 2.12: Mineral Resources at the End of the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2022 Based on a LOM Plan Phosphate Rock Price of $68.00 per tonne</u>**<sup>(a)(b)(c)(d)(f)</sup>

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| *(tonnes in millions)* |  |  |  |  |
| **Category** | **Tonnes**<sup>(e)</sup> | **Grade %P2O5**<sup>(e)</sup> | **Cut-off Grade** | **Metallurgical Recovery %** |
| Measured | 102.0 | 30.0 | n/a | 100% |
| Indicated | 415.0 | 30.1 | n/a | 100% |
| **Measured + Indicated** | **517.0** | **30.1** | n/a | 100% |
| Inferred | 83.0 | 30.0 | n/a | 100% |

---

**______________________________**

(a)Mineral resources are not mineral reserves and do not meet the threshold for mineral reserve modifying factors, such as estimated economic viability, that would allow for conversion to mineral reserves. There is no certainty that any part of the mineral resources estimated will be converted into mineral reserves.

(b)Mineral resources are reported as mineralization (matrix) tonnage, grade and impurities after beneficiation.

(c)Mineral resources assume dragline mining at all sites except Wingate mine where dredging is assumed.

(d)Mineral resources amenable to a dragline mining method are contained within a conceptual mine pit design using the same technical parameters as used for mineral reserves.

(e)The cut-offs used to estimate mineral resources include: minimum beneficiation plant concentrate BPL (27.45%P2O5), minimum pebble BPL (18.30%P2O5, except 22.88%P2O5 for DeSoto and Pioneer), maximum pebble magnesium oxide concentration and a maximum clay content cut-off for a logged matrix layer, and the composite matrix volume.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

(f)A LOM commodity price of $68.00 per tonne of phosphate rock was used to assess prospects for economic extraction but is not used for cut-off purposes.

The mineral resource estimated tonnage and grades did not change from 2021 to 2022.

***Mineral Reserve Estimates***

Mosaic's estimated mineral reserves are located at the South Fort Meade, Four Corners and Wingate mine facilities and are reported as a beneficiation plant product (phosphate rock) tonnage and P2O5 grade including a total MER. Mineral reserves have demonstrated economic viability utilizing the criteria and assumptions required at each phosphate facility and meet all the mining criteria required including, but not limited to mining, processing, metallurgical, infrastructure, economic, marketing, legal, environmental, social, and governmental factors.

The methodology for estimating mineral reserves consists of interpreting the available geological data to create composites of lithological units that meet the specified reserve criteria. A utility macro is used to apply reserve plant volume recoveries, adjust insoluble limits to the geologic model and to adjust elevations grids to account for holes with no matrix that meets the mine requirements. Dragline or dredge pit design work and scheduling are applied to the geologic model by the mine planner. Tonnes, grades and product quality are estimated by applying the mining shapes to the geological model. The data from each grid is then volumetrically combined using product volumes for the specific mine pit shape creating a block of uniform constituents. The recoverable tonnes of pebble and feed for the entire mine pit are calculated based on the area of the mine pit. The beneficiation plant grade recoveries are then applied to the recoverable feed tonnes to estimate the mineral reserves and recoverable concentrate tonnes.

Additional details regarding the estimation methodology are listed in Section 12 of the 2022 Florida Phosphate Mining TRS filed as an Exhibit to this Form 10-K.

The mineral reserve estimates are listed in Table 2.13.

**<u>Table 2.13: Mineral Reserves at the End of the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2022 Based on a LOM Plan Phosphate Rock Price of $68.00 per tonne</u>**<sup>(</sup><sup>a)(b)(c)(d)(e)</sup>

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| *(tonnes in millions)* |  |  |  |
| **Category** | **Tonnes** | **Grade**<br>**%P2O5** | **Metallurgical Recovery %** |
| Proven | 56 | 28.0 | Pebble: 87.8 to 97.2%, Concentrate: 68.5 to 79.5% |
| Probable | 70 | 27.1 | Pebble: 87.8 to 97.2%, Concentrate: 68.5 to 79.5% |
| **Proven + Probable** | **126** | **27.5** | Pebble: 87.8 to 97.2%, Concentrate: 68.5 to 79.5% |

---

**___________________________**

(a)South Fort Meade and Four Corners mineral reserves are mined by a dragline mining method. Wingate mineral reserves are mined by dredge mining.

(b)Cut-off based on productivity factors per site have been applied to estimate mineral reserves. Recoverable finished product tonnes vs. matrix volume mined ranges from 9.4-9.9%. Recoverable finished product tonnes vs. total volume mined is 2.2%,

(c)Mine designs are used to constrain measured and indicated mineral resources within mineable pit shapes.

(d)Only after a positive economic test and inclusion in the LOM plan are the mineral reserve estimates considered and disclosed as mineral reserves.

(e)A commodity price of $68.00 per tonne of phosphate rock was used to assess the economic viability of the mineral reserves in the LOM.

**Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Comparison**

As of December 31, 2022, we had mineral reserves of 126 million tonnes compared to 127 million in the prior year, resulting in a decrease of <1%. Changes in mineral reserve tonnage from the prior year are the result of mining depletion, small changes to beneficiation plant factors and mineral reserve acquisitions.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

**BELLE PLAINE**

The Belle Plaine Facility is in the rural municipality of Pense (No. 160) in the province of Saskatchewan, Canada. It is located north of the TransCanada Highway (Hwy. 1) approximately 32 miles (51 km) west of Regina (Figure 2.4). It is the oldest and largest potash solution mine in the world. Coordinates for the Belle Plaine Facility are +50° 25' 39.57, -105° 11' 53.87" +50° 25' 39.57," -105° 11' 53.87".

We lease 53,133 acres of mineral rights from the Crown under Subsurface Mineral Lease KL 106-R. Table 2.14 lists additional information regarding the lease. Table 2.15 outlines the lease acreage designated by township and section. The lease term is for a period of 21 years from July 2012, with renewals at the Company's option for additional 21-year periods.

In addition, we own 16,523 acres of mineral rights within the Belle Plaine area as shown in Table 2.16 below. All mineral titles owned or leased by us include "subsurface minerals," which under The Subsurface Mineral Tenure Regulations, 2015 (Saskatchewan) means "all-natural mineral salts of boron, calcium, lithium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, bromine, chlorine, fluorine, iodine, nitrogen, phosphorus and sulfur, and their compounds, occurring more than 197.0 feet (60.0 m) below the surface of the land". Other commodities (e.g., petroleum and natural gas, coal, etc.) may be included within mineral rights we lease or own but are not specifically sought after when acquired.

Within the total acreage leased from the Crown or owned by us are parcels of land where we own or lease less than a 100% share of the mineral rights. In order to mine these properties, we would need to acquire 100% control either by lease or ownership. Acreages currently not mineable for this reason are listed in Table 2.17 below.

There are no significant environmental permitting encumbrances, existing or anticipated in the future, associated with the Belle Plaine Facility. We do not anticipate any future encumbrances based on current known regulations and existing permitting processes. There are no outstanding fines or material violations.

The net book value for Belle Plaine is $0.9 billion as of December 31, 2022.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

**<u>Figure 2.4: Location Plan</u>**

![mos-20221231_g10.jpg](mos-20221231_g10.jpg)

**<u>Table 2.14: Mineral Lease</u>**

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Crown Lease Number** | **Type** | **Area (Ha)** | E | **Expiration Date** |
| KL 106-R | Subsurface Mineral Lease | 21,501 | | July 1, 2033 |

---

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

**<u>Table 2.15: Sections and Acreages Owned by the Crown</u>**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **Township/Range** | **Sections of Mineral Rights Owned by Crown\*** | **Area of Mineral Rights Owned by Crown (acres)** |
| 18/21 | 2/100 | 12 |
| 19/21 | 4-13/16 | 3087 |
| 17/22 | 4-14/16 | 3118 |
| 18/22 | 9-10/16 | 6166 |
| 19/22 | 9-6/16 | 5991 |
| 17/23 | 9-11/16 | 6201 |
| 18/23 | 14-13/16 | 9475 |
| 17/24 | 7-1/16 | 4500 |
| 18/24 | 18-7/16 | 11813 |
| 18/25 | 4-5/16 | 2768 |
| Total | 83-2/100 | 53131 |

---

\*Full sections range from 640 acres to 644 acres; total acreage shown above is based on 640 acres per section where actual survey acreage is not available.

**<u>Table 2.16: Sections and Acreages of Mosaic Owned Mineral Rights</u>**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Township/Range** | **Sections of Mineral Rights Owned by Mosaic\*** | **Area of Mineral Rights Owned by Mosaic (acres)** | **Area of Full Quarter Sections Owned by Mosaic (acres)** |
| 17/23 | 11-2/16 | 7121 | 6069 |
| 18/23 | 7-1/16 | 4831 | 4057 |
| 17/24 | 7-11/16 | 4922 | 3526 |
| 18/24 | 5-6/16 | 3441 | 2871 |
| Total | 31-4/16 | 20315 | 16523 |

---

\*Full sections range from 640 acres to 644 acres; total acreage shown above is based on 640 acres per section where actual survey acreage is not available.

**<u>Table 2.17: Partial Mineral Rights Area</u>**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **Township/Range** | **Sections of Crown Mineral Rights Leased by Mosaic, Currently Not Mineable\*** | **Crown Mineral Rights Leased by Mosaic, Currently Not Mineable (acres)** |
| 18/22 | 1-2/100 | 652 |
| 19/22 | 1-7/100 | 682 |
| 18/23 | 38/100 | 241 |
| 17/24 | 39/100 | 250 |
| 18/24 | 97/100 | 624 |
| Total | 3-83/100 | 2449 |

---

\*Full sections range from 640 acres to 644 acres; total acreage shown above is based on 640 acres per section where actual survey acreage is not available.

***Existing Infrastructure***

The Belle Plaine Facility has been operating since 1964 and consists of a mining area and a processing plant and has an expected mine life based on mineral reserves of 63 years. The processing plant consists of a refinery and cooling pond. The Belle Plaine Facility has the infrastructure in place to meet the current production goals and LOM plan. The current

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

infrastructure includes major road and highway access; railway support from Canadian National Railway ("***CNR***") and Canadian Pacific Railway ("***CPR***"); SaskPower-supplied electricity; TransGas-supplied natural gas; and potable and non-potable water supplied from a local fresh water source. We expect the current TMA footprint to support the volume and deposition rates indicated in the 2022 Belle Plaine LOM plan.

The main source of water (non-potable) required for production is provided by SaskWater from the Buffalo Pound Lake, located northwest of the mine. It also supplies potable water for the cities of Regina, Moose Jaw and surrounding regions. Water levels are controlled by the SaskWater Security Agency and managed through the Lake Diefenbaker Dam.

SaskPower provides a portion of the power required to run the Belle Plaine Facility. This power comes in off the main SaskPower grid which could be fed from any number of SaskPower plants, along the highline running north and south along Kalium Road. A total of 138 kV comes into the Belle Plaine Facility substation where it is then stepped down to 13.8 kV using two transformers (28 MVA and 33.3 MVA). The Belle Plaine Facility owns and manages a substation where there is also a 138 kV grounding transformer and a 138 kVA gas insulated breaker lineup. The Belle Plaine Facility generates power from the powerhouse from two turbine generators.

TransGas supplies natural gas to the Belle Plaine Facility. The gas flows from the main lines into a local regulator station situated just north of the administration building and powerhouse. This station takes the high-pressure feed from the main lines and cuts it down through onsite filtration and also does some pre-heating to provide low pressure gas directly to the facility.

There are a variety of local or site roads on or to the Belle Plaine Facility. These are typically gravel roads. Roads around the processing plant are paved.

CNR and CPR are available to the Belle Plaine Facility to move final product to port. There is an operating agreement between Mosaic, CPR and CNR which governs the joint operation and interaction of all parties for freight services at the Belle Plaine Facility.

The Belle Plaine Facility is located between the cities of Moose Jaw and Regina, Saskatchewan. Moose Jaw has a population of approximately 34,000 people and is located 17 miles (27 km) west of the Belle Plaine Facility. Regina, located 27 miles (43 km) east of the Belle Plaine Facility, has a population of approximately 214,000 people.

Our workforce primarily lives in Regina and Moose Jaw and are typically trained through a variety of trades programs offered at the Saskatchewan Polytechnic campuses, the University of Regina or the University of Saskatchewan.

The province of Saskatchewan offers a large variety of suppliers for the potash mine operators. The potash industry in Saskatchewan is very mature which makes it easier to attract vendors to support the needs of the various mine sites throughout the province.

Saskatoon and Regina, Saskatchewan both have large industrial sectors with a variety of machine shops and industrial support services. Some specialty services are provided from the Alberta oil and gas industry.

Supplies are sourced locally, regionally and internationally based on availability or commercial considerations. Lead times and on-hand inventory are balanced to meet the needs of the site.

***Mining Method***

The Belle Plaine Facility utilizes an underground, solution mining process where paired wells are directionally drilled, cased, and cemented to the base of the potash beds. Solution mining techniques are used to target mining of the potash ("***KCl***") bedding while minimizing mining of the halite salts ("***NaCl***"). Current mining practices allow for all three potash beds in the formation to be mined. During the mining process, the two wells are mined to connect with each other underground, allowing one well to become the feed well and the other well to become the return well. Water, or a weaker brine, is injected into the cavern to return a salt saturated and potash rich brine. This fluid is pumped through pipelines from the mining area and sent to the refinery complex as raw feed for further processing. The total life cycle of each cavern is approximately 25 years. Once the potash recovery is exhausted, each cavern is plugged and decommissioned in accordance with local government regulations.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

The mining area capability is scheduled to ramp up to support a finished tonnage projection of 3.0 million tonnes per year and will do so until drilling is completed in the year 2066 at which point there is a ramp down in production until 2084.

The 2022 Belle Plaine LOM plan based on mineral reserves has an expected total mine life of 62 years, ending in 2084 and yielding an estimated total of 164.1 million tonnes of final product KCl.

***Processing Recovery Method***

The Belle Plaine Facility processing plant receives KCl-NaCl rich brine, known as raw feed, from the mine and achieves KCl recovery through the refinery and cooling pond areas. We use well established solubility curves of H2O-NaCl-KCl systems to monitor the selective dropout of products in the process.

The refinery subjects the raw feed brine from the mining area to changing temperatures and pressures that selectively precipitates the NaCl and then the KCl out of solution in different stages of the process. Selective drop out of NaCl is achieved through two parallel lines of evaporators that heat the brine with steam, that is generated onsite through natural gas fired boilers. The heating of the raw feed brine results in water liberation, causing NaCl to concentrate in the brine and then precipitate out of solution. After the brine is conditioned in the evaporator circuit, it is pumped to the thickener area for clarification and then pumped into a crystallizer circuit for KCl recovery. The crystallizer circuit subjects the process brine to a vacuum that allows further boiling, creating a cooling effect on the brine. As the brine cools, the KCl is forced to precipitate out of solution. The solid KCl is withdrawn from the crystallizer vessel as a slurry and pumped to the dewatering and drying area. The brine that overflows the crystallizer circuit, which still contains some dissolved KCl and NaCl, is fed to the cooling pond area for further KCl recovery.

The cooling pond area consists of multiple ponds that are fed with brine from the refinery and with raw feed brine from the mining area. The ponds facilitate atmospheric cooling, which allows KCl to preferentially precipitate out of the brine and then settle to the bottom of the ponds. The cooling pond area contains several KCl dredges that are comprised of a cutter wheel that fluidizes the deposited KCl from the bottom of a cooling pond and a slurry pump that moves the KCl slurry toward the dewatering and drying areas.

The dewatering and drying area removes the bulk of the brine in the slurry through process equipment and then conveys the KCl product into natural gas fired industrial dryers. The dried KCl product is then fed into the sizing area or compaction area for compacting, crushing, and screening processes to achieve product size specifications. Finished product is then conveyed to the onsite storage area, where it is held until being reclaimed, rescreened and shipped offsite, primarily through rail.

We expect site production to increase to 3.0 million tonnes per year until the year 2069, at which time we expect to stop drilling new cavities and ramp down production to 2084. The site's ability to produce at a sustained 3.0 million tonnes per year in future years is backed by a Canpotex proving run in 2016/2017, in which the Belle Plaine Facility achieved a production nameplate of 3.9 million tonnes per year. We expect total site processing recovery to average 79% throughout the remaining life of the mine and is dependent on sustained drilling activities. Future projections are modeled with mass and energy balance software to predict the future production and recovery capabilities.

***History and Exploration***

The Belle Plaine Facility started production in 1964, after a period of significant research into solution mining, potash recovery and processing plant construction. Table 2.18 summarizes the important historical dates and events for the Belle Plaine Facility.

**<u>Table 2.18: History</u>**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **Date** | **Event/Activity** |
| 1928 | Discovery of evaporites in the sedimentary sequence in Saskatchewan. |
| 1956 to 1966 | Pittsburgh Plate Glass completed significant research and development over a decade and published several research papers concerning solution mining and potash recovery. |

---

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| 1960 | A pilot solution mining project located at the current site was constructed, convincing Pittsburgh Plate Glass to develop the first commercial potash solution mining operation in the world based on the pilot plant results. The first exploration well drilled at the Belle Plaine property was Standard Chemical Stony Beach #1 in August 1960. Fourteen additional exploration wells were drilled from August 1960 to June 1968. |
| 1963 | Kalium Chemicals, Ltd, a joint subsidiary of Pittsburgh Plate Glass and Armour and Co. started construction of the original processing plant for a capacity of 0.544 million tonnes annually. The main plant construction consisted of the North and South evaporators (all 8), crystallizers #1 to #4, #1 and #2 compactor systems, #1 to #5 beehive warehouses, loadout building and the office and maintenance buildings. |
| 1964 | Mine and processing plant construction completed and production commences. The first rail car of potash was produced and shipped in August. |
| 1968 | Capacity expansion to 0.9 million tonnes per year. Main assets added included three more crystallizers (#5, #6 and #7), a third cooling tower, a sixth beehive warehouse and a barn style warehouse #7, a fluid bed dryer and filter table and a third boiler. |
| 1980 to 1984 | Two capacity expansions, first to 1.1 million tonnes and the second to 1.5 million tonnes per year. The major assets added included bucket elevators for each product, the fine fluid bed dryer, #4 compactor, reheat system barometric, additional galleries and conveyors to the warehouse (1A), cooling ponds, scrubbers and the Cold Leach Area. |
| 1989 | Belle Plaine Facility sold to Sullivan & Proops (Vigoro). |
| 1990s | Capacity expansion to 2.0 million tonnes per year. Assets added included the K-Life System, #4 Turbo Generator, dual conveyors, conversion of the compaction system and additional compactors installed. |
| 1995 | IMC purchased Belle Plaine. |
| 1998 | The first 2D seismic survey at the Belle Plaine mine site was completed. A total of 160 line km was completed covering an area of approximately 5.4 sq. miles (14 sq. km). |
| 2000 | The first 3D seismic survey at the Belle Plaine Facility was completed, providing critical geological information about the geology of the potash members. This has become a critical tool used to provide confidence in the interpretation of the potash mineralization. |
| 2001 | The 2001 Belle Plaine Facility 3D seismic survey was completed. The survey covered approximately 5 sq. miles (13 sq. km) and was adjacent to and merged with the 2000 survey. This survey program utilized 35 miles (56 km) of source lines and 45 miles (72 km) of receiver lines. |
| 2004 | Mosaic created out of a merger between IMC and Cargill Crop Nutrition. |
| 2005 | The 2005 Belle Plaine Facility 3D seismic survey was completed. The survey covered approximately 4 sq. miles (11 sq. km) and was adjacent to and merged with previous 3D surveys. This survey program utilized 29 miles (47 km) of source lines and 34 miles (55 km) of receiver lines. |
| 2008 | The 2008 3D seismic survey covered approximately 28 sq. miles (72 sq. km) and was adjacent to and merged with previous 3D surveys. This survey program utilized 239 miles (385 km) of source lines and 235 miles (378 km) of receiver lines. |
| 2008 to 2012 | Capacity was expanded to 2.86 million tonnes per year. Assets added the injection wells 3 and 4, reclaim brine system, #4 boiler, process water building, cold leach motor control center room, #5 compaction system, #8 warehouse building, #2 reclaim, reclaim losses system, pond return slurry tank and centrifuge upgrades, rotary dryer #3, #2 loadout system, 37 miles (60 km) of new mine field pipelines, a drilling rig, new substation and replacement of the #4 crystallizer. |
| 2010 | The Pense 3D seismic survey was completed that covered approximately 15 sq. miles (40 sq. km) and was adjacent to and merged with the previous 3D surveys. This survey program consisted of 136 miles (219 km) of source lines and 129 miles (208 km) of receiver lines. |
| 2014 | Plant upgrades included the adding and commissioning of Compaction #6. |
| 2016/2017 | The site's ability to produce at a sustained 3.0 million tonnes per year in future years was validated through a "proving run" completed in 2016 when the Belle Plaine Facility achieved a proven peak capacity of 3.9 million tonnes per year. |

---

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| 2019 | Plant upgrades were completed, consisting of adding the east thickener and advanced dewatering techniques. |
| 2020 | Two production wells were cored in 2020 to support the grade interpretation and calibration of the gamma geophysical logging system. The recent calibration check has been evaluated by a third party potash consultant to ensure applicability of the method regarding sample quality grade estimation. |

---

***Geology and Mineralization***

The intracratonic Elk Point Basin is a major sedimentary geological feature in western Canada and the northwest U.S. It contains one of the world's largest stratabound potash resources. The nature of this type of deposition is largely continuous with predictable depths and thickness. It is mined at several locations, including Belle Plaine.

Potash at the Belle Plaine Facility occurs conformably within Middle Devonian-age sedimentary rocks ranging in thicknesses from approximately 100 to 131 feet (30.5 to 39.9 m) at a depth of approximately 5,345 to 5,740 feet (1,629.2 to 1,749.6 m).

The Prairie Evaporite Formation, host to the potash mineralization, is divided into a basal lower salt and an overlying unnamed unit containing three potash-bearing units and one unit containing thin marker beds. In ascending order, the potash horizons in the upper unit are the Esterhazy Member, White Bear Marker Beds, Belle Plaine Member, and Patience Lake Member. Mineralogically, these members consist of sylvite and halite with minor amounts of carnallite (KCl, MgCl2, 6H2O).

The Esterhazy, Belle Plaine, and Patience Lake Members underly the Belle Plaine property. Also present are the White Bear Formation marker beds which occur between the Belle Plaine and Esterhazy Members but are of insufficient thickness to be minable.

The following is a summary of the key stratigraphic units for the Belle Plaine Facility area:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• <u>Patience Lake Member</u>: The uppermost member of the Prairie Evaporite Formation with potash production potential. Between the top of the Prairie Evaporite and the top of the Patience Lake Member is a 0 to 45 feet (0.0 to 13.7 m) thick unit of halite with clay bands called the Salt Back. The sylvite-rich horizons within the Patience Lake Member are mined using conventional underground mining techniques along a trend from Vanscoy to Lanigan in the Saskatoon area and by solution mining techniques at Belle Plaine.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• <u>Belle Plaine Member</u>: The Belle Plaine Member underlies the Patience Lake Member and is separated from it by a zone of low grade sylvinite. The Belle Plaine Member is mined using solution mining techniques at the Belle Plaine Facility.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• <u>White Bear Formation</u>: The White Bear Formation consists of marker beds that are a distinctive unit of thin interbedded clay, halite, and sylvinite horizons that are not minable due to their insufficient thicknesses of only 4.0 to 5.0 feet (1.2 to 1.5 m).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• <u>Esterhazy Member</u>: The Esterhazy Member is separated from the Belle Plaine Member by the White Bear Formation marker beds, a sequence of clay seams, low-grade sylvinite, and halite. The Esterhazy Member is mined using conventional underground techniques at the Esterhazy Facility in southeastern Saskatchewan, and by solution mining techniques at the Belle Plaine Facility. The potash mined at the Belle Plaine Facility is a mixture of halite and sylvite and in some parts of the mining area, small amounts of carnallite. There are a number of insoluble clay-rich zones that are not recovered in the solution mining process. The potash deposit at Belle Plaine is uniform and laterally continuous. Solution mining methods can more easily accommodate any local variations in geological condition due to the non-selective concentrate mining process.

When considering the sequence of mining at the Belle Plaine Facility, the following terminology is applied to the beds. This describes the geology in a way that best summarizes the grades that are available for solution mining.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• <u>The Upper Mining Zone</u> consists of beds 38 to 31 of the Patience Lake Member and beds 23 to 21 of the Belle Plaine Member. The Upper Mining Zone is about 90 feet (27.4 m) thick.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• <u>The Salt Stringer</u> is a thin bed of salt located between Beds 31 and 23 in the Upper Mining Zone. The Salt Stringer is approximately 10 feet (3.0 m) thick.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• <u>The Interzonal Salt</u> is a thick bed of salt located between the Lower and Upper Mining Zones.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• <u>The Marker Bed</u> is a small, very rich potash bed located midway through the Interzonal Salt.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• <u>The Lower Mining Zone</u> consists of beds 13, 12 and 11 of the Esterhazy Member. The Lower Mining Zone is approximately 20 feet (6.1 m) thick.

Potash mineralization contains sylvinite: a mixture of the iron oxide-stained halite, sylvite and locally carnallite. When present interstitially or as massive pods, carnallite can deteriorate rapidly or be preferentially dissolved. The color of the potash can vary from light orange to deep red rimmed crystals. The mineralization can be locally bedded or massive. The halite and sylvite crystals can range from small to more typically coarse to large which can be attributed to the conditions during deposition as there has been no alteration.

***Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Assumption and Modifying Factors***

The key mineral resource and mineral reserve assumptions and modifying factors are listed in Table 2.19.

**<u>Table 2.19: Key Assumptions and Modifying Factors</u>**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **Parameter** | **Value** | **TRS Section** |
| Supporting Information | Regional geologic studies, 700 production wells, seismic surveys and greater than 55 years of mining history from approximately 350 caverns. | Section 7, 11 |
| Average composited total thickness of the potash mineralization amenable to solution mining | 102.2 feet (31.1 m) | Section 11 |
| Tonnage Factor | 17.2 cu ft./tonne (2,054 kilograms per cubic meter). | Section 11 |
| Average KCl grade from all drilling | 30.6% (19.3% K2O) | Section 11 |
| Operating Days per Year | 365 days | Section 13 |
| Mining Method | Solution mining from surface installations. | Section 13 |
| Production Rate | 3.0 million tonnes per year. | Section 13 |
| Cut-off | No cut-off grade is applied. | Section 11, 12 |
| Mining Recovery | 22% | Section 13 |
| External Dilution |  | Section 12 |
| Processing Method | KCl recovered from brine solution. | Section 14 |
| Processing Recovery | 79 to 96% | Section 14 |
| Deleterious Elements and Impact | Trace NaCl and MgCl2 | Section 10 |
| Environmental Requirements – Permits, etc. | No significant environmental permitting encumbrances. | Section 17 |
| Geotechnical Factors (if any) | No concerns. | Section 13 |
| Hydrological or Hydrogeological Factors (if any) | No concerns. | Section 13 |
| Commodity Prices | KCl commodity prices: 2022-$109/tonne, 2023-$616/tonne, 2024-$472/tonne, 2025-$253/tonne, 2026-$214/tonne, 2027-$301/tonne and for the LOM $417/tonne. | Section 16 |
| Exchange Rate (US$/C$) | 1.30 | Section 6 |

---

***Mineral Resource Estimates***

The Belle Plaine Facility mineral resources are reported as in-situ mineralization and are exclusive of mineral reserves. The mineral resources occur in the Esterhazy, Belle Plaine and Patience Lake Members. Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves have not demonstrated economic viability utilizing the criteria and assumptions required at the Belle Plaine Facility.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

The methodology for estimating mineral resources consists of interpreting the available geological data in plain view using AutoCAD 2020 software. The plan is updated to include the current mineral rights status, seismic survey interpretations, the limits of the current mining footprint, known areas (geological anomalies, town sites and other surface infrastructure) that make the mineral resource inaccessible and the planned cluster sites.

Additional details regarding the estimation methodology are listed in Section 11 of the 2021 Belle Plaine Facility TRS filed as an Exhibit to the 2021 Form 10-K.

The mineral resource estimates for the Belle Plaine Facility are listed in Table 2.20.

**<u>Table 2.20: Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2022 Based on a LOM Plan KCl Price of $108.70 per tonne</u>**<sup>(a)(b)(c)(d)</sup>

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| *(tonnes in millions)* |  |  |  |  |  |
| **Category** | **Tonnes** | **Grade** <br>**%K2O** | **Grade %KCl** | **Cut-off** <br>**Grade**<sup>(e)</sup> | **Metallurgical <br>Recovery** |
| Inferred | 4647 | 19 | 31 | n/a | 79 to 90% |

---

**___________________________**

(a)Mineral resources are reported exclusive of those mineral resources that have been converted to mineral reserves.

(b)Mineral resources are not mineral reserves and do not meet the threshold for mineral reserve modifying factors, such as estimated economic viability, that would allow for conversion to mineral reserves. There is no certainty that any part of the mineral resources estimated will be converted into mineral reserves.

(c)Mineral resources assume solution mining.

(d)Mineral resources amenable to a solution mining method are contained within a conceptual cluster and cavern design using the same technical parameters as used for mineral reserves.

(e)No cut-off grade is used to estimate mineral resources as the solution mining method used at the Belle Plaine Facility is not selective. At no point in the cavern development and mining process can a decision be made to mine or not mine the potash mineralization that is in contact with the mining solution. There is no control on what potash grade the mining solution dissolves to make a concentrate that is pumped to surface from the mining caverns for processing.

There were no changes in the mineral resource estimates from 2021 to 2022.

***Mineral Reserve Estimates***

The Belle Plaine Facility mineral reserve estimates are reported as in-situ mineralization accounting for all applicable modifying factors. Mineral reserves meet all the mining criteria required at the Belle Plaine Facility including, but not limited to mining, processing, metallurgical, infrastructure, economic, marketing, legal, environmental, social, and governmental factors.

The methodology for estimating mineral reserves consists of solution mining design work and scheduling and the application of mining recovery and unplanned dilution. Additional details regarding the estimation methodology are listed in Section 12 of the 2021 Belle Plaine Facility TRS filed as an Exhibit to the 2021 Form 10-K.

The mineral reserve estimates for the Belle Plaine Facility are listed in Table 2.21.

**<u>Table 2.21: Mineral Reserves at the End of the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2022 Based on LOM Plan KCl Price of $108.70 per tonne</u>**<sup>(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)</sup>

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| *(tonnes in millions)* |  |  |  |  |
| **Category** | **KCl Tonnes** | **Grade %KCl** | **Grade** <br>**%K2O** | **Metallurgical <br>Recovery %** |
| Proven | 272 | 30.6 | 19.3 | 81.2% |
| Probable | 388 | 30.6 | 19.3 | 81.2% |
| **Proven + Probable** | **660** | **30.6** | **19.3** | **81.2%** |

---

**___________________________**

(a)Mineral reserves are based on measured and indicated mineral resources only.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

(b)All mineral reserves are mined by a solution mining method. Mine designs based on a solution mining method and design criteria are used to constrain measured and indicated mineral resources within mineable shapes.

(c)No cut-off grade is used to estimate mineral reserves. The solution mining method used at the Belle Plaine Facility is not selective. At no point in the cavern development and mining process can a decision be made to mine or not mine the potash mineralization that is in contact with the mining solution. There is no control on what potash grade the mining solution dissolves to make a concentrate that is pumped to surface from the mining cavities for processing.

(d)Only after a positive economic test and inclusion in the LOM plan is the mineral reserve estimate included as a mineral reserve.

(e)The following KCl commodity prices were used to assess economic viability for the mineral reserves, but were not used for cut-off purposes, 2022-$109/tonne, 2023-$616/tonne, 2024-$472/tonne, 2025-$253/tonne, 2026-$214/tonne, 2027-$301/tonne and for the LOM $417/tonne.

(f)A US$/CAD$ exchange rate of 1.30 was used to assess economic viability for the mineral reserves but was not used for cut-off purposes.

**Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Comparison**

As of December 31, 2022, our estimated mineral reserves were 660 million tonnes compared to 668 million as of the prior year-end, resulting in a change of <1%. Year-over-year changes are due to mining depletion.

**ESTERHAZY**

The Esterhazy Facility is approximately 10 miles (16 km) to the east of the town of Esterhazy in Saskatchewan, Canada, 56 miles (90 km) southeast of the city of Yorkton and 137 miles (220 km) east of the city of Regina (Figure 2.5). The K1 mill site is located nine miles (14 km) northeast of Esterhazy. The K2 mill site is located 12 miles (19 km) east of Esterhazy. The K3 mine site is located four miles east (six km) of Esterhazy and the K4 mineral resources are located 18 miles northeast of Esterhazy. The geographic coordinates for K1 are latitude 50.726463 N and longitude -101.933506 W. The K2 coordinates are latitude 50.6574 N and longitude -101.8422 W and the K3 coordinates are latitude 50.64623 N and longitude -101.99346 W.

Mosaic, through Mosaic Potash Esterhazy Limited Partnership, a wholly-owned indirect subsidiary of Mosaic, leases 197,920 acres of mineral rights from the Crown under Subsurface Mineral Leases KL 105, KL 126, and KLSA 003. Table 2.22 lists additional information regarding the three Crown leases. Table 2.23 outlines the total acreage of the Crown leases designated by township and range. The lease terms are 21 years, with renewals at our option for successive 21-year periods.

We also own or lease 206,228 acres of freehold mineral rights within the Esterhazy area as shown in Table 2.24 below. All mineral titles owned or leased by Mosaic include the "subsurface mineral" which under The Subsurface Mineral Tenure Regulations (Saskatchewan) means all natural mineral salts of boron, calcium, lithium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, bromine, chlorine, fluorine, iodine, nitrogen, phosphorus and sulfur, and their compounds, occurring more than 60m below the surface of the land. Other commodities (e.g., petroleum and natural gas, coal, etc.) that are not specifically sought after when acquired may be on mineral titles that Mosaic leases or owns.

Within the total acreage leased from the Crown or owned/leased by us are parcels of land where we own or lease less than a 100% share of the mineral rights. To mine these properties, we would need to acquire 100% control either by lease or ownership. Acres currently not mineable for this reason are listed in Table 2.25 below.

There are no significant environmental permitting encumbrances (existing or anticipated in the future) associated with the Esterhazy Facility. Except for royalties, we do not anticipate any future encumbrances based on current known regulations and existing permitting processes. There are no outstanding fines or material violations.

The net book value for Esterhazy is $3.4 billion as of December 31, 2022.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

**<u>Figure 2.5: Location Plan</u>**![mos-20221231_g11.jpg](mos-20221231_g11.jpg)

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

**<u>Table 2.22: Mineral Lease</u>**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Crown Lease Number** | **Type** | **Area (Hectares)** | **Expiration Date** |
| KL 105 | Subsurface Mineral Lease | 26125 | November 2, 2023 |
| KL 126 | Subsurface Mineral Lease | 28473 | October 25, 2026 |
| KLSA 003 | Subsurface Mineral Lease | 25498 | November 18, 2030 |

---

**<u>Table 2.23: Sections and Acreages Owned by the Crown</u>**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **Township/Range** | **Sections of Mineral Rights Owned by Crown\*** | **Area of Mineral Rights Owned by Crown (acres)** |
| 19/30 | 19-2/16 | 12221 |
| 20/30 | 18-1/16 | 11542 |
| 21/30 | 18-6/16 | 11753 |
| 22/30 | 2-1/16 | 1331 |
| 19/31 | 18-1/16 | 11561 |
| 20/31 | 19-3/16 | 12265 |
| 21/31 | 13-7/16 | 8613 |
| 22/31 | 15-15/16 | 10238 |
| 18/32 | 5-7/16 | 3471 |
| 19/32 | 18-15/16 | 12116 |
| 20/32 | 14-11/16 | 9388 |
| 21/32 | 17-2/16 | 10970 |
| 22/32 | 4-6/16 | 2799 |
| 18/33 | 5-12/16 | 3662 |
| 19/33 | 10-11/16 | 6850 |
| 20/33 | 11-7/16 | 7326 |
| 21/33 | 8-5/16 | 5313 |
| 22/33 | 1-6/16 | 878 |
| 18/1 | 15-9/16 | 9969 |
| 19/1 | 15-14/16 | 10158 |
| 20/1 | 16-7/16 | 10533 |
| 21/1 | 14-6/16 | 9207 |
| 22/1 | 4-3/16 | 2668 |
| 19A/1 | 2-12/16 | 1762 |
| 18/2 | 6-1/16 | 3865 |
| 19/2 | 4-13/16 | 3083 |
| 19A/2 | 1-12/16 | 1130 |
| Total | 309-4/16 | 194672 |

---

\*Full sections range from 640 acres to 644 acres; total acreage shown above is based on 640 acres per section where actual survey acreage is not available.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

**<u>Table 2.24: Sections and Acreages of Mosaic-Owned Mineral Rights</u>**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **Township/Range** | **Sections of Mineral Rights Owned/ Leased by Mosaic\*** | **Area of Mineral Rights Owned/Leased by Mosaic (acres)** |
| 19/30 | 17-14/16 | 11420 |
| 20/30 | 19-7/16 | 12430 |
| 21/30 | 18-8/16 | 11822 |
| 19/31 | 16-13/16 | 10760 |
| 20/31 | 17-13/16 | 11389 |
| 21/31 | 23-6/16 | 14954 |
| 22/31 | 4-7/16 | 2846 |
| 18/32 | 4-15/16 | 3168 |
| 19/32 | 18-8/16 | 11843 |
| 20/32 | 22-12/16 | 14553 |
| 21/32 | 19-12/16 | 12624 |
| 22/32 | 4-8/16 | 2868 |
| 18/33 | 5-14/16 | 3764 |
| 19/33 | 10-6/16 | 6631 |
| 20/33 | 9-8/16 | 6087 |
| 21/33 | 12-10/16 | 8075 |
| 22/33 | 2-3/16 | 1390 |
| 18/1 | 2-8/16 | 1583 |
| 19/1 | 18-14/16 | 12084 |
| 19A/1 | 4-15/16 | 3177 |
| 20/1 | 20-8/16 | 13134 |
| 21/1 | 21-7/16 | 13707 |
| 22/1 | 9-15/16 | 6343 |
| 18/2 | 2-9/16 | 1631 |
| 19/2 | 10-4/16 | 6579 |
| 19A/2 | 2-2/16 | 1365 |
| Total | 30-2/16 | 206227 |

---

\*Full sections range from 640 acres to 644 acres; total acreage shown above is based on 640 acres per section where actual survey acreage is not available.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

**<u>Table 2.25: Partial Mineral Rights Area</u>**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **Township/Range** | **Crown Mineral Rights Leased by Mosaic, Currently Not Mineable (acres)\*** | **Mineral Rights Owned/Leased by Mosaic, Currently Not Mineable (acres)\*** |
| 21/30 | 321 |  |
| 20/31 | 80 |  |
| 21/31 | 80 |  |
| 22/31 | 80 | 514 |
| 21/32 | 321 |  |
| 21/33 |  | 74 |
| 18/1 | 150 |  |
| 19/1 | 1209 | 138 |
| 19A/1 | 322 |  |
| 20/1 | 221 |  |
| 21/1 | 80 | 159 |
| 18/2 | 160 |  |
| 19/2 | 161 |  |
| 19A/2 | 61 |  |
| Total | 3246 | 885 |

---

\*Less than 100% share of a mineral rights parcel.

***Existing Infrastructure***

The Esterhazy Facility consists of an underground mine and two processing plants that started production in 1962. The mine has an additional expected life, based on mineral reserves of 33 years, to 2054. The Esterhazy Facility has the infrastructure in place to meet the current production goals and LOM plan. The current infrastructure includes: major road and highway access; railway support from CNR and CPR; SaskPower supplied electricity; TransGas and SaskEnergy supplied natural gas; and potable and non-potable water supplied from local fresh water sources. The long-term TMA development plan is being revised to support production at the levels indicated in the LOM plan.

Process and potable water for the K1 mill is provided by three approximately 200 foot (61 m) deep wells drilled into the upper Dundurn aquifer. The K2 mill water supply comes from the Cutarm Creek dam reservoir that is owned and operated by Mosaic. Located 1.5 miles (2.4 km) northeast of the K2 site, the dam forms a reservoir approximately 5.25 miles (8.9 km) long and 650 feet (198.1 m) wide. K3 mine water is supplied from K2 via a 7.4 mile (11.9 km) long pipeline.

The power to operate the Esterhazy Facility is supplied by the provincial utility, SaskPower. The K1 mill is serviced by a 72 kV line with approximately 36 MVA capacity. The K2 mill has two services at 72 kV and 138 kV respectively, with a combined capacity of 125 MVA. The K3 mine is serviced by a 230 kV line from SaskPower with 140 MVA capacity. Two transformers step down the voltage, each rated at 70 MVA.

TransGas is the primary supplier of an uninterrupted supply of natural gas to the Esterhazy Facility. Esterhazy has regulator stations for the natural gas at each of the sites, with a low-pressure distribution piping network.

The K1 and K2 sites are serviced by the CNR main line, and by spur lines to the CPR. The surrounding area is developed for agriculture with a road network, villages and towns.

Regina International Airport is 140 miles (225 km) west of the Esterhazy Facility, while Yorkton municipal airport is 55 miles (88 km) to the northwest. The Town of Esterhazy maintains a paved 3,000 feet (914.0 m) long airstrip, located 8 miles (13 km) southwest of the K1 mill.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

The Esterhazy Facility's workforce lives throughout the area, generally within 62 miles (100 km) of the mine sites. This includes the Russell and Binscarth areas of western Manitoba. Education and healthcare facilities are in Esterhazy, Russell, Melville, and Yorkton.

The province of Saskatchewan offers a large variety of suppliers for the potash mine operators. The potash industry in Saskatchewan is very mature, making it easier to attract vendors to support the needs of the various mine sites throughout the province.

Saskatoon and Regina have large industrial sectors with a variety of machine shops and industrial support services. Some specialty services are provided from the Alberta oil and gas industry.

Supplies are sourced locally, regionally and internationally based on availability or commercial considerations. Lead times and on-hand inventory are balanced to meet the needs of the site.

***Mining Method***

At the Esterhazy Facility, potash is extracted by underground mining using the room-and-pillar method. Current mine design allows for the planned extraction of 27.6% of the in-situ ore. Pillars are left in place between mining rooms to support overlying strata and prevent failure of the upper rock formations or an inflow of brine from any water-bearing zones above.

The LOM plan for the Esterhazy Facility includes the K3 mineral reserves. The K4 mineral resources are currently scheduled after depletion of the K3 mineral resources. Production is based on an average production rate of 17.527 million tonnes per year based on 365 production days per year.

We expect the K3 mineral reserves production to ramp up to full production by 2024. We expect the mine to ramp down starting in 2051, with mining anticipated to be completed in 2054.

Our current schedule to begin mining the K4 mineral resources is in 2050. We expect the mine to ramp up to full production in 2055 and ending in 2090.

***Processing Recovery Method***

The Esterhazy Facility's processing plant consists of two separate mill facilities, designated as K1 and K2. Each mill processes the raw ore feed stock received from the underground mining operations through crushing, separation, screening and compaction unit operations to produce on-grade, saleable product. The plants utilize online grade analyzers to monitor the process as well as routine samples that are analyzed by the onsite lab. The milling can be broken down into two main functions: the wet end separates potash and salt, while the dry end sizes potash for sale.

The wet end of the mill begins with raw ore sizing and crushing to prepare it for the separation processes. In heavy media, the larger size fraction is separated into potash and salt through dense media separation that is driven by differences of buoyancy in salt and potash. Flotation receives the smaller size fraction and has specific reagents added that allow the potash crystals to float while the salt is rejected as tailings material. At K2 there is also a crystallizer circuit that produces potash using solubility, temperature, and pressure differences. Dewatering and drying is the final stage in the wet end, where potash is sent through centrifuges and industrial driers to remove all moisture.

Once the product is dried, it is sent to a screen to separate right-sized material from the over and undersized material for all the different product grades. Oversized material is sent through a crushing circuit to break it down to right-sized material. The undersized material is upgraded through compaction to a larger product.

We plan to ramp up milling rates once the K3 mine is up to full capacity. We then expect to stabilize at a total milling rate to the end of mine life. The differences in final product tonnes will be based on supplied raw ore grade as it varies throughout the mine workings. We believe that the site's ability to produce at the increasing rates being forecasted in the LOM plan is supported by a proving run in 2013, when the Esterhazy Facility achieved a production nameplate of 6.3 million tonnes overall.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

***History and Exploration***

The Esterhazy Facility K1 started production in 1962 and K2 started production in 1967. Table 2.26 lists the important historical dates and events for Esterhazy.

**<u>Table 2.26: History</u>**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **Date** | **Event/Activity** |
| 1928 | Discovery of evaporites in the sedimentary sequence in Saskatchewan. |
| 1955 | International Minerals and Chemicals (IMC, Canada) Ltd. acquired >500,000 acre lease in Esterhazy area and started drilling. |
| 1957 to 1962 | IMC Corporation begins shaft sinking at K1. K1 mine production officially started in September 1962 at a capacity of 0.9 million tonnes per year. |
| 1965 | K2 TMA Phase I expansion. |
| 1966 | The K1 mine capacity was expanded to 1.5 million tonnes per year. |
| 1967 | The K2 shaft sinking was completed to a capacity of 2.4 million tonnes per year. The first potash production from K2 was in April/May. |
| 1968 | The K2 TMA Phase II expansion was completed. |
| 1974 | K2 mill expansion, heavy media circuit. |
| 1981 | The K2 TMA Phase III expansion was completed. |
| 1985 | Inflow 10B was detected December 29, 1985 in the D400 entry at a point 3.5 miles (5.6 km) southwest of the K2 shaft. Initial inflow was estimated to be 1,000 gpm. Information obtained using seismic surveys allowed for targeted drilling and placement of calcium chloride and various grouts to reduce the inflow to manageable levels. The pumping capacity was increased through a series of stages to bring online a total of 22 pumps, to a maximum capacity of 4,000 gpm. As a result of these efforts, K1 and K2 sites continued normal mining operations. |
| 1987 | Mineral Resource Location Study – Vibroseis Study was completed. |
| 1989 | 12 exploration drill holes to delineate the K1 and K2 mining area were completed. |
| 1991 to 1998 | Seismic surveys in the Gerald, Gerald West and Cutarm areas. |
| 1997 | IMC Kalium merged with IMC Global and Freeport-McMorRan. |
| 1999 | Company renamed IMC Potash. |
| 2000-03 | Seismic surveys: 2D and 3D (K1 and K2). |
| 2004 | Mosaic created out of a merger between IMC and Cargill Crop Nutrition. |
| 2005 | 3D seismic surveys completed at K1 (7.5 sq. miles, 19.5 sq. km) and K2 (4.0 sq. miles, 10.3 sq. km). |
| 2006-09 | Various seismic surveys completed. Hoist expansion at K2. Processing plant capacity increased to 4.8 million tonnes per year. K2 TMA expansion completed. Exploration drilling of 10 holes including two shaft pilot holes completed as part of the K3 expansion project. |
| 2010 | Completion of the crushing expansion at K1. |
| 2011 | 3D seismic surveys at K1 North (19.7 sq. miles, 51.4 sq. km) and Perrin Lake (14.4 sq. miles, 37.3 sq. km). |
| 2012 | K3 South shaft pre-sink was completed. Esterhazy exits Tolling Agreement with PCS. A number of 3D seismic surveys were completed including Saskman, K1 NW, K1 SWD Field. Seven brine injection wells were drilled at Farfield. |
| 2013 | K3 South Shaft sunk to the potash level. 3D seismic survey at Panel 11Q (9.2 sq. km) completed. Completion of mill expansion at K2 for an additional 0.7 million tonnes per year. A Canpotex proving run was successfully completed increasing the site nameplate processing plant capacity from 4.8 million tonnes per year to 6.3 million tonnes per year. |
| 2014 | 3D seismic survey at Panel 11Q 3C (3.6 sq. miles, 9.3 sq. km) completed. |
| 2015 | 3D seismic surveys at Gerald (4.7 sq. miles, 12.1 sq. km) and K3 (89.7 sq. miles, 232.4 sq. km) completed. |

---

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| 2016 | Nine exploration drill holes completed. |
| 2017 | The K3 North shaft sinking was completed and the first K3 ore from the South shaft was skipped to surface and trucked to the K1 mill. |
| 2018 | The K3 to K2 overland conveyor construction was completed. The K3 North shaft steel and Keope hoist rope up were completed. The K3 North shaft first ore skipped in December 18 and trucked to the K2 mill.<br>The first K3 ore was conveyed on the overland conveyor to the K2 mill in December. |
| 2019 | Commissioned the K3 Koepe production and Blair service hoists. Four drum miners cutting K3 shaft pillar development started. Two four rotor miner assemblies completed. The K3 South shaft sinking was completed in November. |
| 2020 | Completion of the South shaft bottom steel, added a third four-rotor miner, installed the Mainline conveyor, added a fourth rotor miner cutting and completed the K3 South Headframe concrete slip. K3 shaft pillar development completed in December. The K3 fifth four-rotor continuous miner started cutting in October. The first ore from K3 conveyed to K1. |
| 2021 | The sixth K3 four-rotor miner started cutting in January and the seventh four rotor-miner started cutting in May. The K1 and K2 mines were closed 9 months ahead of schedule in response to brine inflow conditions. |
| 2022 | K1 and K2 shaft decommissioning completed. |

---

***Geology and Mineralization***

The intracratonic Elk Point Basin is a major sedimentary geological feature in western Canada and the northwest U.S. It contains one of the world's largest stratabound potash resources. The nature of this type of deposition is largely continuous with predictable depths and thickness. It is mined at several locations, including the Esterhazy Facility.

Potash at the Esterhazy Facility area occurs conformably within Middle Devonian-age sedimentary rocks and is found in total thicknesses ranging from approximately 100 to 131 feet (30 to 40 m) at a depth of approximately 5,345 to 5,740 feet (1,630 to 1,750 m).

The Prairie Evaporite Formation, host to the potash mineralization, is divided into a basal "lower salt" and an overlying unnamed unit containing three potash-bearing units and one unit containing thin marker beds. In ascending order, the potash horizons in the upper unit are the Esterhazy Member, White Bear Marker Beds, Belle Plaine Member, and Patience Lake Member. Mineralogically, these members consist of sylvite and halite, with minor amounts of carnallite (KCl, MgCl2, 6H2O).

In the Esterhazy area, the Esterhazy, White Bear and Belle Plaine Members are present, and the Patience Lake Member is absent. The following is a summary of the key stratigraphic units for the Esterhazy Facility area:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• <u>Belle Plaine Member</u>: The Belle Plaine Member underlies Second Red Bed and makes up part of the salt back that is critical to isolating the mining horizon from the formations above. The Belle Plaine Member is mined using solution mining techniques at the Belle Plaine Facility and is not mined at the Esterhazy Facility.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• <u>White Bear Member</u>: The White Bear Member consists of marker beds that are a distinctive unit of thin interbedded clay, halite, and sylvinite horizons that are not minable due to their insufficient thickness of only 4.0 to 5.0 feet (1.2 to 1.5 m).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• <u>Esterhazy Member</u>: The Esterhazy Member is separated from the Belle Plaine Member by the White Bear Member marker beds, a sequence of clay seams, low-grade sylvinite, and halite. The Esterhazy Member is mined using conventional underground techniques at the Esterhazy Facility in southeastern Saskatchewan, and by solution mining techniques at the Belle Plaine Facility.

The typical sylvinite intervals within the Prairie Evaporite Formation consist of a mass of interlocked sylvite crystals that range from pink to translucent and may be rimmed by greenish-grey clay or bright red iron insoluble material, with minor halite randomly disseminated throughout the mineralized zones. Local large one inch (2.5 cm) cubic translucent to cloudy halite crystals may be present within the sylvite groundmass, and overall, the sylvinite ranges from a dusky brownish red color (lower grade, 23% to 27% K2O with an increase in the amount of insoluble material) to a bright, almost translucent pinkish orange color (high grade, 30%+ K2O). Carnallite is also present locally in the Prairie Evaporite Formation as a

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

mineral fraction of the depositional sequence. The intervening barren salt beds consist of brownish red, vitreous to translucent halite with minor sylvite and carnallite and increased insoluble materials content.

***Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Assumptions and Modifying Factors***

The key mineral resource and mineral reserve assumptions and modifying factors are listed in Table 2.27.

**<u>Table 2.27: Key Assumptions and Modifying Factors</u>**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **Parameter** | **Value** | **TRS Section** |
| Supporting Information | Regional geologic studies, 59 exploration holes, seismic surveys, in-mine channel samples and 50 years of mining history at K1 and K2. | Section 7 |
| Average total thickness of the potash mineralization | 8.55 feet (2.6 m)., based on the ratio of 8.5 feet (2.6 m)t. production panel mining height and 9.0 feet (2.7 m) t. development mining height. | Section 11 |
| Density | 129.878 lbs./cu ft. (2,080.446 kg/cu m) | Section 11 |
| In-mine channel samples grade | 27.1% K2O | Section 11 |
| Operating Days per Year | 365 days | Section 13 |
| Mining Method | Underground room and pillar mining. | Section 13 |
| Production Rate | 17.527 million tonnes per year. | Section 13 |
| Cut-off | No cutoff grade is applied. | Section 11 |
| Mining Recovery | 27.6% | Section 12, 13 |
| External Dilution |  | Section 12, 13 |
| Processing Method | Two mill facilities that crush, float, screen and compact KCl. | Section 14 |
| Processing Recovery | 85 to 88% (86.1% average) | Section 14 |
| Deleterious Elements and Impact | Increased amounts of NaCl can significantly impact production volumes. | Section 10 |
| Environmental Requirements, Permits, etc. | No significant environmental permitting encumbrances. | Section 17 |
| Geotechnical Factors (if any) | No concerns/issues. | Section 13 |
| Hydrological or Hydrogeological Factors (if any) | Undersaturated brines from adjacent aquifers. | Section 13 |
| Commodity Prices | 2021 LOM plan KCl commodity prices (US$): 2022-$103/tonne, 2023-$231/tonne, 2024-$219/tonne, 2025-$185/tonne, 2026-$188/tonne and for the LOM $219/tonne for the economic evaluation of the mineral resources. The following 2022 LOM plan K2O commodity prices were used to assess economic viability for the mineral reserves, but were not used for cut-off purposes, 2023-$616/tonne, 2024-$472/tonne, 2025-$253/tonne, 2026-$214/tonne, 2027-$301/tonne and for the LOM plan $417/tonne. | Section 16 |
| Exchange Rate (US$/CAD$) | 1.3 | Section 16 |

---

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

***Mineral Resource Estimates***

The Esterhazy Facility's mineral resources are reported as in-situ mineralization and are exclusive of mineral reserves. The mineral resources occur in the Esterhazy, White Bear and Belle Plaine Members. We assume that the mineralization is laterally continuous and consistent, based on publicly available regional geological information and our knowledge of the local geology and area.

Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves have not demonstrated economic viability utilizing the criteria and assumptions required at the Esterhazy Facility.

The methodology for estimating mineral resources consists of interpreting the available geological data in plain view using AutoCAD 2020 software. The plan is updated to include the current mineral rights status, seismic survey interpretations, the limits of the current mining footprint, known areas (geological anomalies, town sites and other surface infrastructure) that make the mineral resource inaccessible and therefore excluded from the mineral resource estimation process, property boundary pillars, pillars around exploration holes and infrastructure, "no mining" areas in the uncontrolled mineral rights locations and a pillar between the K1 and K2 mining area and the adjacent K4 mineral resource areas.

Additional details regarding the estimation methodology are listed in Section 11 of the 2021 Esterhazy Facility TRS filed as an Exhibit to the 2021 Form 10-K.

The mineral resource estimates for the Esterhazy Facility are listed in Table 2.28.

**<u>Table 2.28: Mineral Resources at the End of the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2022 Based on a LOM Plan KCl Price of $103.4 per tonne</u>**<sup>(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(g)(h)</sup>

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| *(tonnes in millions)* |  |  |  |
| **Category** | **Tonnes** | **Grade** <br>**%K2O**<sup>(f)</sup> | **Metallurgical <br>Recovery** |
| Measured | 255.0 | 23.3 | 86.1 |
| Indicated | 2092.0 | 22.8 | 86.1 |
| **Measured + Indicated** | **2347.0** | **22.9** | **86.1** |

---

**___________________________**

(a)Mineral resources are reported exclusive of those mineral resources that have been converted to mineral reserves. Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.

(b)Mineral resources are not mineral reserves and do not meet the threshold for mineral reserve modifying factors, such as estimated economic viability, that would allow for conversion to mineral reserves. There is no certainty that any part of the mineral resources estimated will be converted into mineral reserves.

(c)Mineral resources assume an underground room and pillar mining method.

(d)Mineral resources amenable to underground mining methods are accessed via shaft and scheduled for extraction based on a conceptual room and pillar design using the same technical parameters as for mineral reserves.

(e)No cut-off grade or value based on commodity price is used to estimate mineral resources. This is because the mining method used at Esterhazy is not grade selective. The potash mineralization is mined on one level by continuous miners following the well-defined and continuous beds of mineralization with relatively consistent grades (Section 11.2 of TRS).

(f)%K2O refers to the total %K2O of the samples.

(g)We used the following 2021 LOM plan KCl commodity prices to assess prospects for economic extraction for the mineral resources but are not used for cut-off purposes: 2022-$103/tonne, 2023-$231/tonne, 2024-$219/tonne, 2025-$185/tonne, 2026-$188/tonne, and for the LOM plan $219/tonne.

(h)We used a US$/CAD$ exchange rate of 1.30 to assess prospects for economic extraction for the mineral resources but was not used for cut-off purposes.

There were no changes to the mineral resources from 2021 to 2022.

------

<u>[Table of Conten](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)[t](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_7)</u>

***Mineral Reserve Estimates***

The Esterhazy Facility's mineral reserves are reported as in-situ mineralization, accounting for all applicable modifying factors. Mineral reserves meet all the mining criteria required at Esterhazy including, but not limited to mining, processing, metallurgical, infrastructure, economic, marketing, legal, environmental, social and governmental factors.

The methodology for estimating mineral reserves consists of post pillar mine design work and scheduling and the application of mining recovery and unplanned dilution. Additional details regarding the estimation methodology are listed in Section 12 of the 2021 Esterhazy Facility TRS filed as an Exhibit to the 2021 Form 10-K.

The mineral reserve estimates for the Esterhazy Facility are listed in Table 2.29.

**<u>Table 2.29: Mineral Reserves at the End of the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2022 Based on a LOM Plan KCl Price of $103.4 per tonne</u>**<sup>(a)(b)(d)(e)</sup>

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| *(tonnes in millions)* |  |  |  |
| **Category** | **Tonnes** | **Grade** <br>**%K2O**<sup>(c)</sup> | **Metallurgical <br>Recovery %** |
| Proven | 110.0 | 23.9 | 86.1 |
| Probable | 433.0 | 20.9 | 86.1 |
| **Proven + Probable** | **543.0** | **21.3** | **86.1** |

---

**___________________________**

(a)The mineral reserves are based on measured and indicated resources only and are reported as in-situ mineralization.

(b)We used underground mining standards and design criteria to constrain measured and indicated mineral resources within mineable shapes. Only after a positive economic test and inclusion in the LOM plan is the mineral reserve estimate included as mineral reserves.

(c)%K2O refers to the total %K2O of the samples.

(d)We used the following KCl commodity prices to assess economic viability for the mineral reserves, but were not used for cut-off purposes: 2022- $103/tonne, 2023-$616/tonne, 2024-$472/tonne, 2025-$253/tonne, 2026-$214/tonne, 2027-$301/tonne and for the LOM plan $417/tonne.

(e)We used a US$/CAD$ exchange rate of 1.30 to assess economic viability for the mineral reserves but was not used for cut-off purposes.

**Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Comparison**

Our mineral reserves decreased by 3% to 543 million tonnes at December 31, 2022 compared to 557 million tonnes at December 31, 2021. Year-over-year changes are due to mining depletion.

**TAPIRA**

Tapira is located in the western portion of the state of Minas Gerais, in the southeast of Brazil, to the north of the town of Tapira, and approximately 22 miles (35 km) south-southeast of the city of Araxá (Figure 2.6). The mine is 261 miles (420 km) to the Minas Gerais state capital of Belo Horizonte, via the BR-262 highway to Araxá and then the BR 146 highway to Tapira. The property extends from approximately UTM 7,805,000 N to 7,799,500 N, and from 304,000 E to 310,000 E (Corrego Alegre 1961, UTM Zone 23 South), and is centered approximately at 19º52'S/46º51'W. The Tapira complex consists of a mine and a phosphate beneficiation plant. The plant produces phosphate conventional and ultrafine concentrate, which is sent by pipeline (conventional) and truck (ultrafine) to local Mosaic chemical plants for finished product production.

------

**<u>Figure 2.6: Project Location Plan</u>**

![mos-20221231_g12.jpg](mos-20221231_g12.jpg)

***Infrastructure***

Tapira is located in a highly developed region known as Alto Parnaíba. This region is known for its excellent, modern infrastructure with high standards of living compared with other regions in Brazil. The local infrastructure available to Tapira is excellent, as it is situated within a well-established mining area, 22 miles (35 km) from the well-developed city of Araxá and within 16 miles (25 km) of two other mining operations.

The supply of electricity occurs via a 138 kiloVolt ("***kV***") transmission line that is operated by CEMIG and Vale Energia Concessionaires. Tapira has a total receipt of 40 megawatts ("***MW***") and an annual power usage around 305 gigawatts ("***GW***"). The main substation receives 138 kV in three oil-type transformers which is transferred to secondary substations. From the secondary substations, power is distributed to the end-use areas at 110 volts ("***V***"), 220 V, 280 V, 440 V, or 4,160 V.

Water intake comes from the Ribeirão do Inferno and artesian wells, as well as recovered water from the tailings dams. Additionally, there are four artesian wells at Tapira. The industrial reuse system used to recover water from the dams includes 10 pumps (four operating and six on stand-by) and 36 inch (91 cm) pipes covering varying distances to the different dam areas. The distance from BR1 dam is approximately six miles (nine km) with a rated capacity of 4,400 cubic meters per hour (***"m***<sup>3</sup>***/hr"***). The distance from BL1 dam is approximately two miles (three km) with a rated capacity of 10,400 m<sup>3</sup>/hr. The distance from BR dam is approximately 2.5 miles (four km) with a rated capacity of 4,900 m<sup>3</sup>/hr.

There is currently no rail or airport access at Tapira. The closest rail and airport access is in the city of Araxá.

Infrastructure includes a phosphate beneficiation plant with associated support infrastructure, including tailings storage facilities, maintenance facilities, warehouses and various administrative and other support facilities. The mine infrastructure

------

includes overburden storage and other material storage facilities, surface water management features and maintenance, warehouses, and other typical support infrastructure.

Tapira includes an impoundment stability monitoring system that covers all the operating impoundments at Tapira.

Network connectivity is in place at the mine buildings and a telephone system provides coverage throughout the mine unit. A radio system provides the ability to dispatch and control the mining equipment and transport trucks as well as communicate with the control room in the beneficiation plant.

***Mineral and Surface Rights***

Mining rights in Brazil are governed by the Mining Code, Decree 227, dated February 27, 1967, and further regulation enacted by the ANM. This governmental agency, which controls the mining activities throughout Brazil, was recently created as a replacement of the former National Department of Mineral Production ("***DNPM***"). All sub-soil situated within Brazilian territory is deemed state property, with the mining activities subject to specific permits granted by the ANM.

The Tapira Mining Consortium and all mining permits, except for one permit, 803.387/1974 which is currently pending, have transferred from Vale S.A to Mosaic Fertilizantes P&K Ltda. Tapira operates via the Tapira Mining Consortium, therefore, the transfer process of mining right ANM 803.387/1974 does not affect the continuity of the mining operations.

Tapira has an overall surface rights area of 8,008 ha distributed in 18 different property registrations. The surface area within the ultimate pit is currently mostly controlled by Mosaic. There is a small area near a local village that is not within the current property rights. The relocation of the village and State Highway MG-146 will be necessary to fully realize the LOM tonnages. The area surrounding the village and State Highway MG-146 is included in the currently controlled mining permits, and is therefore not seen as a significant encumbrance to Tapira.

The capacity requirements are not currently in place for all tailings disposal for total LOM capacity requirements. However, Tapira has an ongoing permitting and development plan to support the mining operations that will continue through the LOM requirements.

***Present Condition of the Propert***y

The Tapira mine has been in operation since 1978 and is a production stage property.

All required fixed and permanent infrastructure of power, pipelines and primary roadways, and project access are established. Drainage, water controls, and mine access roads and ramps are established for current operations and will be expanded and continued as the pit progresses through its planned life of operations.

The ore at Tapira is recovered using open-pit conventional truck and shovel mining methods, due to the proximity of the ore to the surface and the physical characteristics of the deposit. The ore is transported via truck to a homogenization pile where it is later fed to the beneficiation plant via conveyors. The beneficiation plant produces phosphate conventional and ultrafine concentrate which is sent by pipeline (conventional) and truck (ultrafine) to local Mosaic chemical plants for finished product production.

The mining equipment at Tapira is leased and therefore not owned by us. The beneficiation plant has been in operation since Tapira started 44 years ago. The tailings dams, water dams and sedimentation ponds have been active at Tapira since mining started 44 years ago as well. Currently the BR1 dam is being raised to its final design height to accommodate the LOM plan.

The total book value for Tapira is R$1,692 million (US$332 million with exchange rate of 1 US dollar = 5.0993 Brazilian real) as of December 31, 2022.

Exploration activities are ongoing for in-fill drilling for phosphate production to complete the current LOM. Additional areas of exploration and research include better understanding of the non-weathered material and titanium ore for future mining prospects.

------

***History of Previous Operations***

Tapira has been in operation since 1978 and has produced more than 70 million tonnes (***"Mt"***) of phosphate concentrate. Since 1978, Titanium Dioxide (TiO2) bearing material, mainly in the form of anatase, has been stockpiled, with more than 200,000 tonnes awaiting the implementation of an economical beneficiation method.

The geological structure of the alkaline complex of Tapira was first recognized in 1953, through magnetometric and radiometric investigations carried out by the Brazil-Germany Project. There was an agreement between the two countries to carry out regional geophysical aero-survey programs, performed by the Geological Survey of Brazil in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s.

In 1968, three major private groups – Pedro Maciel, Companhia Meridional de Mineração, and Companhia Brasileira de Metalurgia e Mineração – had exploration research requests granted by DNPM. In early1971, Vale (previously known as Companhia Vale do Rio Doce) joined Pedro Maciel to create the company Titan International S.A., which changed its name to Rio Doce Titânio in later years. Vale acquired the rights of Pedro Maciel at the end of 1971, with the mining rights incorporated into the company Mineração Rio Paranaíba. At the time, a series of intensive and detailed systematic works were undertaken, and important occurrences of phosphate, titanium, niobium, rare earths and vermiculite were identified.

Extensive exploration works were undertaken between 1971 and 1973, with particular focus on the occurrences of titanium. From 1973 to 1977, the exploration priorities changed to occurrences of phosphate, with the aim of replacing the massive imports of fertilizers in the agricultural sector that was then undergoing a period of expansion in Brazil. In 1977, the Fosfértil (Fertilizantes Fosfatados S.A.) company was created under the administration of Petrofértil (a subsidiary of Petrobras, the Brazilian state oil company). In 1992, Fosfértil was privatized, and a pool of investors held the company shares.

In 2010, Vale S.A. acquired complete control of Fósfertil. Thereafter it created a new company, Vale Fertilizantes S.A., which also included other fertilizer assets. At the start of 2018, Mosaic Fertilizantes P&K S.A. acquired the assets of Vale Fertilizantes S.A,, including the Tapira mineral deposit.

**<u>Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves</u>**

The regional and local geology, mineral resources, and mineral reserves are detailed in the sub-sections below.

***Regional and Local Geology***

The Tapira phosphate deposit is part of a series of Late-Cretaceous, carbonatite-bearing alkaline ultramafic plutonic complexes belong to the Alto Paranaiba Igneous Province. The Tapira igneous rocks intrude the phyllites, schists, and quartzites of the Late-Proterozoic Brasília mobile belt. The Tapira igneous complex is roughly elliptical, 35 square kilometers (km<sup>2</sup>) in area and consists predominantly of alkaline pyroxenite rocks with subordinate carbonatite, serpentinite (dunite), glimmerite, syenite, and ultramafic potassic dikes.

The tropical weathering regime prevailing in the region and the inward drainage patterns developed from the weathering-resistant quartzite margins of the dome structures resulted in the development of an extremely thick soil cover in most of the complexes. The extreme weathering process was responsible for the residual concentration of apatite. The main geological types identified in the deposit are a combination of the igneous protoliths (bebedourites, phoscorites, and carbonatites) and the products of the weathering process.

***Mineral Resources***

The mineral resources at Tapira were estimated based on the long-standing exploration drilling and sampling completed at Tapira since 1967. The drilling results were loaded into the geological database, verified, and vetted for errors and then used in the geological model to create the lithology and weathering surfaces. The geological model was used in creating the block model, where geological domains based on the lithology and weathering surfaces were utilized to interpret grade, density, and mass recovery in a geologically appropriate manner. Exploratory Data Analysis and geostatistical analysis were completed on the raw and composite data sets to help define interpolation parameters and mineral resource classifications. The mineral resources were restricted based on an optimized pit limit that took into account cut-off grade, price, mining costs, infrastructure limitations, and mineral licenses. The mineral resources are exclusive of mineral reserves and include approximately 129.8 million tonnes of measured and indicated mineral resources with a P2O5ap grade of 7.2%. There are an additional 112.8 million tonnes of inferred mineral resources with a P2O5ap grade of 8.6% (Table 2.30).

------

**<u>Table 2.30: Mineral Resources at the End of the Fiscal Year Ended 2022 Based on R$1,492.92/tonne of Phosphate Concentrate</u>**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| *(tonnes in millions)* |  |  |  |
| **Category** | **Tonnes** | **Grade (%P2O5ap)** | **Metallurgical Recovery (%P2O5ap)** |
| Measured | 62.8 | 8.0 | 52.7 |
| Indicated | 67.0 | 7.8 | 53.2 |
| **Measured + Indicated** | **129.8** | **7.9** | **53.0** |
| Inferred | 112.8 | 8.6 | 52.4 |

---

**___________________________**

(a)Additional details are described in the TRS filed as an Exhibit to the 2021 Form 10-K.

(b)Mineral resources are reported exclusive of mineral reserves. Mineral resources are not mineral reserves and do not meet the threshold for mineral reserve modifying factors, such as estimated economic viability, that would allow for conversion to mineral reserves. There is no certainty that any part of the mineral resources estimated will be converted into mineral reserves.

(c)Grades are P2O5ap, which represents the P2O5 associated with apatite and was calculated by the evaluation of the CaO / P2O5 ratio. Where CaO / P2O5 ratio was greater than or equal to 1.34, P2O5ap was equal to the total of P2O5; where the CaO / P2O5 ratio was less than 1.35, P2O5ap was equal to the CaO / 1.35 ratio.

(d)Mineral resource tonnages and grade are stated in-situ and exclusive of mineral reserves. Cut-off grade of P2O5ap ≥ 5.0% and 0.9 ≤ Ratio of CaO to P2O5 (RCP) ≤ 3.0 was applied to mineral resources. Measured, indicated and inferred blocks were included in mineral resource estimates if they were inside mining concessions and exploration permits with a final report approved by ANM, but exclusive of physical structures such as the crusher and waste piles. A revenue factor of 1.0 with sales price of R$1,492.92 per tonne of phosphate concentrate (2020 price evaluation) was used to develop the mineral resource pit shell.

***Mineral Reserves***

A mineral reserve estimate has been prepared for Tapira. Mineral reserves are limited by the Tapira property boundary, and the ultimate pit designed for the LOM plan, which was limited with an economic optimized pit analysis.

The mineral reserve estimate includes mining modifying adjustments for mining ore recovery, mining dilution, and ore concentration recovery factors. The mineral reserve estimate is limited to a cut-off grade of 5.0% P2O5ap, as well as certain geometallurgical beneficiation criteria, including:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;a.Diluted ratio of CaO to P2O5 (RCP) between 0.9 and 3.0

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;b.Within one of the four mineralized domains characterized by lithology and alteration

The beneficiation plant generates conventional (coarse) and ultrafine concentrates from the Tapira ore. The mass recovery of coarse concentrate is forecast based on the results of laboratory flotation tests performed on drill core samples. The mass recovery of coarse concentrate is predicted based on a mass recovery regression equation as a function of the ROM Fe2O3, CaO and P2O5 chemical compositions.

The metallurgical recovery is calculated from the mass recovery, the concentrate % P2O5, and the ROM % P2O5 according to the following equation:

*Metallurgical recovery = 100 x Mass recovery x Concentrate % P2O5 / ROM % P2O5*

The annual production estimates were used to determine annual estimates of capital and operating costs. All cost estimates were in real 2022 R$ terms. Total capital costs included R$3.7 billion of sustaining capital and opportunity costs. Annual operating costs were based predominantly on historical consumption factors and unit costs. They included costs for ongoing, final reclamation, and closure. Annual total cost of rock production varied from R$250 per concentrate tonne to R$379 per concentrate tonne, with an average total cost of production for a tonne of phosphate rock concentrate at R$311.

For the purpose of reporting for our total financial statistics, the discounted cash flow was converted from Brazilian reals to U.S. dollars at an exchange rate of R$4.69 = US$1.00.

------

Because Tapira is a captive operation supplying rock to other Mosaic-owned chemical plants, there is no transparent mined phosphate rock commodities price market in Brazil. Mineral reserves for Tapira were estimated based on an internal transfer price. This internal transfer price was set as a constant number of US$102.47 per tonne (R$480.59 per tonne).

The Tapira mineral reserve, as of December 31, 2022, was estimated to be 457.3 Mt ROM (dry), with a dry grade of 9.7% P2O5ap delivered to the concentrator plant and 72.8 Mt (dry) concentrated phosphate tonnes at 35.0% P2O5 post-concentration process plant. This includes (Table 2.31):

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;a.182.7 Mt of Proven Mineral Reserve at a 9.4% P2O5ap dry grade, resulting in 28.3 Mt of concentrate with a 35.0% P2O5 post beneficiation plant; and

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;b.274.6 Mt of Probable Mineral Reserve with a 9.1% P2O5ap dry grade, resulting in 44.5 Mt of concentrate at 35.0% P2O5.

**<u>Table 2.31 Mineral Reserves at the End of the Fiscal Year Ended 2022 Based on R$1,492,92/tonne of Phosphate Concentrate</u>**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| *(tonnes in millions)* |  |  |  |
| **Category** | **Tonnes (Dry)** | **Grade**<br>**(%P2O5ap Dry)** | **Metallurgical Recovery (%P2O5)** |
| Proven | 182.7 | 9.4 | 57.4 |
| Probable | 274.6 | 9.1 | 62.6 |
| **Proven + Probable** | **457.3** | **9.2** | **60.4** |

---

**___________________________**

(a)Additional details are described in the TRS filed as an Exhibit to the 2021 Form 10-K.

(b)Mineral reserves are within measured and indicated mineral resource limits.

(c)Only after a positive economic test and inclusion in the LOM plan is the mineral reserve estimate included as a mineral reserve.

(d)Grades are P2O5ap, which represents the P2O5 associated with apatite and was calculated by the evaluation of the CaO / P2O5 ratio. Where CaO / P2O5 ratio was greater than or equal to 1.34, P2O5ap was equal to the total of P2O5; where the CaO / P2O5 ratio was less than 1.35, P2O5ap was equal to the CaO / 1.35 ratio.

(e)Mineral reserve tonnages and grade are stated as ROM tonnages. The mineral reserves are constrained by a pit design that honors site specific geotechnical designs by pit sector. The mine plan considers constraints required for surface and groundwater management, appropriate extraction methodology, labor and equipment requirements, beneficiation plant mass and metallurgical recoveries, and are dependent upon all permits and environmental licenses in place and continued approved status. The reference point for cut-off grade and pit optimization analysis is tonnes of concentrate at a price of R$1,492.92/tonne concentrate (2020 price evaluation). Cut-off grade of P2O5ap ≥ 5.0% and 0.9 ≤ RCP ≤ 3.0 was applied to mineral reserves. Mineral reserves were proven to be economic based on internal transfer price that was derived in the discounted cash flow and compared to the gross margin available.

***Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Comparison***

Our mineral resources have not changed since the 2021 TRS. Our mineral reserves decreased by 3% to 457 million tonnes at December 31, 2022 compared to 469 million tonnes at December 31, 2021. Year-over-year changes are due to mining depletion.

**REGULATION S-K 1300 INTERNAL CONTROLS DISCLOSURE**

Qualified persons, including third parties and Mosaic employees, are responsible for estimating mineral resources and reserves. Mosaic has a Global Review Team, consisting of a broad spectrum of internal personnel outside the operating organization whose primary responsibilities include review of the mineral resources and reserves estimation reporting for compliance with SEC rules and regulations. The Global Review Team includes members from Mosaic's accounting, finance, business units and legal departments. Reports prepared by qualified persons and third parties are reviewed at various levels of the Global Review Team before they are ultimately reviewed and approved by our senior leadership team. In future years, Mosaic expects to modify and streamline our S-K 1300 processes and internal controls.

------

**Item 3. Legal Proceedings.**

We have included information about legal and environmental proceedings in Note 23 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. That information is incorporated herein by reference.

We are also subject to the following legal and environmental proceedings in addition to those described in Note 23 of our Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K:

*Countervailing Duty Petitions*. In 2020, we filed petitions with the DOC and the ITC that requested the initiation of countervailing duty investigations into imports of phosphate fertilizers from Morocco and Russia. The purpose of the petitions was to remedy the distortions that we believe foreign subsidies have caused or are causing in the U.S. market for phosphate fertilizers, and thereby restore fair competition. On February 16, 2021, the DOC made final affirmative determinations that countervailable subsidies were being provided by those governments. On March 11, 2021, the ITC made final affirmative determinations that the U.S. phosphate fertilizer industry is materially injured by reason of subsidized phosphate fertilizer imports from Morocco and Russia. As a result of these determinations, the DOC issued countervailing duty orders on phosphate fertilizer imports from Russia and Morocco, which are scheduled to remain in place for at least five years. Currently, the cash deposit rates for such imports are approximately 20 percent for Moroccan producer OCP, 9 percent and 47 percent for Russian producers PhosAgro and Eurochem, respectively, and 17 percent for all other Russian producers. The final determinations in the DOC and ITC investigations are subject to challenge before U.S. federal courts and the World Trade Organization. Mosaic has initiated actions at the U.S. Court of International Trade contesting certain aspects of the DOC's final determinations that, we believe, failed to capture the full extent of Moroccan and Russian phosphate fertilizer subsidies. Moroccan and Russian producers have also initiated U.S. Court of International Trade actions, seeking lower cash deposit rates and revocation of the countervailing duty orders. Further, the cash deposit rates and the amount of countervailing duties owed by importers on such imports could change based on the results of the litigation as well as DOC's annual administrative review proceedings.

*The South Pasture Extension Mine Litigation.* On January 8, 2020, the Hardee County Mining Coordinator issued a Notice of Violation ("***NOV***") for the failure by Mosaic to proceed with reclamation of two designated reclamation units within the South Pasture Mine footprint. These two reclamation units comprise 166 acres of mined lands. The NOV cites noncompliance with the County Land Development Regulations and with the conditions of Development of Regional Impact ("***DRI***") Development Order 12-21 that was issued in 2012 to authorize continued mining at the South Pasture Mine, continued operation of the South Pasture beneficiation plant, and mining at the South Pasture Mine Extension. Through the NOV, the county requested that Mosaic submit a revised reclamation plan and schedule to demonstrate when initial reclamation activities would be completed for the two reclamation units identified in the NOV.

The delay in meeting the required reclamation schedule at the two reclamation units is tied to the idling and eventual shutdown of the Plant City fertilizer plant and the idling of the South Pasture Mine beneficiation plant. The Plant City Facility was first idled in late 2017. In June 2019, Mosaic announced that the Plant City Facility would be closed permanently.

Given the relationship between the Plant City fertilizer plant and the South Pasture beneficiation plant, and facing adverse market conditions, Mosaic idled the South Pasture beneficiation plant in September 2018. Idling that plant resulted in no tailings sand being produced by the processing of phosphate matrix. As a result, there was no tailings sand available for use in backfilling reclamation at the South Pasture Mine, and specifically, the two reclamation units identified in the county's January 8, 2020 NOV.

On March 10, 2020, Mosaic filed an "Application for Waiver and Reclamation Schedule Extension" to secure Board of County Commissioners ("***BOCC***") approval of extended reclamation deadlines for the South Pasture Mine. To obtain waiver relief from the BOCC, a quasi-judicial hearing would be required.

Extensive negotiations between Mosaic and county legal and technical staff resulted in an agreement that involved two separate but related actions: (1) secure a waiver and reclamation schedule extension through formal action by the BOCC at a quasi-judicial public hearing; and (2) enter into a settlement agreement that would require payment of a civil penalty by Mosaic for the non-compliance in meeting the required reclamation deadlines of the South Pasture Mine Development Order and the County Mining Ordinance. The settlement agreement would also be presented and acted upon at a formal public hearing before the BOCC.

On May 7, 2020, a quasi-public judicial hearing was held before the Hardee County BOCC. At that hearing, the BOCC voted unanimously to issue a waiver of the applicable reclamation deadlines of the South Pasture Development Order and the

------

county ordinance for three specific reclamation areas of the South Pasture Mine. The waiver also included a negotiated alternative reclamation schedule that extends the deadline for completion of reclamation until the end of 2023. At that same hearing, the BOCC approved a settlement agreement that resolved all outstanding non-compliance associated with reclamation obligations at the South Pasture Mine and required Mosaic to pay an agreed settlement amount of $249,000.

Mosaic has satisfied the payment obligation of the settlement agreement and continues to implement the alternative reclamation schedule, as required. Monitoring programs have been put in place to ensure continued compliance with the waiver and settlement agreement.

*Cruz Litigation*. On August 27, 2020, a putative class action complaint was filed in the Circuit Court of the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit in Hillsborough County, Florida against our wholly-owned subsidiary, Mosaic Global Operations Inc., and two unrelated co-defendants. The complaint alleges claims related to elevated levels of radiation at two manufactured housing communities located on reclaimed mining land in Mulberry, Polk County, Florida, allegedly due to phosphate mining and reclamation activities occurring decades ago. Plaintiffs seek monetary damages, including punitive damages, injunctive relief requiring remediation of their properties, and a medical monitoring program funded by the defendants. On October 14, 2021, the court substantially granted a motion to dismiss we filed late in 2020, with leave for the plaintiffs to amend their complaint.

On November 3, 2021, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint and in response, Mosaic filed a motion to dismiss that complaint with prejudice on November 15, 2021. On December 23, 2021, plaintiffs opposed that motion and Mosaic replied to that opposition on January 26, 2022. On April 6, 2022, the court heard argument on the motions to dismiss filed by Mosaic and each other co-defendant.

We intend to continue to vigorously defend this matter.

*Faustina Plant Risk Management Plan*. On September 14, 2022, EPA Region 6 issued a Notice of Potential Violation and Opportunity to Confer ("***NOPVOC***") regarding compliance of our Faustina Plant with Section 112(r) of the Federal Clean Air Act and 40 C.F.R. Part 68, commonly known as the Risk Management Plan Rule ("***RMP Rule***"). The NOPVOC relates to a compliance evaluation inspection conducted by EPA at the Faustina Plant from February 22-25, 2022 and alleges violations of the RMP Rule. We conferred with the EPA regarding the allegations in the NOPVOC on November 30, 2022. The EPA provided a penalty calculation on January 19, 2023 which we are reviewing. We intend to continue discussions with the agency.

**Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures.**

Information concerning mine safety violations or other regulatory matters required by Section 1503(a) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and Item 104 of Regulation S-K is included in Exhibit 95 to this report.

------

**PART II.**

**Item 5. Market for Registrant's Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.**

We have included information about the market price of, dividends on and the number of holders of our common stock under "Quarterly Results (Unaudited)" in the financial information that is incorporated by reference in this Form 10-K in Part II, Item 8, "Financial Statements and Supplementary Data".

The principal stock exchange on which our common stock is traded is The New York Stock Exchange under the symbol "MOS".

The following provides information related to equity compensation plans:

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Plan category** | **Number of shares to be**<br>**issued upon exercise of**<br>**outstanding options,**<br>**warrants and rights** <sup>(a)</sup> | **Weighted-average**<br>**exercise price of**<br>**outstanding options,**<br>**warrants and rights** <sup>(b)</sup> | **Number of shares remaining<br>available for future issuance<br>under equity compensation plans<br>(excluding shares reflected<br>in first column)** |
| Equity compensation plans approved by stockholders | 6369391 | $36.12 | 10490759 |
| Equity compensation plans not approved by stockholders |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Total** | 6369391 | $36.12 | 10490759 |

---

**______________________________**

(a)Includes grants of 651,456 stock options, 2,152,495 time-based restricted stock units and 3,565,440 total stockholder return ("TSR") performance units settled in stock. The total does not include cash-settled TSR performance units. For purposes of the table above, the number of shares to be issued under a performance unit award reflects the maximum number of shares of our common stock that may be issued pursuant to such performance award. The actual number of shares to be issued under a TSR performance unit award will depend on the change in the market price of our common stock over a three-year vesting period, with no shares issued if the market price of a share of our common stock at the vesting date plus dividends thereon is less than 50% of its market price on the date of grant and the maximum number issued only if the market price of a share of our common stock at the vesting date plus dividends thereon is at least twice its market price on the date of grant.

(b)Includes weighted average exercise price of stock options only.

Pursuant to our equity compensation plans, we have granted and may in the future grant employee stock options to purchase shares of common stock of Mosaic for which the purchase price may be paid by means of delivery to us by the optionee of shares of common stock of Mosaic that are already owned by the optionee (at a value equal to market value on the date of the option exercise). During the period covered by this report, no options to purchase shares of common stock of Mosaic were exercised for which the purchase price was so paid.

The following table sets forth information with respect to shares of our Common Stock that we purchased during the quarter ended December 31, 2022 under the $2.0 billion share repurchase program authorized by our Board of Directors in the third quarter of 2022:

------

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Period** | **Total number of shares purchased** | **Average price paid per share** | **Total number of shares purchased as part of a publicly announced program** | **Maximum approximate dollar value of shares that may yet be purchased under the program**<sup>(a)</sup> |
| **<u>Common Stock</u>** | | | | |
| October 1, 2022- October 31, 2022 |  | $— |  | $1979868011 |
| November 1, 2022- November 30, 2022 |  |  |  | 1979868011 |
| December 1, 2022- December 31, 2022 | 1409611 | 45.45 | 1409611 | 1915799008 |
| Total | 1409611 | $45.45 | 1409611 | $1915799008 |

---

(a)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;At the end of the month shown.

**Item 6. Reserved.**

**Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.**

The Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations listed in the Financial **Table of Contents** included in this report is incorporated herein by reference.

**Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk.**

We have included a discussion about market risks under "Market Risk" in the Management's Analysis that is included in this report in Part II, Item 7, "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations". This information is incorporated herein by reference.

**Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.**

Our Consolidated Financial Statements, the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, the report of our Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, and the information under "Quarterly Results" listed in the Financial **Table of Contents** included in this report are incorporated herein by reference. All other schedules for which provision is made in the applicable accounting regulation of the SEC are not required under the related instructions or are inapplicable, and therefore, have been omitted.

**Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosures.**

None.

**Item 9A. Controls and Procedures.**

**(a)Disclosure Controls and Procedures**

We maintain disclosure controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our filings under the Exchange Act is (i) recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC's rules and forms, and (ii) accumulated and communicated to management, including our principal executive officer and our principal financial officer, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosures. Our management, with the participation of our principal executive officer and our principal financial officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this Form 10-K. Our principal executive officer and our principal financial officer have concluded, based on such evaluations, that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective for the purpose for which they were designed as of the end of such period.

**(b)Management's Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting**

We have included management's report on internal control over financial reporting under "Management's Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting" listed in the Financial **Table of Contents** included in this Form 10-K.

------

We have included our registered public accounting firm's attestation report on our internal controls over financial reporting under "Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm" listed in the Financial **Table of Contents** included in this Form 10-K.

This information is incorporated herein by reference.

**(c)Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting**

Our management, with the participation of our principal executive officer and our principal financial officer, has evaluated any change in internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the quarter ended December 31, 2022 in accordance with the requirements of Rule 13a-15(d) promulgated by the SEC under the Exchange Act. There were no changes in internal control over financial reporting identified in connection with management's evaluation that occurred during the quarter ended December 31, 2022 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

**Item 9B. Other Information.**

None.

------

**PART III.**

**Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.**

The information contained under the headings "Proposal No. 1–Election of Directors," "Corporate Governance–Committees of the Board of Directors," " Beneficial Ownership of Securities," and"Delinquent Section 16 Reports" included in our definitive proxy statement for our 2023 annual meeting of stockholders and the information contained under "Information About our Executive Officers" in Part I, Item 1, "Business," in this report is incorporated herein by reference.

We have a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics within the meaning of Item 406 of Regulation S-K adopted by the SEC under the Exchange Act that applies to our principal executive officer, principal financial officer and principal accounting officer. Our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics is available on Mosaic's website (www.mosaicco.com) and we intend to satisfy the disclosure requirement under Item 5.05 of Form 8-K regarding any amendment to, or waiver from, a provision of our code of ethics by posting such information on our website. The information contained on Mosaic's website is not being incorporated herein.

**Item 11. Executive Compensation.**

The information under the headings "Director Compensation" and "Executive Compensation" included in our definitive proxy statement for our 2023 annual meeting of stockholders is incorporated herein by reference.

**Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters.**

The information under the headings "Beneficial Ownership of Securities" and "Certain Relationships and Related Transactions" included in our definitive proxy statement for our 2023 annual meeting of stockholders is incorporated herein by reference. The table containing information related to equity compensation plans set forth in Part II, Item 5 "Market for Registrant's Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities" of this report is also incorporated herein by reference.

**Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence.**

The information under the headings "Corporate Governance–Board Independence," "Corporate Governance–Committees of the Board of Directors," "Corporate Governance–Other Policies Relating to the Board of Directors–Policy and Procedures Regarding Transactions with Related Persons," and "Certain Relationships and Related Transactions" included in our definitive proxy statement for our 2023 annual meeting of stockholders is incorporated herein by reference.

**Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services.**

Our independent registered public accounting firm is KPMG LLP, Tampa, FL, Auditor Firm ID: 185.

The information included under "Audit Committee Report and Payment of Fees to Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm–Fees Paid to Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm" and "Audit Committee Report and Payment of Fees to Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm–Pre-approval of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm Services" is included in our definitive proxy statement for our 2023 annual meeting of stockholders is incorporated herein by reference.

------

**PART IV.**

**Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules.** 

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| (a) | (1) | Consolidated Financial Statements filed as part of this report are listed in the Financial **Table of Contents** included in this report and incorporated by reference in this report in Part II, Item 8, "Financial Statements and Supplementary Data". | Consolidated Financial Statements filed as part of this report are listed in the Financial **Table of Contents** included in this report and incorporated by reference in this report in Part II, Item 8, "Financial Statements and Supplementary Data". | Consolidated Financial Statements filed as part of this report are listed in the Financial **Table of Contents** included in this report and incorporated by reference in this report in Part II, Item 8, "Financial Statements and Supplementary Data". |
|  | (2) | All schedules for which provision is made in the applicable accounting regulations of the SEC are listed in this report in Part II, Item 8, "Financial Statements and Supplementary Data". | All schedules for which provision is made in the applicable accounting regulations of the SEC are listed in this report in Part II, Item 8, "Financial Statements and Supplementary Data". | All schedules for which provision is made in the applicable accounting regulations of the SEC are listed in this report in Part II, Item 8, "Financial Statements and Supplementary Data". |
|  | (3) | Reference is made to the Exhibit Index in (b) below. | Reference is made to the Exhibit Index in (b) below. | Reference is made to the Exhibit Index in (b) below. |
| (b) | Exhibits | Exhibits |  |  |
| **Exhibit No.** |  | **Description** | **Incorporated Herein by<br>Reference to** | **Filed with<br>Electronic<br>Submission** |
| 2.i. |  | <u>[Agreement and Plan of Merger and Contribution, dated as of January 26, 2004, by and among IMC Global Inc. (now known as Mosaic Global Holdings Inc.), Global Nutrition Solutions, Inc. (now known as The Mosaic Company ("Mosaic"), as successor by merger to MOS Holdings Inc. ("MOS Holdings")), GNS Acquisition Corp., Cargill, Incorporated ("Cargill") and Cargill Fertilizer, Inc., as amended by Amendment No. 1 to Agreement and Plan of Merger and Contribution, dated as of June 15, 2004, and as further amended by Amendment No. 2 to Agreement and Plan of Merger and Contribution, dated as of October 18, 2004](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000119312504180752/dex21.htm)</u> <sup>(1)</sup> | Exhibit 2.1 to Mosaic's Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 22, 2004, and filed on October 28, 2004<sup>(2)</sup> |  |
| 3.i. |  | <u>[Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Mosaic, effective May 19, 2016](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000124378616000305/exhibit3irestatedcertifica.htm)</u> | Exhibit 3.i to Mosaic's Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 19, 2016 and filed on May 23, 2016<sup>(2)</sup> |  |
| 3.ii. |  | <u>[Amended and Restated Bylaws of Mosaic, effective March 5, 2020](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000124378620000012/amendedandrestatedbyla.htm)</u> | Exhibit 3.1 to Mosaic's Current Report on Form 8-K dated March 5, 2020 and filed on March 6, 2020<sup>(2)</sup> |  |
| 4.i |  | <u>[Credit Agreement dated as of August 19, 2021, among Mosaic, Bank of America, N.A., as administrative agent, Swing Line Lender and an L/C Issuer, and the lenders and other L/D Issuers party thereto](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000124378621000109/exhibit4i-2021creditagreem.htm)</u> | Exhibit 4.i to Mosaic's Current Report on Form 8-K dated August 23, 2021 and filed on August 23, 2021<sup>(2)</sup> |  |
| 4.ii. |  | <u>[Indenture dated as of October 24, 2011, between Mosaic and U.S. Bank National Association, as trustee](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000119312511278238/d246255dex41.htm)</u>.<br>Registrant hereby agrees to furnish to the Commission, upon request, all other instruments defining the rights of holders of each issue of long-term debt of the Registrant and its consolidated subsidiaries | Exhibit 4.1 to Mosaic's Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 24, 2011 and filed on October 24, 2011<sup>(2)</sup> |  |
| 4.iii |  | <u>[Description of Registrant](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803420000003/exhibit4iii20191231.htm)</u>'<u>[s Common Stock](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803420000003/exhibit4iii20191231.htm)</u> | Exhibit 4.iii to Mosaic's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019 |  |
| 10.ii.a |  | <u>[Time Charter dated as of October 24, 2017 between Tampa Port Services, LLC and Savage Harvest Operations, LLC](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000124378617000145/ex101-timecharterdtd10x24x.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.1 to Mosaic's Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 24, 2017 and filed on October 30, 2017 |  |

---

------

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| 10.ii.b | <u>[Guaranty dated as of October 24, 2017 by The Mosaic Company](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000124378617000145/ex102guaranteedtd10-24x201.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.2 to Mosaic's Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 24, 2017 and filed on October 30, 2017 |  |
| 10.iii.a.<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[The Mosaic Company 2004 Omnibus Stock and Incentive Plan (the "Omnibus Incentive Plan"), as amended October 8, 2009](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000119312509180765/ddef14a.htm#toc22113_60)</u> | Appendix A to Mosaic's Proxy Statement dated August 25, 2009<sup>(2)</sup> |  |
| 10.iii.a.1<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Form of Amendment dated May 11, 2011, to the Omnibus Incentive Plan](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000119312511191456/dex10iiiu.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.u. to Mosaic's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the Fiscal Year ended May 31, 2011<sup>(2)</sup> |  |
| 10.iii.a.2<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Form of Employee Nonqualified Stock Option Award Agreement under the Omnibus Incentive Plan, approved July 20, 2011](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000119312511260021/d237212dex10iiib.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.b. to Mosaic's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period ended August 31, 2011<sup>(2)</sup> |  |
| 10.iii.b<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Description of Mosaic Management Incentive Program](exhibit10iiib20221231.htm)</u> |  | X |
| 10.iii.c.1<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Mosaic Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan, as amended and restated effective October 9, 2008](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000119312509003231/dex10iiib.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.b. to Mosaic's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period ended November 30, 2008<sup>(2)</sup> |  |
| 10.iii.c.2<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Amendment dated April 13, 2011, to the Mosaic Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan, as amended and restated effective October 9, 2008](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000119312511191456/dex10iiir.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.r. to Mosaic's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the Fiscal Year ended May 31, 2011<sup>(2)</sup> |  |
| 10.iii.c.3<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Mosaic LTI Deferral Plan, approved March 5, 2015](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000124378615000044/mosaicltideferralplanappro.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.1 to Mosaic's Current Report on Form 8-K dated March 5, 2015 and filed on March 11, 2015<sup>(2)</sup> |  |
| 10.iii.c.4<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Amendment to Mosaic LTI Deferral Plan, approved March 1, 2017](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803417000008/exhibit10iiic4_2017331.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.c.4 to Mosaic's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period ended March 31, 2017<sup>(2)</sup> |  |
| 10.iii.c.5<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Amendment dated December 20, 2018, to the Mosaic Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan, as amended and restated effective October 9, 2008.](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803419000004/exhibit10iiic5_20181231.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.c.5 to Mosaic's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the Fiscal Year ended December 31, 2018 |  |
| 10.iii.c.6<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Amendment dated December 16, 2020, to the Mosaic Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan, as amended and restated effective October 9, 2008](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803421000003/exhibit10iiic620201231.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.c.6 to Mosaic's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the Fiscal Year ended December 31, 2020 |  |
| 10.iii.d.1<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Form of Senior Management Severance and Change in Control Agreement effective April 1, 2020](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803420000007/exhibit10iiid20200331.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.d to Mosaic's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period ended March 31, 2020 |  |

---

------

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| 10.iii.d.2 | <u>[Form of Non-Competition, Non-Solicitation, Non-Defamation and Confidentiality Agreement effective April 1, 2020](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803422000004/exhibit10iiid22021-12x31.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.d.2. to Mosaic's Annual Report on Form 10-K of Mosaic for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022<sup>(2)</sup> |
| 10.iii.d.3<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Form of expatriate agreement dated November 1, 2019 between Mosaic and an executive officer](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000124378619000127/expatriateagreement-ex.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.1 to Mosaic's Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 31, 2019 and filed on November 4, 2019 |
| 10.iii.d.4<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Form of expatriate agreement dated January 8, 2016, between Mosaic and an executive officer](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803422000007/exhibit10iiid20220331.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.d to Mosaic's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period ended March 31, 2022 |
| 10.iii.e.1<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Agreement between Cargill and Mosaic relating to certain former Cargill employees' participation in the Cargill International Pension Plan](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000119312512412302/d402895dex10iiib.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.b. to Mosaic's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period ended August 31, 2012<sup>(2)</sup> |
| 10.iii.e.2<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Form of Supplemental Agreement between Mosaic and certain former participants in the Cargill International Pension Plan](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000119312513292097/d566975dex10iiix.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.x. to Mosaic's Annual Report on Form 10-K of Mosaic for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2013<sup>(2)</sup> |
| 10.iii.f.<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Form of Indemnification Agreement between Mosaic and its directors and executive officers](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000119312508210005/dex10iii.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii. to Mosaic's Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 8, 2008, and filed on October 14, 2008<sup>(2)</sup> |
| 10.iii.g.<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Summary of Board of Director Compensation of Mosaic](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803422000010/exhibit10iiia20220630.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.a. to Mosaic's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period ended June 30, 2022 |
| 10.iii.h.<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Executive Perquisite Program](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000124378619000043/a2019proxystatement.htm)</u> | The material under "Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Other Executive Compensation Arrangements, Policies and Practices—Perquisites" in Mosaic's Proxy Statement dated April 6, 2022 |
| 10.iii.i.<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[The Mosaic Company 2014 Stock and Incentive Plan (the "2014 Incentive Plan")](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000119312514126387/d689200ddef14a.htm#tx689200_73)</u> | Appendix B to Mosaic's Proxy Statement dated April 2, 2014<sup>(2)</sup> |
| 10.iii.j.<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Form of Amendment dated August 14, 2019, to the 2014 Incentive Plan](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803420000003/exhibit10iiij20191231.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.j to Mosaic's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019 |
| 10.iii.k.1<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Form of Non-Qualified Stock Option Award Agreement under the 2014 Incentive Plan, approved March 5, 2015](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803415000009/exhibit10iiia_2015331.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.a. to Mosaic's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period ended March 31, 2015<sup>(2)</sup> |

---

------

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| 10.iii.k.2<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Form of Non-Qualified Stock Option Award Agreement under the 2014 Incentive Plan, approved March 2, 2016](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803416000030/exhibit10iiia_2016331.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.a. to Mosaic's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period ended March 31, 2016<sup>(2)</sup> |
| 10.iii.k.3<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Form of Employee Restricted Stock Unit Award Agreement under the 2014 Incentive Plan, approved March 2, 2016](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803416000030/exhibit10iiie_2016331.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.e. to Mosaic's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period ended March 31, 2016<sup>(2)</sup> |
| 10.iii.k.4<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Form of Director Restricted Stock Unit Award Agreement under the 2014 Incentive Plan, approved May 19, 2016](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803416000036/exhibit10iiikk_2016630.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.kk to Mosaic's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period Ended June 30, 2016<sup>(2)</sup> |
| 10.iii.k.5<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Form of Employee TSR Performance Unit Award Agreement under the 2014 Incentive Plan, approved March 1, 2017](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803417000008/exhibit10iiik1_2017331.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.k.1 to Mosaic's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period ended March 31, 2017<sup>(2)</sup> |
| 10.iii.k.6<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Form of Executive TSR Performance Unit Award Agreement under the 2014 Incentive Plan, approved March 1, 2017](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803417000008/exhibit10iiik2_2017331.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.k.2 to Mosaic's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period ended March 31, 2017<sup>(2)</sup> |
| 10.iii.k.7<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Form of Retention Award Agreement under the 2014 Incentive Plan, approved October 31, 2019](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000124378619000127/formofretentionaward-e.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.2 to Mosaic's Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 31, 2019 and filed on November 4, 2019 |
| 10.iii.k.8<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Form of Executive TSR Cash Settled Performance Unit Award Agreement under the 2014 Incentive Plan, approved March 6, 2019](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803420000003/exhibit10iiik1120191231.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.k.11 to Mosaic's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019 |
| 10.iii.k.9<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Form of Restricted Stock Unit Award Agreement under the 2014 Incentive Plan approved March 4, 2020](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803420000007/exhibit10iiia20200331.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.a to Mosaic's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period ended March 31, 2020 |
| 10.iii.k.10<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Form of Executive TSR Stock Settled Performance Unit Award Agreement under the 2014 Incentive Plan, approved March 4, 2020](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803420000007/exhibit10iiib20200331.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.b to Mosaic's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period ended March 31, 2020 |
| 10.iii.k.11<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Form of Executive TSR Cash Settled Performance Unit Award Agreement under the 2014 Incentive Plan, approved March 4, 2020](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803420000007/exhibit10iiic20200331.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.c to Mosaic's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period ended March 31, 2020 |
| 10.iii.k.12<sup>(3)</sup> | <u>[Form of Director Restricted Stock Unit Award Agreement under The Mosaic Company 2014 Stock and Incentive Plan, as amended, approved May 19, 2022](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803422000010/exhibit10iiik20220630.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.iii.k to Mosaic's quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period Ended June 30, 2022 |
| 10.v.a | <u>[Consent Decree dated September 30, 2015 among the United States of America, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Mosaic Fertilizer, LLC and The Mosaic Company](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000119312515338447/d39432dex101.htm)</u><sup>(4)</sup> | Exhibit 10.1. to Mosaic's Current Report on Form 8-K dated September 30, 2015 and filed on October 6, 2015(2) |

---

------

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| 10.v.b | <u>[Description of Modifications to Consent Decree dated September 30, 2015 among the United States of America, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Mosaic Fertilizer, LLC and The Mosaic Company, filed as Exhibit 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K of Mosaic dated September 30, 2015 and filed on October 6, 2015](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803416000036/exhibit10vi_2016630.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.v.i to Mosaic's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period Ended June 30, 2016(2) |  |
| 10.v.c | <u>[Consent Decree dated September 30, 2015 among the United States of America, the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, Mosaic Fertilizer, LLC and The Mosaic Company](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000119312515338447/d39432dex102.htm)</u><sup>(4)</sup> | Exhibit 10.2. to Mosaic's Current Report on Form 8-K dated September 30, 2015 and filed on October 6, 2015(2) |  |
| 10.v.d | <u>[Description of Modifications to Consent Decree dated September 30, 2015 among the United States of America, the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, Mosaic Fertilizer, LLC and The Mosaic Company, filed as Exhibit 10.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K of Mosaic dated September 30, 2015 and filed on October 6, 2015](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285785/000161803416000036/exhibit10vii_2016630.htm)</u> | Exhibit 10.v.ii to Mosaic's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period Ended June 30, 2016(2) |  |
| 21 | <u>[Subsidiaries of the Registrant](exhibit21_20221231.htm)</u> |  | X |
| 23.1 | <u>[Consent of KPMG LLP, independent registered public accounting firm for Mosaic](exhibit231_20221231.htm)</u> |  | X |
| 23.2 | <u>[Florida Phosphate Mining Consent of Qualified Persons](exhibit232-floridaconsen.htm)</u> |  | X |
| 24 | <u>[Power of Attorney](exhibit24_20221231.htm)</u> |  | X |
| 31.1 | <u>[Certification of Chief Executive Officer Required by Rule 13a-14(a)](exhibit311_20221231.htm)</u> |  | X |
| 31.2 | <u>[Certification of Chief Financial Officer Required by Rule 13a-14(a)](exhibit312_20221231.htm)</u> |  | X |
| 32.1 | <u>[Certification of Chief Executive Officer Required by Rule 13a-14(b) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code](exhibit321_20221231.htm)</u> |  | X |
| 32.2 | <u>[Certification of Chief Financial Officer Required by Rule 13a-14(b) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code](exhibit322_20221231.htm)</u> |  | X |
| 95 | <u>[Mine Safety Disclosures](exhibit9520221231.htm)</u> |  | X |
| 96.1 | <u>[Florida Phosphate Mining Technical Report Summary](a2022floridaphosphatesk1.htm)</u> |  | X |
| 101 | The following materials from the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022 formatted in Inline Extensible Business Reporting Language: (i) the Consolidated Statements of Earnings, (ii) the Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income, (iii) the Consolidated Balance Sheets, (iv) the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows, (v) the Consolidated Statements of Equity, and (vi) Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. |  | X |
| 104 | Cover Page Interactive Data File (embedded within the iXBRL document and contained in Exhibit 101). |  | X |

---

------

(c) Summarized financial information of 50% or less owned persons is included in Note 9 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Financial statements and schedules are omitted as none of such persons are significant under the tests specified in Regulation S-X under Article 3.09 of general instructions to the financial statements.

**\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\***

(1) Mosaic agrees to furnish supplementally to the SEC a copy of any omitted schedules and exhibits to the extent required by rules of the Commission upon request.

(2) SEC File No. 001-32327.

(3) Denotes management contract or compensatory plan.

(4) Confidential information has been omitted from this Exhibit and filed separately with the SEC pursuant to a confidential treatment request under Rule 24b-2 of the Exchange Act.

------

**Item 16. Annual Report on Form 10-K Summary.**

None.

------

**\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\***

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

---

| |
|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;THE MOSAIC COMPANY |
| *(Registrant)* |
| /s/ James "Joc" C. O'Rourke |
| James "Joc" C. O'Rourke |
| Chief Executive Officer and President |

---

Date: February 23, 2023

------

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated:

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **Name** | **Title** | **Date** |
| /s/ James "Joc" C. O'Rourke | Chief Executive Officer and President and Director (principal executive officer) | February 23, 2023 |
| James "Joc" C. O'Rourke | Chief Executive Officer and President and Director (principal executive officer) |  |
| /s/ Clint C. Freeland | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer) | February 23, 2023 |
| Clint C. Freeland | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer) |  |
| /s/ Russell A. Flugel | Vice President—Controller and Chief Accounting Officer (principal accounting officer) | February 23, 2023 |
| Russell A. Flugel | Vice President—Controller and Chief Accounting Officer (principal accounting officer) |  |
| \* | Chairman of the Board of Directors | February 23, 2023 |
| Gregory L. Ebel |  |  |
| \* | Director | February 23, 2023 |
| Cheryl K. Beebe |  |  |
| \* | Director | February 23, 2023 |
| Timothy S. Gitzel |  |  |
| \* | Director | February 23, 2023 |
| Denise C. Johnson |  |  |
| \* | Director | February 23, 2023 |
| Emery N. Koenig |  |  |
| \* | Director | February 23, 2023 |
| David T. Seaton |  |  |
| \* | Director | February 23, 2023 |
| Steven M. Seibert |  |  |
| \* | Director | February 23, 2023 |
| João Roberto Gonçalves Teixeira |  |  |
| \* | Director | February 23, 2023 |
| Gretchen H. Watkins |  |  |
| \* | Director | February 23, 2023 |
| Kelvin R. Westbrook |  |  |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **\*By:** | **/s/ Philip E. Bauer** |
|  | **Philip E. Bauer<br>Attorney-in-Fact** |

---

------

**Financial Table of Contents** 

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| | Page |
| <u>[Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_139)</u> | <u>F-[2](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_142)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Introduction](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_142)</u> | <u>F-[2](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_142)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Key Factors that can Affect Results of Operations and Financial Condition](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_145)</u> | <u>F-[2](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_145)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Results of Operations](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_148)</u> | <u>F-[4](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_148)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Overview](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_151)</u> | <u>F-[5](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_151)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Phosphates](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_154)</u> | <u>F-[8](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_154)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Potash](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_157)</u> | <u>F-[10](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_157)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Mosaic Fertilizantes](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_160)</u> | <u>F-[11](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_160)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Corporate, Elimination and Other](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_163)</u> | <u>F-[12](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_163)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Other Income Statement Items](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_166)</u> | <u>F-[12](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_166)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Selling, General and Administrative Expenses](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_169)</u> | <u>F-[13](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_169)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Impairment, Restructuring and Other](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_172)</u> | <u>F-[13](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_172)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Other Operating Expenses](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_175)</u> | <u>F-[13](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_175)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Interest Expense, Net](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_178)</u> | <u>F-[13](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_178)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Foreign Currency Transaction Gain (Loss)](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_181)</u> | <u>F-[13](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_181)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Other Income/Expense](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_184)</u> | <u>F-[13](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_184)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Equity in Net](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_187)[Earnings](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_187)[(Loss)](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_187)[of Nonconsolidated Companies](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_187)</u> | <u>F-[13](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_187)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Provision for (Benefit from) Income Taxes](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_190)</u> | <u>F-[14](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_190)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Critical Accounting Estimates](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_196)</u> | <u>F-[14](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_196)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Liquidity and Capital Resources](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_199)</u> | <u>F-[16](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_199)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements and Obligations](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_202)</u> | <u>F-[18](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_202)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Market Risk](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_205)</u> | <u>F-[20](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_205)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Environmental, Health, Safety and Security Matters](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_208)</u> | <u>F-[23](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_208)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Contingencies](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_211)</u> | <u>F-[29](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_211)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Related Parties](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_214)</u> | <u>F-[29](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_214)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Recently Issued Accounting Guidance](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_217)</u> | <u>F-[29](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_217)</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>[Forward-Looking Statements](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_220)</u> | <u>F-[29](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_220)</u> |
| <u>[Reports of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_223)</u> | <u>F-[33](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_223)</u> |
| <u>[Consolidated Statements of Earnings](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_229)</u> | <u>F-[36](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_229)</u> |
| <u>[Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_232)</u> | <u>F-[37](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_232)</u> |
| <u>[Consolidated Balance Sheets](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_235)</u> | <u>F-[38](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_235)</u> |
| <u>[Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_241)</u> | <u>F-[39](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_241)</u> |
| <u>[Consolidated Statements of Equity](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_244)</u> | <u>F-[41](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_244)</u> |
| <u>[Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_250)</u> | <u>F-[42](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_250)</u> |
| <u>[Management's Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_358)</u> | <u>F-[87](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_358)</u> |

---

------

***Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations***

**<u>Introduction</u>**

The Mosaic Company (before or after the Cargill Transaction, as defined below, "***Mosaic****,*" and with its consolidated subsidiaries, "***we****,*" "***us****,*" "***our***" or the "***Company***") is the parent company of the business that was formed through the business combination ("***Combination***") of IMC Global Inc. and the Cargill Crop Nutrition fertilizer businesses of Cargill, Incorporated and its subsidiaries (collectively, "***Cargill***") on October 22, 2004. In May 2011, Cargill divested its approximately 64% equity interest in us in a split-off to its stockholders and a debt exchange with certain Cargill debt holders.

We produce and market concentrated phosphate and potash crop nutrients. We conduct our business through wholly-and majority-owned subsidiaries as well as businesses in which we own less than a majority or a non-controlling interest, including consolidated variable interest entities and investments accounted for by the equity method.

We are organized into the following business segments:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Our **Phosphates** business segment owns and operates mines and production facilities in Florida, which produce concentrated phosphate crop nutrients and phosphate-based animal feed ingredients, and processing plants in Louisiana, which produce concentrated phosphate crop nutrients for sale domestically and internationally. We have a 75% economic interest in the Miski Mayo Phosphate Mine ("***Miski Mayo Mine***") in Peru. These results are consolidated in the Phosphates segment. The Phosphates segment also includes our 25% interest in the Ma'aden Wa'ad Al Shamal Phosphate Company ("***MWSPC***"), a joint venture to develop, own and operate integrated phosphate production facilities in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. We market approximately 25% of the MWSPC phosphate production. We recognize our equity in the net earnings or losses relating to MWSPC on a one-quarter reporting lag in our Consolidated Statements of Earnings.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Our **Potash** business segment owns and operates potash mines and production facilities in Canada and the U.S. which produce potash-based crop nutrients, animal feed ingredients and industrial products. Potash sales include domestic and international sales. We are a member of Canpotex, Limited ("***Canpotex***"), an export association of Canadian potash producers through which we sell our Canadian potash outside the U.S. and Canada.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Our **Mosaic Fertilizantes** business segment includes five phosphate rock mines, four phosphate chemical plants and a potash mine in Brazil. The segment also includes our distribution business in South America, which consists of sales offices, crop nutrient blending and bagging facilities, port terminals and warehouses in Brazil and Paraguay. We also have a majority interest in Fospar S.A., which owns and operates a single superphosphate granulation plant and a deep-water port and throughput warehouse terminal facility in Brazil.

Intersegment eliminations, unrealized mark-to-market gains/losses on derivatives, debt expenses, Streamsong Resort<sup>®</sup> results of operations, and the results of the China and India distribution businesses are included within Corporate, Eliminations and Other. See Note 25 of the Consolidated Financial Statements in this Form 10-K for segment results.

**<u>Key Factors that can Affect Results of Operations and Financial Condition</u>**

Our primary products, phosphate and potash crop nutrients, are, to a large extent, global commodities that are also available from a number of domestic and international competitors, and are sold by negotiated contracts or by reference to published market prices. The markets for our products are highly competitive, and the most important competitive factor for our products is delivered price. Business and economic conditions and governmental policies affecting the agricultural industry and customer sentiment are the most significant factors affecting worldwide demand for crop nutrients. The profitability of our businesses is heavily influenced by worldwide supply and demand for our products, which affects our sales prices and volumes. Our costs per tonne to produce our products are also heavily influenced by fixed costs associated with owning and operating our major facilities, significant raw material costs in our Phosphates and Mosaic Fertilizantes businesses, and fluctuations in currency exchange rates.

Our products are generally sold based on the market prices prevailing at the time the sales contract is signed or through contracts which are priced at the time of shipment. Additionally, in certain circumstances the final price of our products is determined after shipment based on the current market at the time the price is agreed to with the customer. Forward sales programs at fixed prices increase the lag between prevailing market prices and our average realized selling prices. The mix

------

and parameters of these sales programs vary over time based on our marketing strategy, which considers factors that include, among others, optimizing our production and operating efficiency within warehouse limitations, as well as customer requirements. The use of forward sales programs and the level of customer prepayments may vary from period to period due to changing supply and demand environments, seasonality, and market sentiments.

World prices for the key raw material inputs for concentrated phosphate products, including ammonia, sulfur and phosphate rock, have an effect on industry-wide phosphate prices and production costs. The primary feedstock for producing ammonia is natural gas. The product price for ammonia is generally highly dependent on the supply and demand balance for ammonia. In North America, we purchase approximately one-third of our ammonia from various suppliers in the spot market, with the remaining two-thirds either purchased through a long-term ammonia supply agreement (the "***CF Ammonia Supply Agreement***") with an affiliate of CF Industries, Inc. ("***CF***") or produced internally at our Faustina, Louisiana location. The CF Ammonia Supply Agreement provides for U.S. natural gas-based pricing that is intended to lessen pricing volatility. If the price of natural gas rises or the market price for ammonia falls outside of the range anticipated at execution of this agreement, we may not realize a cost benefit from the natural gas-based pricing over the term of the agreement, or the cost of our ammonia under the agreement could be at a competitive disadvantage. During 2022, the contract has provided an advantage over pricing in the spot market. At times, we have paid more or less for ammonia under the agreement than in the spot market. On October 14, 2022, we received notice from CF to exercise the bilateral, contractual right to end the ammonia supply agreement in its current form, effective January 1, 2025. In Brazil, we purchase all of our ammonia from a single supplier.

Sulfur is a global commodity that is primarily produced as a by-product of oil refining. The market price is based primarily on the supply and demand balance for sulfur. We believe our current and future investments in sulfur transformation and transportation assets will enhance our competitive advantage.

We produce and procure most of our phosphate rock requirements through either wholly or partly owned mines. In addition to producing phosphate rock, Mosaic Fertilizantes purchases phosphate, potash and nitrogen products which are either used to produce blended crop nutrients ("***Blends***") or for resale.

Our per tonne selling prices for potash are affected by shifts in the product mix, geography and customer mix. Our Potash business is significantly affected by Canadian resource taxes and royalties that we pay to the Province of Saskatchewan in order for us to mine and sell our potash products. In addition, cost of goods sold is affected by a number of factors, including: fluctuations in the Canadian dollar; the level of periodic inflationary pressures on resources in western Canada, where we produce most of our potash; and natural gas costs for operating our potash solution mine at Belle Plaine, Saskatchewan. In the past, we have also incurred operating costs to manage salt saturated brine inflows at our Esterhazy, Saskatchewan K1 and K2 mine shafts which we closed in June 2021 due to an acceleration of brine inflows. We have now transitioned mining to the K3 mine shaft, which has replaced production from the K1 and K2 shafts.

Our results of operations are also affected by changes in currency exchange rates due to our international footprint. The most significant currency impacts are generally from the Canadian dollar and the Brazilian real.

A discussion of these and other factors that affected our results of operations and financial condition for the periods covered by this Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations is set forth in further detail below. This Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations should also be read in conjunction with the narrative description of our business in Item 1, and the risk factors described in Item 1A, of Part I of this Annual Report on Form 10-K **(**"***Form 10-K***"**)**, and our Consolidated Financial Statements, accompanying notes and other information listed in the accompanying Financial **Table of Contents**.

This section of this Form 10-K discusses 2022 and 2021 items and year-to-year comparisons between 2022 and 2021. Discussions of 2020 items and year-to-year comparisons between 2021 and 2020 that are not included in this Form 10-K can be found in "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" in Part II, Item 7 of the Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021 and are incorporated by reference herein.

Throughout the discussion below, we measure units of production, sales and raw materials in metric tonnes which are the equivalent of 2,205 pounds, unless we specifically state that we mean short or long ton(s), which are the equivalent of 2,000 pounds and 2,240 pounds, respectively. In addition, we measure natural gas, a raw material used in the production of our products, in MM BTU, which stands for one million British Thermal Units ("***BTU***"). One BTU is equivalent to 1.06 Joules. Management uses the following metrics to monitor segment performance: production volume, sales volume, average finished product selling price and average cost per unit consumed.

------

In the following table, there are certain percentages that are not considered to be meaningful and are represented by "NM".

**<u>Results of Operations</u>**

The following table shows the results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021, and 2020:

---

| | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **2022-2021** | **2022-2021** | **2021-2020** | **2021-2020** |
| *(in millions, except per share data)* | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** | **Change** | **Percent** | **Change** | **Percent** |
| Net sales | $19125.2 | $12357.4 | $8681.7 | $6767.8 | 55% | $3675.7 | 42% |
| Cost of goods sold | 13369.4 | 9157.1 | 7616.8 | 4212.3 | 46% | 1540.3 | 20% |
| Gross margin | 5755.8 | 3200.3 | 1064.9 | 2555.5 | 80% | 2135.4 | NM |
| Gross margin percentage | 30.1% | 25.9% | 12.3% | 4.2% |  | 13.6% |  |
| Selling, general and administrative expenses | 498.0 | 430.5 | 371.5 | 67.5 | 16% | 59.0 | 16% |
| Impairment, restructuring and other expenses |  | 158.1 |  | (158.1) | (100)% | 158.1 | NM |
| Other operating expenses | 472.5 | 143.2 | 280.5 | 329.3 | NM | (137.3) | (49)% |
| Operating earnings | 4785.3 | 2468.5 | 412.9 | 2316.8 | 94% | 2055.6 | NM |
| Interest expense, net | (137.8) | (169.1) | (180.6) | 31.3 | (19)% | 11.5 | (6)% |
| Foreign currency transaction gain (loss) | 97.5 | (78.5) | (64.3) | 176.0 | NM | (14.2) | 22% |
| Other (expense) income | (102.5) | 3.9 | 12.9 | (106.4) | NM | (9.0) | (70)% |
| Earnings from consolidated companies before income taxes | 4642.5 | 2224.8 | 180.9 | 2417.7 | 109% | 2043.9 | NM |
| Provision for (benefit from) income taxes | 1224.3 | 597.7 | (578.5) | 626.6 | 105% | 1176.2 | NM |
| Earnings from consolidated companies | 3418.2 | 1627.1 | 759.4 | 1791.1 | 110% | 867.7 | 114% |
| Equity in net earnings (loss) of nonconsolidated companies | 196.0 | 7.8 | (93.8) | 188.2 | NM | 101.6 | (108)% |
| Net earnings including noncontrolling interests | 3614.2 | 1634.9 | 665.6 | 1979.3 | 121% | 969.3 | 146% |
| Less: Net earnings (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests | 31.4 | 4.3 | (0.5) | 27.1 | NM | 4.8 | NM |
| Net earnings attributable to Mosaic | $3582.8 | $1630.6 | $666.1 | $1952.2 | 120% | $964.5 | 145% |
| Diluted net earnings per share attributable to Mosaic | $10.06 | $4.27 | $1.75 | $5.79 | 136% | $2.52 | 144% |
| Diluted weighted average number of shares outstanding | 356.0 | 381.6 | 381.3 |  |  |  |  |

---

------

***Overview of the Years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021***

Net earnings attributable to Mosaic for the year ended December 31, 2022 were $3.6 billion, or $10.06 per diluted share, compared to $1.6 billion, or $4.27 per diluted share for 2021.

In 2022, net earnings were negatively impacted in the aggregate by $350 million, net of tax, or $(1.03) per diluted share, related to notable items. The most significant of which were as follows (noted on a pre-tax basis, with the exception of discrete income tax):

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Other operating expense of $173 million, or $(0.36) per diluted share, related to an increase in our environmental reserves, expenses of $41 million, or $(0.10) per diluted share, related to maintaining closed and indefinitely idled facilities in Florida, and $10 million, or $(0.02) per diluted share, related to fixed asset write-offs

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Asset retirement obligation ("***ARO***") costs of $157 million, or $(0.34) per diluted share, related to upward revisions in the estimated costs of our AROs for closed facilities

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Other non-operating expense of $46 million, or $(0.09) per diluted share, related to a realized loss on securities held in trusts (the "***RCRA Trusts***"), expense of $42 million, or $(0.09) per diluted share, related to the settlement of a pension plan, and $12 million, or $(0.02) per diluted share, related to the write-down of an investment

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Cost of goods sold impact of $39 million, or $(0.09) per diluted share, related to Hurricane Ian idle costs

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Discrete income tax expense of $26 million, or $(0.08) per diluted share

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Unrealized loss on derivatives of $21 million, or $(0.04) per diluted share

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Foreign currency transaction gain of $98 million, or $0.18 per diluted share

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Other operating income of $9 million, or $0.02 per diluted share, for insurance proceeds related to Hurricane Ida, and $7 million, or $0.02 per diluted share, related to a gain on the sale of assets

Net earnings for 2021 included the following notable items (noted on a pre-tax basis, with the exception of discrete income tax) that negatively impacted net earnings by $291 million, net of tax, or $(0.76) per diluted share. The most significant of which were as follows:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Expense related to the closure of our K1 and K2 mine shafts at our Esterhazy, Saskatchewan potash mine of $158 million, or $(0.30) per diluted share

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Foreign currency transaction loss of $79 million, or $(0.16) per diluted share

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Discrete income tax provision of $43 million, or $(0.11) per diluted share

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Other operating expenses of $50 million, or $(0.10) per diluted share, related to maintaining closed and indefinitely idled facilities

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Depreciation expense of $37 million, or $(0.08) per diluted share, related to the acceleration of the closure of our K1 and K2 mine shafts at our Esterhazy, Saskatchewan mine

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Expense related to the impact of Hurricane Ida on our Louisiana operations of $27 million, or $(0.05) per diluted share

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ARO costs of $25 million, or $(0.05) per diluted share, related to revisions in the estimated costs of our AROs.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Unrealized loss on derivatives of $14 million, or $(0.02) per diluted share

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Other operating income of $20 million, or $0.04 per diluted share, related to the sale of our warehouse in Houston, Texas and $13 million, or $0.02 per share, related to a decrease in reserves for legal contingencies that were part of our acquisition (the "***Acquisition***") of Vale Fertilizantes S.A. (now known as Mosaic Fertilizantes P&K S.A. or the "***Acquired Business***")

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Functional currency impact in cost of goods sold of $20 million, or $0.04 per diluted share

Additional significant factors that affected our results of operations and financial condition in 2022 and 2021 are listed below. These factors are discussed in more detail in the following sections of this Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

<u>Year ended December 31, 2022</u>

Operating results for the year ended December 31, 2022 in all of our segments increased, mainly from higher average sales prices compared to the prior year period. Average selling prices rose throughout 2021 and into the first half of 2022, driven by tightness in global supply and demand. The Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 created instability in global

------

commodities markets. The invasion, together with the continuation of reduced potash exports by Belarus, significantly reduced the physical supply of fertilizer and agricultural commodities produced in those geographies. This contributed to rising fertilizer prices globally. In addition, Chinese export restrictions on phosphates also impacted the global supply of fertilizer and contributed to tightening in the worldwide fertilizer market.

In the Phosphate segment, operating results for 2022 were driven by higher average selling prices partially offset by higher raw material costs and lower sales volumes compared to the prior year. Selling prices increased due to the factors described above and were partially offset by higher raw material costs, primarily sulfur and ammonia, due to global supply and demand. Finished product sales volumes were unfavorable versus the prior year, due to adverse weather conditions in North America, which contributed to a condensed spring season, the deferral of customers purchases in North America, and delayed shipments caused by impacts from Hurricane Ian which occurred at the end of the third quarter in 2022.

In the Potash segment, 2022 operating results were favorably impacted by higher average selling prices compared to the prior year period, driven by the factors discussed above. This was partially offset by lower sales volumes, due to customers deferring purchases to future periods.

In the Mosaic Fertilizantes segment, 2022 results were favorably impacted by higher average selling prices compared to the prior year period, driven by the factors discussed above, partially offset by higher raw material and production costs and lower sales volumes compared to the prior year. Productions costs increased due to inflation and higher raw materials costs, which increased due to higher global prices for sulfur and ammonia. Sales volumes were lower in 2022 compared to the prior year, mainly due to unfavorable farmer economics.

<u>Other highlights in 2022 include</u>:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*•* In the first quarter of 2022, our Board of Directors approved the establishment of a new $1.0 billion share repurchase authorization, which was completed in the second quarter of 2022. Our Board of Directors authorized an additional $2.0 billion share repurchase program in the third quarter of 2022.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• During 2022, we repurchased 30,810,173 shares of Common Stock in the open market for approximately $1.7 billion. This includes 7,056,229 shares we purchased under an accelerated share repurchase agreement in 2022.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• In the first quarter of 2022, our Board of Directors approved a regular dividend increase to $0.60 per share annually from $0.45, beginning with the second quarter of 2022. In the fourth quarter of 2022, our Board of Directors increased the dividend to $0.80 per share annually, beginning with the dividend declared on December 16, 2022.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• In November 2022, we paid the outstanding balance of $550 million on our 3.25% senior notes, due November 15, 2022, without premium or penalty.

On January 12, 2023, we completed the sale of the Streamsong Resort<sup>®</sup> (the "***Resort***") and approximately 7,000 acres of land on which it sits for a purchase price of $160 million. The Resort is a destination resort and conference center, which we developed in an area of previously mined land as part of our long-term business strategy to maximize the value and utility of our extensive land holdings in Florida. In addition to a hotel and conference center, the Resort includes multiple golf courses, a clubhouse and ancillary facilities.

Subsequent to year end, our Board of Directors approved an accelerated share repurchase ("***ASR***") of $300 million which is expected to be initiated in the first quarter of 2023. Also, in February 2023, the Board of Directors approved a special dividend of $0.25 per share to be distributed in March, 2023 to our stockholders of record as of March 15, 2023.

<u>Year ended December 31, 2021</u>:

Phosphates operating results for the year ended December 31, 2021 were favorably impacted by higher phosphate average selling prices compared to the prior year period. After reaching a low in the first quarter of 2020, sales prices continued to rise in 2021, driven by tightness in global supply and demand, strong farmer economics and improved grain prices. Operating results in 2021 were unfavorably impacted by lower finished product sales volumes, and higher raw material costs, primarily sulfur and ammonia. The purchase prices of these raw materials are driven by global supply and demand. In addition, during the first half of 2021, availability of molten sulfur was impacted by refinery closures in 2020 and 2021, due to lower fuel demand and extreme cold weather in the first quarter of 2021 in the southern U.S., where several refineries are located. The low sulfur availability constrained our production in the first half of 2021. Operating results in 2021 were also unfavorably

------

impacted by higher idle plant and maintenance turnaround costs compared to 2020, mainly driven by the impacts of Hurricane Ida on our Louisiana operations.

Potash operating results for the year ended December 31, 2021, were favorably impacted by higher average selling prices compared to the prior year. Prices began to strengthen in North America and Brazil in the fourth quarter of 2020 due to increased demand, tight supply and improved farmer economics. Prices continued to increase throughout 2021. Operating results in 2021 were unfavorably impacted by lower sales volumes caused by decreased production volumes associated with the closure of our K1 and K2 mine shafts at our Esterhazy, Saskatchewan potash mine. We reopened our previously idled Colonsay, Saskatchewan potash mine during the third quarter of 2021, and ramped up production at our K3 mine shaft which partially replaced this lost production.

Mosaic Fertilizantes operating results for the year ended December 31, 2021 were favorably impacted by increased sales prices compared to the prior year, due to tight global supply and demand. The favorable results were partially offset by lower sales volumes due to lower product availability and production challenges, low inventory levels and increased raw materials costs, as global prices of sulfur and ammonia were higher in 2021 compared to 2020.

------

***Phosphates Net Sales and Gross Margin***

The following table summarizes the Phosphates segment's net sales, gross margin, sales volume, selling prices and raw material prices:

---

| | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **2022-2021** | **2022-2021** | **2021-2020** | **2021-2020** |
| **(in millions, except price per tonne or unit)**  | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** | **Change** | **Percent** | **Change** | **Percent** |
| Net sales: |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;North America | $4211.2 | $3251.4 | $1953.1 | $959.8 | 30% | $1298.3 | 66% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;International | 1973.0 | 1671.5 | 1163.3 | 301.5 | 18% | 508.2 | 44% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Total | 6184.2 | 4922.9 | 3116.4 | 1261.3 | 26% | 1806.5 | 58% |
| Cost of goods sold | 4425.2 | 3617.5 | 2990.9 | 807.7 | 22% | 626.6 | 21% |
| Gross margin | $1759.0 | $1305.4 | $125.5 | $453.6 | 35% | $1179.9 | NM |
| Gross margin as a percentage of net sales | 28.4% | 26.5% | 4.0% |  |  |  |  |
| Sales volumes<sup>(a)</sup> (in thousands of metric tonnes)  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;DAP/MAP | 3399 | 3904 | 4936 | (505) | (13)% | (1032) | (21)% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Performance and Other<sup>(b)</sup> | 3159 | 3789 | 3598 | (630) | (17)% | 191 | 5% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Total finished product tonnes | 6558 | 7693 | 8534 | (1135) | (15)% | (841) | (10)% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Rock<sup>(c)</sup> | 1719 | 1772 | 739 | (53) | (3)% | 1033 | 140% |
| Total Phosphates Segment Tonnes<sup>(a)</sup> | 8277 | 9465 | 9273 | (1188) | (13)% | 192 | 2% |
| Realized prices ($/tonne) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Average finished product selling price (destination)<sup>(d)</sup> | $913 | $618 | $360 | $295 | 48% | $258 | 72% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;DAP selling price (fob mine) | $804 | $564 | $310 | $240 | 43% | $254 | 82% |
| Average cost per unit consumed in cost of goods sold: |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Ammonia (metric tonne) | $603 | $396 | $287 | $207 | 52% | $109 | 38% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Sulfur (long ton) | $368 | $181 | $83 | $187 | 103% | $98 | 118% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Blended rock (metric tonne) | $70 | $60 | $61 | $10 | 17% | $(1) | (2)% |
| Production volume (in thousands of metric tonnes) - North America | 6647 | 7331 | 8160 | (684) | (9)% | (829) | (10)% |

---

(a)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Includes intersegment sales volumes.

(b)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Includes sales volumes of MicroEssentials<sup>®</sup> and animal feed ingredients.

(c)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Sales volumes of rock are presented on a wet tonne basis based on average moisture levels of 3.5% to 4.5% as it exits the drying process and is prepared for shipping.

(d) &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Excludes sales revenue and tonnes associated with rock sales.

<u>Year Ended December 31, 2022 compared to Year Ended December 31, 2021</u>

The Phosphates segment's net sales were $6.2 billion for the year ended December 31, 2022, compared to $4.9 billion for the same period a year ago. The increase in net sales was primarily due to higher average finished goods selling prices, which resulted in an increase in net sales of approximately $1.7 billion. Net sales was also positively impacted by approximately $200 million, primarily due to sales of rock in our Miski Mayo operation and sales of excess ammonia and sulfur in the current year. These increases were partially offset by lower finished product sales volumes, which decreased net sales by approximately $650 million.

Our average finished product selling price increased 48%, to $913 per tonne for the year ended December 31, 2022, compared to $618 per tonne for the same period a year ago, due to the factors discussed in the Overview.

The Phosphates segment's sales volumes of finished products decreased to 6.6 million tonnes for the year ended December 31, 2022, compared to 7.7 million tonnes in 2021, due to the factors discussed in the Overview.

Gross margin for the Phosphates segment increased to $1.8 billion in the current year compared with $1.3 billion for the prior year. The increase was primarily driven by higher selling prices, which impacted gross margin by approximately $1.7 billion. This was partially offset by higher raw material prices (primarily sulfur and ammonia) of approximately $840 million

------

compared to the prior-year period. Gross margin was also unfavorably impacted in the current year by higher conversion costs of approximately $130 million and higher idle plant and maintenance turnaround costs of approximately $80 million. Lower sales volumes unfavorably impacted gross margin by approximately $230 million.

Our average consumed price for ammonia in our North American operations increased to $603 per tonne in 2022 from $396 a year ago. The average consumed price for sulfur for our North American operations increased to $368 per long ton for the year ended December 31, 2022 from $181 in the prior-year period. The purchase price of these raw materials is driven by global supply and demand. The consumed ammonia and sulfur prices also include transportation, transformation, and storage costs.

The average consumed cost of purchased and produced rock increased to $70 per tonne in the current year, from $60 a year ago. For the year ended December 31, 2022, our North American phosphate rock production decreased to 9.6 million tonnes from 11.1 million tonnes in the prior year, due to geology of rock and operational challenges, and due to downtime caused by Hurricane Ian.

The Phosphates segment's production of crop nutrient dry concentrates and animal feed ingredients decreased to 6.6 million tonnes for the year ended December 31, 2022, compared to 7.3 million in 2021. The lower production in the current year period reflects impacts from downtime at our Florida locations due to unplanned operational outages and Hurricane Ian. For the year ended December 31, 2022, our operating rate for processed phosphate production decreased to 67%, compared to 74% in the same period of the prior year.

------

***Potash Net Sales and Gross Margin***

The following table summarizes the Potash segment's net sales, gross margin, sales volume and selling price:

---

| | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **2022-2021** | **2022-2021** | **2021-2020** | **2021-2020** |
| **(in millions, except price per tonne or unit)**  | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** | **Change** | **Percent** | **Change** | **Percent** |
| Net sales: |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;North America | $2122.3 | $1456.8 | $1147.2 | $665.5 | 46% | $309.6 | 27% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;International | 3086.2 | 1170.0 | 872.1 | 1916.2 | 164% | 297.9 | 34% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Total | 5208.5 | 2626.8 | 2019.3 | 2581.7 | 98% | 607.5 | 30% |
| Cost of goods sold | 2365.5 | 1569.3 | 1551.0 | 796.2 | 51% | 18.3 | 1% |
| Gross margin | $2843.0 | $1057.5 | $468.3 | $1785.5 | 169% | $589.2 | 126% |
| Gross margin as a percentage of net sales | 54.6% | 40.3% | 23.2% |  |  |  |  |
| Sales volume<sup>(a)</sup> (in thousands of metric tonnes) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;MOP | 7236 | 7277 | 8456 | (41) | (1)% | (1179) | (14)% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Performance and Other<sup>(b)</sup> | 865 | 909 | 941 | (44) | (5)% | (32) | (3)% |
| Total Potash Segment Tonnes | 8101 | 8186 | 9397 | (85) | (1)% | (1211) | (13)% |
| Realized prices ($/tonne) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Average finished product selling price (destination) | $643 | $321 | $215 | $322 | 100% | $106 | 49% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;MOP selling price (fob mine) | $632 | $285 | $181 | $347 | 122% | $104 | 57% |
| Production volume (in thousands of metric tonnes) | 9053 | 8204 | 8433 | 849 | 10% | (229) | (3)% |

---

(a)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Includes intersegment sales volumes.

(b)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Includes sales volumes of K-Mag<sup>®</sup>, Aspire<sup>®</sup> and animal feed ingredients.

<u>Year Ended December 31, 2022 compared to Year Ended December 31, 2021</u>

The Potash segment's net sales increased to $5.2 billion for the year ended December 31, 2022, compared to $2.6 billion in the prior year. The increase in net sales was driven by a favorable impact from higher selling prices of approximately $2.6 billion, partially offset by unfavorable sales volumes of approximately $60 million.

Our average finished product selling price was $643 per tonne for the year ended December 31, 2022, an increase of $322 per tonne compared with the prior year period, due to the factors discussed in the Overview.

The Potash segment's sales volumes decreased slightly to 8.1 million tonnes for the year ended December 31, 2022, compared to 8.2 million tonnes in the same period a year ago, due to the factor discussed in the Overview.

Gross margin for the Potash segment increased to $2.8 billion in the current year, from $1.1 billion in the prior year period. Gross margin was positively impacted by $2.6 billion related to the increase in selling prices, partially offset by approximately $20 million due to lower sales volumes. The increase in gross margin was also partially offset by increased Canadian resource taxes of approximately $700 million, and increased plant spending of approximately $130 million compared to the prior year, due to the Colonsay mine operating for the majority of 2022 and the ramp up of K3. Canadian resource taxes and other costs affecting gross margin are discussed in more detail below.

We had expense of $927.9 million from Canadian resource taxes for the year ended December 31, 2022, compared to $259.5 million in the prior year. Royalty expense increased to $112.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2022, from $42.0 million in the prior year. The fluctuations in Canadian resource taxes and royalties are due to higher average selling prices and margins in the current year, compared to the prior year.

On June 4, 2021, due to increased brine inflows, we made the decision to immediately close the K1 and K2 shafts at our Esterhazy mine, which eliminated future brine inflow management expenses. Therefore, we did not incur brine inflow management expenses in the current year, compared to $46 million in brine inflow management expenses, including depreciation on brine assets in the prior year.

------

For the year ended December 31, 2022, potash production increased to 9.1 million tonnes, compared to 8.2 million tonnes in the prior year period, resulting in an operating rate of 81% for 2022, compared to 75% for 2021. Production increased in the current year due to the Colonsay mine operating for the majority of 2022 and the ramp up of our K3 shaft at Esterhazy, which replaced capacity from the K1 and K2 shafts.

***Mosaic Fertilizantes Net Sales and Gross Margin***

The following table summarizes the Mosaic Fertilizantes segment's net sales, gross margin, sales volume and selling price.

---

| | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **2022-2021** | **2022-2021** | **2021-2020** | **2021-2020** |
| **(in millions, except price per tonne or unit)**  | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** | **Change** | **Percent** | **Change** | **Percent** |
| Net Sales | $8287.2 | $5088.5 | $3481.6 | $3198.7 | 63% | $1606.9 | 46% |
| Cost of goods sold | 7241.6 | 4245.8 | 3062.0 | 2995.8 | 71% | 1183.8 | 39% |
| Gross margin | $1045.6 | $842.7 | $419.6 | $202.9 | 24% | $423.1 | 101% |
| Gross margin as a percent of net sales | 12.6% | 16.6% | 12.1% |  |  |  |  |
| Sales volume (in thousands of metric tonnes) | Sales volume (in thousands of metric tonnes) | Sales volume (in thousands of metric tonnes) |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Phosphate produced in Brazil | 2368 | 2543 | 3813 | (175) | (7)% | (1270) | (33)% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Potash produced in Brazil | 165 | 240 | 305 | (75) | (31)% | (65) | (21)% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Purchased nutrients | 6905 | 7319 | 6446 | (414) | (6)% | 873 | 14% |
| Total Mosaic Fertilizantes Segment Tonnes | 9438 | 10102 | 10564 | (664) | (7)% | (462) | (4)% |
| Realized prices ($/tonne) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Average finished product selling price (destination) | $878 | $504 | $330 | $374 | 74% | $174 | 53% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Brazil MAP price (delivered price to third party) | $868 | $597 | $333 | $271 | 45% | $264 | 79% |
| Purchases ('000 tonnes) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;DAP/MAP from Mosaic | 272 | 311 | 597 | (39) | (13)% | (286) | (48)% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;MicroEssentials<sup>®</sup> from Mosaic | 1271 | 1226 | 1108 | 45 | 4% | 118 | 11% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Potash from Mosaic/Canpotex | 2276 | 2510 | 2081 | (234) | (9)% | 429 | 21% |
| Average cost per unit consumed in cost of goods sold: |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Ammonia (metric tonne) | $1301 | $580 | $336 | $721 | 124% | $244 | 73% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Sulfur (long ton) | $391 | $194 | $108 | $197 | 102% | $86 | 80% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Blended rock (metric tonne) | $105 | $80 | $69 | $25 | 31% | $11 | 16% |
| Production volume (in thousands of metric tonnes) | 3598 | 3725 | 3918 | (127) | (3)% | (193) | (5)% |

---

<u>Year Ended December 31, 2022 compared to Year Ended December 31, 2021</u>

The Mosaic Fertilizantes segment's net sales were $8.3 billion for the year ended December 31, 2022, compared to $5.1 billion for 2021. The increase in net sales was due to higher selling prices, which favorably impacted net sales by approximately $3.2 billion. This was partially offset by a decrease in sales volumes, which impacted net sales by approximately $290 million. Net sales also benefited from the selling prices of other products, primarily acids and gypsum, which favorably impacted net sales by approximately $200 million, and favorable foreign currency impacts which impacted net sales by approximately $60 million.

The overall average finished product selling price increased $374 per tonne, to $878 per tonne for 2022, due to the increase in global prices referenced in the Overview.

The Mosaic Fertilizantes segment's sales volume decreased to 9.4 million tonnes for the year ended December 31, 2022, compared to 10.1 million tonnes for the prior year period, due to the factor discussed in the Overview.

Gross margin for the Mosaic Fertilizantes segment increased to $1.0 billion for the year ended December 31, 2022, from $842.7 million in the prior year. The increase was driven by higher selling prices, which favorably impacted gross margin by

------

approximately $3.2 billion, and foreign currency impacts of approximately $30 million. Higher costs had an unfavorable impact of $2.9 billion, driven by an increase in product costs, primarily higher nitrogen and potash products for our distribution business and higher sulfur and ammonia raw material costs in our production business. Gross margin was also unfavorably impacted by a decrease in sales volumes of approximately $70 million, a decrease in specialty product margins, largely driven by gypsum and sulfuric acid, of approximately $30 million, and increased turnaround costs of approximately $50 million.

The average consumed price for ammonia for our Brazilian operations was $1,301 per tonne for the year ended December 31, 2022, compared to $580 per ton in the prior year. The average consumed sulfur price for our Brazilian operations was $391 per long ton for the year ended December 31, 2022, compared to $194 in the prior year. The purchase price of these raw materials is driven by global supply and demand, and also includes transportation, transformation, and storage costs.

The Mosaic Fertilizantes segment's production of crop nutrient dry concentrates and animal feed ingredients decreased 3% to 3.6 million tonnes for the year ended December 31, 2022, compared to 3.7 million tonnes in the prior year. For the year ended December 31, 2022, our phosphate operating rate was 85%, compared to 86% in the prior year.

Our Brazilian phosphate rock production was 4.0 million tonnes for each of the years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021.

***Corporate, Eliminations and Other***

In addition to our three operating segments, we assign certain costs to Corporate, Eliminations and Other, which is presented separately in Note 25 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. The Corporate, Eliminations and Other category includes intersegment eliminations, including profit on intersegment sales, unrealized mark-to-market gains and losses on derivatives, debt expenses, Streamsong Resort<sup>®</sup> results of operations, and the results of the China and India distribution businesses.

Gross margin for Corporate, Eliminations and Other was a gain of $108.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2022, compared to a loss of $5.3 million in the same period a year ago. The change was driven by a favorable impact of $18.9 million related to the lower gross margin, partially offset by higher sales volumes on the elimination of intercompany in the current year, compared to an unfavorable impact of $131.0 million in the prior year period. Partially offsetting the change was a net unrealized loss of $21.3 million in the current year period, primarily on foreign currency derivatives, compared to a net unrealized loss of $13.6 million in the prior year period. Distribution operations in India and China had revenues and gross margin of $1.1 billion and $130.9 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2022, compared to revenues and gross margin of $730.1 million and $141.6 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2021. The increase was primarily due to increased selling prices in the current year compared to the prior year period. This was partially offset by higher product cost in the current year due to tighter global supply and demand. Sales volumes of finished products were 1.6 million tonnes for each of the years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021.

***Other Income Statement Items***

---

| | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **2022-2021** | **2022-2021** | **2021-2020** | **2021-2020** |
| *(in millions)* | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** | **Change** | **Percent** | **Change** | **Percent** |
| Selling, general and administrative expenses | $498.0 | $430.5 | $371.5 | $67.5 | 16% | $59.0 | 16% |
| Impairment, restructuring and other expenses |  | 158.1 |  | (158.1) | (100)% | 158.1 | NM |
| Other operating expenses | 472.5 | 143.2 | 280.5 | 329.3 | NM | (137.3) | (49)% |
| Interest (expense) | (168.8) | (194.3) | (214.1) | 25.5 | (13)% | 19.8 | (9)% |
| Interest income | 31.0 | 25.2 | 33.5 | 5.8 | 23% | (8.3) | (25)% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Interest expense, net | (137.8) | (169.1) | (180.6) | 31.3 | (19)% | 11.5 | (6)% |
| Foreign currency transaction gain (loss) | 97.5 | (78.5) | (64.3) | 176.0 | NM | (14.2) | 22% |
| Other (expense) income | (102.5) | 3.9 | 12.9 | (106.4) | NM | (9.0) | (70)% |
| Provision for (benefit from) income taxes | 1224.3 | 597.7 | (578.5) | 626.6 | 105% | 1176.2 | NM |
| Equity in net earnings (loss) of nonconsolidated companies | 196.0 | 7.8 | (93.8) | 188.2 | NM | 101.6 | (108)% |

---

------

***Selling, General and Administrative Expenses***

Selling, general and administrative expenses were $498.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2022, compared to $430.5 million for the same period a year ago. The increase was primarily due to approximately $44 million of higher consulting and professional services costs related to executing on our strategic initiatives, and higher costs of approximately $16 million in our Mosaic Fertilizantes segment, due to impacts from inflation and higher compensation and other employee-related costs.

***Impairment, Restructuring and Other Expenses***

Impairment, restructuring and other expenses include costs associated with asset impairments, employee severance and pension expense, and other exit costs to close or indefinitely idle facilities. Due to increased brine inflows, on June 4, 2021, we made the decision to accelerate the timing of the shutdown of our K1 and K2 mine shafts at our Esterhazy, Saskatchewan potash mine. We recognized pre-tax costs of $158.1 million related to the permanent closure of these facilities in 2021. These costs consisted of $110.0 million related to the write-off of fixed assets, $37.1 million related to AROs, and $11.0 million related to inventory and other reserves. We had no such expenses in 2022.

***Other Operating Expenses***

Other operating expenses were $472.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2022, compared to $143.2 million for the prior year period. Other operating expenses typically relate to five major categories: (1) AROs, (2) environmental and legal reserves, (3) idle facility costs, (4) insurance reimbursements and (5) gain/loss on sale or disposal of fixed assets. The current year includes approximately $173 million related to increases in environmental reserves, approximately $157 million related to upward revisions in estimated closure costs for our AROs at our closed facilities, and approximately $41 million related to costs of maintaining closed and indefinitely idled facilities. These costs were primarily related to our Phosphate segment.

***Interest Expense, Net***

Net interest expense decreased to $137.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2022, compared to $169.1 million in 2021, due to lower debt levels in the current year.

***Foreign Currency Transaction Gain (Loss)***

In 2022, we recorded a foreign currency transaction gain of $97.5 million, compared to a loss of $78.5 million in 2021. The gain was the result of the effect of the weakening of the U.S. dollar relative to the Brazilian real of U.S. dollar-denominated payables held by our Brazilian subsidiaries and on significant intercompany loans, partially offset by the strengthening of the U.S. dollar relative to the Canadian dollar on significant intercompany loans.

***Other (Expense) Income***

For the year ended December 31, 2022, we had other expense of $102.5 million compared to income of $3.9 million in the prior year. The current year expense primarily related to approximately $46 million of realized losses on the marketable securities held in the RCRA Trusts, approximately $42 million related to the settlement loss on the termination of a pension plan as further described in Note 18 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statement, and $12 million related to the write-down of an investment.

***Equity in Net Earnings (Loss) of Nonconsolidated Companies***

For the year ended December 31, 2022, we had a gain from equity of nonconsolidated companies of $196.0 million, net of tax, compared to a gain of $7.8 million, net of tax, for the prior year. The current year gain was primarily related to the operations of MWSPC, which was favorably impacted by higher phosphate selling prices, and the continued ramp-up of its operations.

------

***Provision for (Benefit from) Income Taxes***

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Effective<br>Tax Rate** | **Provision for<br>Income Taxes** |
| Year Ended December 31, 2022 | 26.4% | $1224.3 |
| Year Ended December 31, 2021 | 26.9% | 597.7 |
| Year Ended December 31, 2020 | (319.8)% | (578.5) |

---

For all years, our income tax is impacted by the mix of earnings across jurisdictions in which we operate, by a benefit associated with depletion and by the impact of certain entities being taxed in both their foreign jurisdiction and the U.S., including foreign tax credits for various taxes incurred.

For the year ended December 31, 2022, tax expense specific to the period included a net expense of $26.2 million. The net expense relates to the following: $29.0 million related to true-up of estimates primarily related to our U.S. tax return, $4.8 million related to changes to valuation allowances in Brazil, $4.0 million related to interest of effectively settled unrecognized tax benefits and $1.2 million of other miscellaneous costs. The tax expenses are partially offset by a net tax benefit related to $12.8 million of RSUs vested in CY22 above grant price.

**<u>Critical Accounting Estimates</u>**

We prepare our Consolidated Financial Statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America which requires us to make various judgments, estimates and assumptions that could have a significant impact on our reported results and disclosures. We base these estimates on historical experience and other assumptions we believe to be reasonable at the time we prepare our financial statements. Changes in these estimates could have a material effect on our Consolidated Financial Statements.

Our significant accounting policies can be found in Note 2 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. We believe the following accounting policies include a higher degree of judgment and complexity in their application and are most critical to aid in fully understanding and evaluating our reported financial condition and results of operations.

***Recoverability of Goodwill***

Goodwill is the excess of the purchase price consideration over the estimated fair value of net assets of acquired businesses. The carrying value of goodwill in our reporting units is tested annually as of October 31 for possible impairment. We typically use an income approach valuation model, representing present value of future cash flows, to determine the fair value of a reporting unit. Growth rates for sales and profits are determined using inputs from our annual strategic and long range planning process. The rates used to discount projected future cash flows reflect a weighted average cost of capital based on the Company's industry, capital structure and risk premiums, including those reflected in the current market capitalization. When preparing these estimates, management considers each reporting unit's historical results, current operating trends, and specific plans in place. These estimates are impacted by various factors, including inflation, the general health of the economy and market competition. In addition, events and circumstances that might be indicators of possible impairment are assessed during other interim periods. As of October 31, 2022, the date of our annual impairment testing, the Company concluded that the fair values of the reporting units which include goodwill, Potash, Mosaic Fertilizantes and Corporate, Eliminations and Other, were in substantial excess of their respective carrying values and the goodwill for those units was not impaired.

See Note 10 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the goodwill impairment analysis, including the methodologies and assumptions used in estimating the fair values of our reporting units. As of December 31, 2022, we had $1.1 billion of goodwill.

***Environmental Liabilities and Asset Retirement Obligations***

We record accrued liabilities for various environmental and reclamation matters including the demolition of former operating facilities, and AROs.

Contingent environmental liabilities are described in Note 23 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Accruals for environmental matters are based primarily on third-party estimates for the cost of remediation at previously operated sites and estimates of legal costs for ongoing environmental litigation. We regularly assess the likelihood of material adverse

------

judgments or outcomes, the effects of potential indemnification, as well as potential ranges or probability of losses. We determine the amount of accruals required, if any, for contingencies after carefully analyzing each individual matter. Estimating the ultimate settlement of environmental matters requires us to develop complex and interrelated assumptions based on experience with similar matters, our history, precedents, evidence, and facts specific to each matter. Actual costs incurred in future periods may vary from the estimates, given the inherent uncertainties in evaluating environmental exposures. As of December 31, 2022, and 2021, we had accrued $185.5 million and $57.3 million, respectively, for environmental matters.

As indicated in Note 14 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, we recognize AROs in the period in which we have an existing legal obligation, and the amount of the liability can be reasonably estimated. We utilize internal engineering experts as well as third-party consultants to assist in determining the costs of retiring certain of our long-term operating assets. Assumptions and estimates reflect our historical experience and our best judgments regarding future expenditures. The assumed costs are inflated based on an estimated inflation factor and discounted based on a credit-adjusted risk-free rate. For active facilities, fluctuations in the estimated costs (including those resulting from a change in environmental regulations), inflation rates and discount rates can have a significant impact on the corresponding assets and liabilities recorded in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. However, changes in the assumptions for our active facilities would not have a significant impact on the Consolidated Statements of Earnings in the year they are identified. For closed facilities, fluctuations in the estimated costs, inflation, and discount rates have an impact on the Consolidated Statements of Earnings in the year they are identified as there is no asset related to these items. Phosphate land reclamation activities in North America generally occur concurrently with mining operations; as such, we accrue and expense reclamation costs as we mine. As of December 31, 2022, and 2021, $1.9 billion and $1.7 billion, respectively, was accrued for AROs (current and noncurrent amounts) in North and South America. In August 2016, Mosaic deposited $630 million into two trust funds as financial assurance to support certain estimated future AROs. See Note 14 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the Environmental Protection Agency ("***EPA***") RCRA Initiative.

***Income Taxes***

We make estimates for income taxes in three major areas: uncertain tax positions, valuation allowances, and U.S. deferred income taxes on our non-U.S. subsidiaries' undistributed earnings.

A valuation allowance is provided for deferred tax assets for which it is more likely than not that the related tax benefits will not be realized. Significant judgment is required in evaluating the need for and magnitude of appropriate valuation allowances. The realization of the Company's deferred tax assets, specifically, the evaluation of net operating loss carryforwards and foreign tax credit carryforwards, is dependent on generating certain types of future taxable income, using both historical and projected future operating results, the source of future income, the reversal of existing taxable temporary differences, taxable income in prior carry-back years (if permitted) and the availability of tax planning strategies. As of December 31, 2022, and 2021, we had a valuation allowance of $909.9 million and $774.7 million, respectively. Changes in tax laws, assumptions with respect to future taxable income, tax planning strategies, resolution of matters under tax audit and foreign currency exchange rates could result in adjustment to these allowances.

Due to Mosaic's global operations, we assess uncertainties and judgments in the application of complex tax regulations in a multitude of jurisdictions. Future changes in judgment related to the expected ultimate resolution of uncertain tax positions will affect earnings in the quarter of such change. While it is often difficult to predict the final outcome or the timing of resolution of any particular uncertain tax position, our liabilities for income taxes reflect what we believe to be the more likely than not outcome. We adjust these liabilities, as well as the related interest, in light of changing facts and circumstances, including negotiations with taxing authorities in various jurisdictions, outcomes of tax litigation, and resolution of disputes arising from tax audits in the normal course of business. Settlement of any particular position may require the use of cash. The Company is currently in negotiations with non-U.S. tax authorities where settlements could result in different tax outcomes than what is currently accounted for. Based upon an analysis of tax positions taken on prior year returns and expected positions to be taken on the current year return, management has identified gross uncertain income tax positions of $25.2 million as of December 31, 2022.

Any dividends from controlled foreign corporations are tax-free from a U.S. income tax perspective. Additionally, there will not be any foreign tax credits associated with foreign dividends. Therefore, there are no material federal U.S. implications of future repatriations on non-U.S. subsidiaries' undistributed earnings. However, since there are no U.S. foreign tax credits associated with foreign dividends, any foreign withholding tax associated with a future repatriation will need to be accrued if

------

the earnings are not permanently reinvested. As of December 31, 2022, we have included $50.0 million of withholding tax in the full year effective tax rate related to the $1.0 billion dividend to the U.S. from Canada.

We have included a further discussion of income taxes in Note 13 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

**<u>Liquidity and Capital Resources</u>**

We define liquidity as the ability to generate or access adequate amounts of cash to meet current cash needs. We remain committed to a disciplined capital allocation strategy and assess our liquidity in terms of our ability to fund working capital requirements, fund sustaining and opportunity capital projects, pursue strategic opportunities and make capital management decisions, which include making payments on and issuing indebtedness and making distributions to our stockholders, either in the form of share repurchases or dividends. Our liquidity is subject to general economic, financial, competitive and other factors that are beyond our control.

We have a target liquidity buffer of up to $3.0 billion, including cash and available credit facilities. We expect our liquidity to fluctuate from time to time, especially in the first quarter of each year, to manage through the seasonality of our business. We also target debt leverage ratios that are consistent with investment grade credit metrics. Our capital allocation priorities include maintaining our target investment grade metrics and financial strength, sustaining our assets, including ensuring the safety and reliability of our assets, investing to grow our business, either through organic growth or taking advantage of strategic opportunities, and returning excess cash to stockholders, including paying our dividend. During 2022, we returned capital to our stockholders through share repurchases of $1.7 billion and paid dividends of $0.2 billion. Our Board of Directors also approved an increase to our annual dividend to $0.80 per share, beginning with the dividend declared on December 16, 2022. Subsequent to year-end, our Board of Directors approved the following:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• A special dividend of $0.25 per share to be distributed in March to our stockholders of record as of March 15, 2023.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• An ASR of $300 million, which is expected to be initiated in the first quarter of 2023.

As of December 31, 2022, we had cash and cash equivalents of $0.7 billion, marketable securities held in trusts to fund future obligations of $0.7 billion, long-term debt including current maturities of $3.4 billion, short-term debt of $0.2 billion and stockholders' equity of $12.2 billion. In addition, we had $0.8 billion of commercial arrangements for certain customer purchases in Brazil through structured payable arrangements, as discussed in Note 11 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

All of our cash and cash equivalents are diversified in highly rated investment vehicles. Our cash and cash equivalents are held either in the U.S. or held by non-U.S. subsidiaries and are not subject to significant foreign currency exposures, as the majority are held in investments denominated in U.S. dollars as of December 31, 2022. These funds may create foreign currency transaction gains or losses, however, depending on the functional currency of the entity holding the cash. In addition, there are no significant restrictions that would preclude us from bringing funds held by non-U.S. subsidiaries back to the U.S., aside from withholding taxes.

***Sources and Uses of Cash***

As of December 31, 2022, we had cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash of $0.7 billion. Funds generated by operating activities, available cash and cash equivalents and our revolving credit facility continue to be our most significant sources of liquidity. We believe funds generated from the expected results of operations and available cash, cash equivalents and borrowings either under our revolving credit facility or through long-term borrowings will be sufficient to finance our operations, including our expansion plans, existing strategic initiatives and expected dividend payments for the next 12 months. We expect our capital expenditures to be between $1.3 billion and $1.4 billion in 2023. There can be no assurance, however, that we will continue to generate cash flows at or above current levels. At December 31, 2022, we had $2.49 billion available under our $2.5 billion revolving credit facility. See Note 11 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information relating to our financing arrangements, which is hereby incorporated by reference.

We have certain contractual obligations that require us to make cash payments on a scheduled basis. These include, among other things, long-term debt payments, interest payments, operating leases, unconditional purchase obligations and funding requirements of pension and postretirement obligations. Our long-term debt has maturities ranging from one year to 22 years. Unconditional purchase obligations are our largest contractual cash obligations. These include obligations for contracts to purchase raw materials such as sulfur, ammonia, phosphate rock and natural gas, obligations to purchase raw materials for our international distribution activities, and maintenance and services. Other large cash obligations are our AROs and other

------

environmental obligations primarily related to our Phosphates and Mosaic Fertilizantes segments. We expect to fund our AROs and other environmental obligations, purchase obligations, long-term debt and capital expenditures with a combination of operating cash flows, cash and cash equivalents and borrowings.

The following is a summary of our material contractual cash obligations as of December 31, 2022:

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | ***Payments by Calendar Year*** | ***Payments by Calendar Year*** | ***Payments by Calendar Year*** | ***Payments by Calendar Year*** |
|<br>*(in millions)* |<br>**Total** | **Less than 1<br>year** | **1 - 3<br>years** | **3 - 5<br>years** | **More than 5<br>years** |
| Long-term debt<sup>(a)</sup> | $3397.2 | $985.3 | $132.7 | $729.5 | $1549.7 |
| Estimated interest payments on long-term debt<sup>(b)</sup> | 1532.7 | 158.1 | 241.1 | 230.9 | 902.6 |
| Operating leases | 185.9 | 50.7 | 58.4 | 30.5 | 46.3 |
| Purchase commitments<sup>(c)</sup> | 6103.5 | 4393.0 | 1361.9 | 256.3 | 92.3 |
| Pension and postretirement liabilities<sup>(d)</sup> | 145.2 | 8.1 | 29.4 | 32.1 | 75.6 |
| Total contractual cash obligations | $11364.5 | $5595.2 | $1823.5 | $1279.3 | $2666.5 |

---

**______________________________**

(a)Long-term debt primarily consists of unsecured notes, finance leases, unsecured debentures and secured notes.

(b)Based on interest rates and debt balances as of December 31, 2022.

(c)Based on prevailing market prices as of December 31, 2022. For additional information related to our purchase commitments, see Note 22 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

(d)The 2023 pension plan payments are based on minimum funding requirements. For years thereafter, pension plan payments are based on expected benefits paid. The postretirement plan payments are based on projected benefit payments. The above amounts include our North America and Brazil plans.

See Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements and Obligations below for more information on other environmental obligations.

***Summary of Cash Flows***

The following table represents a comparison of the net cash provided by operating activities, net cash used in investing activities and net cash used in financing activities for calendar years 2022, 2021 and 2020:

---

| | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | | | | |
| *(in millions)* | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **2022-2021** | **2022-2021** | **2021-2020** | **2021-2020** |
| **Cash Flow** | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** | **Change** | **Percent** | **Change** | **Percent** |
| Net cash provided by operating activities | $3935.8 | $2187.0 | $1582.6 | $1748.8 | 80% | $604.4 | 38% |
| Net cash used in investing activities | (1259.6) | (1322.3) | (1189.5) | 62.7 | 5% | (132.8) | (11)% |
| Net cash used in financing activities | (2678.7) | (682.1) | (283.8) | (1996.6) | (293)% | (398.3) | (140)% |

---

***Operating Activities***

In 2022, net cash flow from operating activities provided us with a significant source of liquidity. For the year ended December 31, 2022, net cash provided by operating activities was $3.9 billion, compared to $2.2 billion in the prior year. Our results of operations, after non-cash adjustments to net earnings, contributed $4.9 billion to cash flows from operating activities during 2022, compared to $2.8 billion during 2021. During 2022, we had an unfavorable change in assets and liabilities of $1.0 billion, compared to an unfavorable change of $0.6 billion during 2021.

The change in assets and liabilities for the year ended December 31, 2022, was primarily driven by unfavorable impacts from changes in accounts receivable of $215.2 million, other current and noncurrent assets of $247.4 million and inventories of $749.6 million, partially offset by favorable changes in accounts payable and accrued liabilities of $219.8 million. The unfavorable change in accounts receivable was primarily related to higher sales prices at the end of the current year compared to the prior year, which resulted in higher balances. The change in inventories was driven primarily by an increase in raw material prices and finished goods cost across all our operating segments and an increase in inventory volumes, primarily in

------

our Phosphate and Potash segments. The change in other current and noncurrent assets was primarily related to an increase in taxes receivable due to timing of refunds. These changes were partially offset by an increase in accounts payable and accrued liabilities, which was driven primarily by an increase in customer prepayments in Brazil, an increase in environmental reserves and an increase in our dividend payable.

***Investing Activities***

Net cash used in investing activities for the year ended December 31, 2022, was comparable to the same period a year ago at $1.3 billion, primarily driven by capital expenditures of $1.2 billion in 2022.

***Financing Activities***

Net cash used in financing activities was $2.7 billion for the year ended December 31, 2022, compared to $682.1 million in the prior year. In 2022, we made repurchases of our common stock of $1.7 billion and paid dividends of $235.7 million. We also made net payments on our long-term debt of $610.3 million, $302.7 million under our inventory financing arrangement and $81.1 million to the bank for amounts collected on their behalf under our Receivable Purchasing Agreement. Net payments on structured accounts payable were $16.1 million. In 2022, we also received net proceeds from short-term borrowings of $219.3 million.

***Debt Instruments, Guarantees and Related Covenants***

See Note 11 and Note 16 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information relating to our financing arrangements and fair value measurements, which is hereby incorporated by reference.

***Financial Assurance Requirements***

In addition to various operational and environmental regulations primarily related to our Phosphates segment, we incur liabilities for reclamation activities under which we are subject to financial assurance requirements. In various jurisdictions in which we operate, particularly Florida and Louisiana, we are required to pass a financial strength test or provide credit support, typically in the form of cash deposits, surety bonds or letters of credit. See Other Commercial Commitments under Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements and Obligations and Note 22 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information about these requirements, which is hereby incorporated by reference.

**<u>Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements and Obligations</u>**

**Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements**

In accordance with the definition under rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission ("***SEC***"), the following qualify as off-balance sheet arrangements:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• certain obligations under guarantee contracts that have "any of the characteristics identified in Financial Accounting Standards Board ("***FASB***") Accounting Standards Codification ("***ASC***") paragraph ASC 460-10-15-4 (Guarantees Topic)";

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• a retained or contingent interest in assets transferred to an unconsolidated entity or similar arrangement that serves as credit, liquidity or market risk support to that entity for such assets;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• any obligation, including a contingent obligation, under a contract that would be accounted for as derivative instruments except that it is both indexed to the registrant's own stock and classified as equity; and

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• any obligation, arising out of a variable interest in an unconsolidated entity that is held by, and material to, the registrant, where such entity provides financing, liquidity, market risk or credit risk support to the registrant, or engages in leasing, hedging or research and development services with the registrant.

Information regarding guarantees that meet the above requirements is included in Note 17 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements and is hereby incorporated by reference. We do not have any contingent interest in assets transferred, derivative instruments, or variable interest entities that qualify as off-balance sheet arrangements under SEC rules.

------

**Other Commercial Commitments**

The following is a summary of our other commercial commitments as of December 31, 2022:

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | ***Commitment Expiration by Calendar Year*** | ***Commitment Expiration by Calendar Year*** | ***Commitment Expiration by Calendar Year*** | ***Commitment Expiration by Calendar Year*** |
| *(in millions)* | **Total** | **Less than 1<br>year** | **1 - 3<br>years** | **3 - 5<br>years** | **More than 5<br>years** |
| Letters of credit | $65.3 | $65.3 | $— | $— | $— |
| Surety bonds | 724.2 | 723.9 |  | 0.3 |  |
| Total | $789.5 | $789.2 | $— | $0.3 | $— |

---

The surety bonds and letters of credit generally expire within one year or less but a substantial portion of these instruments provide financial assurance for continuing obligations and, therefore, in most cases, must be renewed on an annual basis. We issue letters of credit through our revolving credit facility and bilateral agreements. As of December 31, 2022, we had $10.9 million of outstanding letters of credit through our credit facility and $54.4 million outstanding through bilateral agreements. We primarily incur liabilities for reclamation activities in our Florida operations and for phosphogypsum management system ("***Gypstack***" or "***Gypstacks***") closure in our Florida and Louisiana operations where, for permitting purposes, we must either pass a test of financial strength or provide credit support, typically in the form of cash deposits, surety bonds or letters of credit. As of December 31, 2022, we had $382.3 million in surety bonds and a $50 million letter of credit included in the total amount above. These bonds and letters of credit are outstanding for reclamation obligations, primarily related to mining in Florida. We also have a surety bond of $300.8 million with the EPA which was delivered as a substitute for the financial assurance provided through the Plant City Trust. The surety bonds generally require us to obtain a discharge of the bonds or to post additional collateral (typically in the form of cash or letters of credit) at the request of the issuer of the bonds.

We are subject to financial assurance requirements related to the closure and post-closure care of our Gypstacks in Florida and Louisiana. These requirements include Florida and Louisiana state financial assurance regulations, and financial assurance requirements under the terms of consent decrees that we have entered into with respect to our facilities in Florida and Louisiana. These include a consent decree (the "***Plant City Consent Decree***") with EPA and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection ("***FDEP***") relating to the Plant City, Florida Phosphate Concentrates facility (the "***Plant City Facility***") we acquired as part of (the "***CF Phosphate Assets Acquisition***") and two separate consent decrees (collectively, the "***2015 Consent Decrees***") with federal and state regulators that include financial assurance requirements for the closure and post-closure care of substantially all of our Gypstacks in Florida and Louisiana, other than those acquired as part of the CF Phosphate Assets Acquisition, which are discussed separately below.

See Note 14 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information relating to our financial assurance obligations, including the Plant City Consent Decree and the 2015 Consent Decrees, which information is incorporated by reference.

Currently, state financial assurance requirements in Florida and Louisiana for the closure and post-closure care of Gypstacks are, in general terms, based upon the same assumptions and associated estimated values as the AROs recognized for financial reporting purposes. For financial reporting purposes, we recognize the AROs based on the estimated future closure and post-closure costs of Gypstacks, the undiscounted value of which is approximately $2.7 billion. The value of the AROs for closure and post-closure care of Mosaic's Gypstacks, discounted to the present value, based on a credit-adjusted, risk-free rate, is reflected on our Consolidated Balance Sheets in the amount of approximately $1.0 billion as of December 31, 2022. Compliance with the financial assurance requirements in Florida and Louisiana is generally based on the undiscounted Gypstack closure estimates.

We satisfy substantially all of our Florida, Louisiana and federal financial assurance requirements through compliance with the financial assurance requirements under the 2015 Consent Decrees, by providing third-party credit support in the form of surety bonds (including under the Plant City Consent Decree), and a financial test mechanism supported by a corporate guarantee (*"****Bonnie Financial Test***") related to a closed Florida phosphate concentrates facility in Bartow, Florida (the "***Bonnie Facility***") as discussed below. We comply with our remaining state financial assurance requirements because our financial strength permits us to meet applicable financial strength tests. There have been times in the past that we have not met the applicable financial strength tests and there can be no assurance that we will be able to meet the applicable financial strength tests in the future. In the event we do not meet either financial strength test, we could be required to seek an alternate financial strength test acceptable to state regulatory authorities or provide credit support, which may include surety bonds, letters of credit and cash escrows or trust funds. Cash escrows or trust funds would be classified as restricted cash on our

------

Consolidated Balance Sheets. Assuming we maintain our current levels of liquidity and capital resources, we do not expect that these Florida and Louisiana requirements will have a material effect on our results of operations, liquidity or capital resources.

As part of the CF Phosphate Assets Acquisition, we assumed certain AROs related to the estimated costs ("***Gypstack Closure Costs***") at both the Plant City Facility and the Bonnie Facility. Associated with these assets are two related financial assurance arrangements for which we became responsible and that provided sources of funds for the estimated Gypstack Closure Costs for these facilities, pursuant to federal or state law, which the government can draw against in the event we cannot perform such closure activities. One was initially a trust (the "***Plant City Trust***") established to meet the requirements under a consent decree with EPA and the FDEP with respect to U.S. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ("***RCRA***") compliance at Plant City that also satisfied Florida financial assurance requirements at that site. Beginning in September 2016, as a substitute for the financial assurance provided through the Plant City Trust, we have provided financial assurance for Plant City in the form of a surety bond delivered to EPA (the "***Plant City Bond***"). The amount of the Plant City Bond is $300.8 million at December 31, 2022, which reflects our closure cost estimates at that date. The other was also a trust fund (the "***Bonnie Facility Trust***") established to meet the requirements under Florida financial assurance regulations that apply to the Bonnie Facility. On July 27, 2018, we received $21.0 million from the Bonnie Facility Trust by substituting the trust fund for the Bonnie Financial Test supported by a corporate guarantee as allowed by state regulations. Both financial assurance funding obligations require estimates of future expenditures that could be impacted by refinements in scope, technological developments, new information, cost inflation, changes in regulations, discount rates and the timing of activities. Under our current approach to satisfying applicable requirements, additional financial assurance would be required in the future if increases in cost estimates exceed the face amount of the Plant City Bond or the amount supported by the Bonnie Financial Test.

**Other Long-Term Obligations**

The following is a summary of our other long-term obligations, including Gypstacks and land reclamation, as of December 31, 2022:

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | ***Payments by Calendar Year*** | ***Payments by Calendar Year*** | ***Payments by Calendar Year*** | ***Payments by Calendar Year*** |
| *(in millions)* |<br>**Total** | **Less than 1<br>year** | **1 - 3<br>years** | **3 - 5<br>years** | **More than 5<br>years** |
| ARO<sup>(a)</sup> | $4124.7 | $216.4 | $327.8 | $218.9 | $3361.6 |

---

**______________________________**

(a)Represents the undiscounted estimated cash outflows required to settle the AROs. For the Potash segment, this excludes the subsequent years of tailings area management for activities such as dissolution and reclamation of land, which are estimated to require an additional 158 to 367 years until completion. The corresponding present value of all future expenditures is $1.9 billion as of December 31, 2022 and is reflected in our accrued liabilities and other noncurrent liabilities in our Consolidated Balance Sheets.

Most of our export sales of potash crop nutrients are marketed through a North American export association, Canpotex, which funds its operations in part through third-party financing facilities. As a member, Mosaic or our subsidiaries are subject to certain conditions and exceptions and contractually obligated to reimburse Canpotex for their pro rata share of any operating expenses or other liabilities incurred. The reimbursements are made through reductions to members' cash receipts from Canpotex.

Commitments are set forth in Note 22 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements and are hereby incorporated by reference.

**Income Tax Obligations**

Gross uncertain tax positions as of December 31, 2022 of $25.2 million are not included in the other long-term obligations table presented above because the timing of the settlement of unrecognized tax benefits cannot be reasonably determined. For further discussion, refer to Note 13 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

**<u>Market Risk</u>**

We are exposed to the impact of fluctuations in the relative value of currencies, fluctuations in interest rates, fluctuations in the purchase prices of natural gas, nitrogen, ammonia and sulfur consumed in operations, and changes in freight costs, as well as changes in the market value of our financial instruments. We periodically enter into derivatives in order to mitigate our

------

interest rate risks, foreign currency risks and the effects of changing commodity prices and freight prices, but not for speculative purposes. Unrealized mark-to-market gains and losses on derivatives are recorded in Corporate, Eliminations and Other. Once realized, they are recorded in the related business segment.

***Foreign Currency Exchange Rates***

Due to the global nature of our operations, we are exposed to currency exchange rate changes, which may cause fluctuations in earnings and cash flows. Our primary foreign currency exposures are the Canadian dollar and Brazilian real. To reduce economic risk and volatility on expected cash flows that are denominated in the Canadian dollar and Brazilian real, we use financial instruments that may include forward contracts, zero-cost collars and/or futures.

The functional currency of several of our Canadian entities is the Canadian dollar. For those entities, sales are primarily denominated in U.S. dollars, but the costs are paid principally in Canadian dollars. We generally enter into derivative instruments for a portion of the currency risk exposure on anticipated cash inflows and outflows, including outflows for capital expenditures denominated in Canadian dollars. Mosaic hedges cash flows on a declining basis, up to 18 months for the Canadian dollar. A stronger Canadian dollar generally reduces these entities' operating earnings. A weaker Canadian dollar has the opposite effect. Depending on the underlying exposure, such derivatives can create additional earnings volatility because we do not apply hedge accounting. Gains or losses on these derivative contracts, both for open contracts at quarter-end (unrealized) and settled contracts (realized), are recorded in either cost of goods sold or foreign currency transaction gain (loss).

The functional currency for our Brazilian subsidiaries is the Brazilian real. We finance our Brazilian inventory purchases with U.S. dollar-denominated liabilities. We hedge a portion of cash flows on a declining basis, up to 12 months for the Brazilian real. A stronger Brazilian real relative to the U.S. dollar has the impact of reducing these liabilities on a functional currency basis. When this occurs, an associated foreign currency transaction gain is recorded as non-operating income. A weaker Brazilian real generally has the opposite effect. We also enter into derivative instruments for a portion of our currency risk exposure on anticipated Brazilian real cash flows and record an associated gain or loss in either cost of goods sold or foreign currency transaction gain (loss) line in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings. A stronger Brazilian real generally reduces our Brazilian subsidiaries operating earnings. A weaker Brazilian real has the opposite effect.

As discussed above, we have Canadian dollar, Brazilian real, and other foreign currency exchange contracts. As of December 31, 2022, and 2021, the fair value of our major foreign currency exchange contracts was a liability of $27.3 million and $18.6 million, respectively. We recorded an unrealized loss of $20.1 million in cost of goods sold and recorded an unrealized gain of $10.4 million in foreign currency transaction gain (loss) in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings for 2022.

The table below provides information about Mosaic's significant foreign exchange derivatives.

------

---

| | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **As of December 31, 2022** | **As of December 31, 2022** | **As of December 31, 2022** | **As of December 31, 2022** | **As of December 31, 2021** | **As of December 31, 2021** | **As of December 31, 2021** | **As of December 31, 2021** |
| | **Expected<br>Maturity Date<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Years ending&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<br>December 31,** | **Expected<br>Maturity Date<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Years ending&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<br>December 31,** | **Expected<br>Maturity Date<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Years ending&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<br>December 31,** | **Fair<br>Value** | **Expected<br>Maturity Date<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Years ending&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<br>December 31,** | **Expected<br>Maturity Date<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Years ending&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<br>December 31,** | **Expected<br>Maturity Date<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Years ending&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<br>December 31,** | **Fair<br>Value** |
|<br>*(in millions)* | **2023** | **2024** | **2025** | **Fair<br>Value** | **2022** | **2023** | **2024** | **Fair<br>Value** |
| **Foreign Currency Exchange Forwards** |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Canadian Dollar** |  |  |  | $(32.5) |  |  |  | $3.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Notional (million US$) - short Canadian dollars | $177.7 | $— | $— |  | $421.2 | $78.3 | $28.2 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Weighted Average Rate - Canadian dollar to U.S. dollar | 1.3086 |  |  |  | 1.2731 | 1.2665 | 1.2874 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Notional (million US$) - long Canadian dollars | $1405.1 | $121.1 | $— |  | $1030.7 | $192.0 | $35.2 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Weighted Average Rate - Canadian dollar to U.S. dollar | 1.3157 | 1.3382 |  |  | 1.2708 | 1.2893 | 1.2346 |  |
| **Foreign Currency Exchange Collars** |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Canadian Dollar** |  |  |  | $— |  |  |  | $0.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Notional (million US$) - long Canadian dollars | $— | $— | $— |  | $15.5 | $— | $— |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Weighted Average Participation Rate - Canadian dollar to U.S. dollar |  |  |  |  | 1.3433 |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Weighted Average Protection Rate - Canadian dollar to U.S. dollar |  |  |  |  | 1.2875 |  |  |  |
| **Foreign Currency Exchange Non-Deliverable Forwards** |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Brazilian Real** |  |  |  | $— |  |  |  | $(20.8) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Notional (million US$) - short Brazilian real | $— | $— | $— |  | $531.5 | $— | $— |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Weighted Average Rate - Brazilian real to U.S. dollar |  |  |  |  | 5.7121 |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Notional (million US$) - long Brazilian real | $— | $— | $— |  | $679.2 | $— | $— |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Weighted Average Rate - Brazilian real to U.S. dollar |  |  |  |  | 5.6748 |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Indian Rupee** |  |  |  | $2.9 |  |  |  | $(1.5) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Notional (million US$) - short Indian rupee | $308.7 | $— | $— |  | $125.0 | $— | $— |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Weighted Average Rate - Indian rupee to U.S. dollar | 82.3814 |  |  |  | 75.7627 |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Notional (million US$) - short Indian rupee | $40.2 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Weighted Average Rate - Indian rupee to U.S. dollar | 81.9971 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**China Renminbi** |  |  |  | $2.3 |  |  |  | $(0.5) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Notional (million US$) - short China renminbi | $208.4 | $— | $— |  | $68.0 | $— | $— |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Weighted Average Rate - China renminbi to U.S. dollar | 6.8094 |  |  |  | 6.4750 |  |  |  |
| **Total Fair Value** |  |  |  | $(27.3) |  |  |  | $(18.6) |

---

------

***Commodities***

We use forward purchase contracts, swaps and occasionally three-way collars to reduce the risk related to significant price changes in our inputs and product prices. In addition, the natural gas-based pricing under the CF Ammonia Supply Agreement is intended to lessen ammonia pricing volatility.

All gains and losses on commodities contracts are recorded in cost of goods sold in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings.

As of December 31, 2022, and 2021, the fair value of our major commodities contracts was $18.7 million and $18.8 million, respectively. We recorded an unrealized loss of $1.2 million in cost of goods sold on the Consolidated Statements of Earnings for 2022.

Our primary commodities exposure relates to price changes in natural gas.

The table below provides information about Mosaic's natural gas derivatives which are used to manage the risk related to significant price changes in natural gas.

---

| | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **As of December 31, 2022** | **As of December 31, 2022** | **As of December 31, 2022** | **As of December 31, 2022** | **As of December 31, 2022** | **As of December 31, 2021** | **As of December 31, 2021** | **As of December 31, 2021** | **As of December 31, 2021** | **As of December 31, 2021** |
| | **Expected Maturity Date<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Years ending&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<br>December 31,** | **Expected Maturity Date<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Years ending&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<br>December 31,** | **Expected Maturity Date<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Years ending&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<br>December 31,** | **Expected Maturity Date<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Years ending&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<br>December 31,** | **Fair Value** | **Expected Maturity Date<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Years ending&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<br>December 31,** | **Expected Maturity Date<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Years ending&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<br>December 31,** | **Expected Maturity Date<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Years ending&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<br>December 31,** | | **Fair Value** |
|<br>*(in millions)* | **2023** | **2024** | **2025** | **2026** | **Fair Value** | **2022** | **2023** | **2024** | **2025** | **Fair Value** |
| **Natural Gas Swaps** |  |  |  |  | $18.7 |  |  |  |  | $18.8 |
| Notional (million MMBTU) - long | 9.4 | 4.8 |  |  |  | 9.4 | 9.4 | 4.8 |  |  |
| Weighted Average Rate (US$/MM BTU) | $2.48 | $2.70 | $— | $— |  | $2.21 | $2.34 | $2.72 | $— |  |
| **Total Fair Value** |  |  |  |  | $18.7 |  |  |  |  | $18.8 |

---

***Interest Rates***

From time to time, we enter into interest rate swap agreements to hedge our exposure to changes in future interest rates related to anticipated debt issuances. At December 31, 2022 and 2021, we had no interest rate swap agreements in effect.

***Summary***

Overall, there have been no material changes in our primary market risk exposures since the prior year. In 2023, we do not expect any material changes in our primary risk exposures. Additional information about market risk associated with our investments held in the RCRA Trusts is provided in Note 12 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. For additional information related to derivatives, see Notes 15 and 16 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

**<u>Environmental, Health, Safety and Security Matters</u>**

We are subject to complex and evolving international, federal, state, provincial and local environmental, health, safety and security ("***EHS***") policies that govern the production, distribution and use of crop nutrients and animal feed ingredients. These EHS standards regulate or propose to regulate: (i) conduct of mining, production and supply chain operations, including employee safety and facility security procedures; (ii) management or remediation of potential impacts to air, soil and water quality from our operations; (iii) disposal of waste materials; (iv) beneficial use of co-products and residuals; (v) reclamation of lands after mining; (vi) management and handling of raw materials; (vii) product content; and (viii) use of products by both us and our customers.

We have a comprehensive EHS management program that seeks to achieve sustainable, predictable and verifiable EHS performance. Key elements of our EHS program include: (i) identifying and managing EHS risk; (ii) complying with legal requirements; (iii) improving our EHS procedures and protocols; (iv) educating employees regarding EHS obligations; (v) retaining and developing professional qualified EHS staff; (vi) evaluating facility conditions; (vii) evaluating and enhancing safe workplace behaviors; (viii) performing audits; (ix) formulating EHS action plans; and (x) assuring accountability of all managers and other employees for EHS performance. Our business units are responsible for implementing day-to-day elements of our EHS program, assisted by an integrated staff of EHS professionals. We conduct

------

audits to verify that each facility has identified risks, achieved regulatory compliance, improved EHS performance, and incorporated EHS management systems into day-to-day business functions.

New or proposed regulatory programs or policies can present significant challenges in ascertaining future compliance obligations, implementing compliance plans, and estimating future costs until implementing regulations have been finalized and definitive regulatory interpretations have been adopted. New or proposed regulatory standards may require modifications to our facilities or to operating procedures and these modifications may involve significant capital costs or increases in operating costs. In March, 2022, the SEC issued proposed rules on climate change disclosure requirements that, if adopted as proposed will require disclosure of extensive detailed climate-related information. The Company is monitoring the SEC's proposed rules on climate change and is taking necessary steps to plan for the anticipated disclosure requirements.

We have expended, and anticipate that we will continue to expend, substantial financial and managerial resources to comply with EHS standards and to continue to improve our environmental stewardship. In 2023, excluding capital expenditures arising out of the consent decrees referred to under "EPA RCRA Initiative" in Note 14 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, we expect environmental capital expenditures to total approximately $300 million, primarily related to: (i) modification or construction of waste management infrastructure and water treatment systems; (ii) construction and modification projects associated with Gypstacks and clay settling ponds at our Phosphates facilities and tailings management areas for our Potash mining and processing facilities; (iii) upgrading or new construction of air pollution control equipment at some of the concentrates plants; and (iv) capital projects associated with remediation of contamination at current or former operations. Additional expenditures for land reclamation, Gypstack closure and water treatment activities are expected to total approximately $180 million in 2023. In 2024, we estimate environmental capital expenditures will be approximately $280 million and expenditures for land reclamation activities, Gypstack closure and water treatment activities are expected to be approximately $180 million. We spent approximately $450 million and $410 million for the years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, for environmental capital expenditures, land reclamation activities, Gypstack closure and water treatment activities. No assurance can be given that greater-than-anticipated EHS capital expenditures or land reclamation, Gypstack closure or water treatment expenditures will not be required in 2023 or in the future.

***Operating Requirements and Impacts***

*Permitting.* We hold numerous environmental, mining and other permits and approvals authorizing operations at our facilities. Our ability to continue operations at a facility could be materially affected by a government agency decision to deny or delay issuing a new or renewed permit or approval, to revoke or substantially modify an existing permit or approval or to substantially change conditions applicable to a permit modification, or by legal actions that successfully challenge our permits.

Expanding our operations or extending operations into new areas is also predicated upon securing the necessary environmental or other permits or approvals. We have been engaged in, and over the next several years will be continuing, efforts to obtain permits in support of our anticipated Florida operations at certain of our properties. For years, we have successfully permitted properties and anticipate that we will be able to permit these properties as well.

A denial of our permits, the issuance of permits with cost-prohibitive conditions, substantial delays in issuing key permits, legal actions that prevent us from relying on permits or revocation of permits can prevent or delay our mining at the affected properties and thereby materially affect our business, results of operations, liquidity or financial condition.

In addition, in the U.S., local community involvement has become an increasingly important factor in the permitting process for companies like ours, and various counties and other parties, particularly in Florida, have in the past filed and continue to file lawsuits or administrative appeals challenging the issuance of some of the permits we require. These actions can significantly delay permit issuance. Additional information regarding certain potential or pending permit challenges is provided in Note 23 to our Consolidated Financial Statements and is incorporated herein by reference.

*Federal Initiatives to Define* "*Waters of the United States.*" The 1972 amendments to the Clean Water Act ("*CWA*") established federal jurisdiction over "navigable waters," defined in the Act as "waters of the United States" and often abbreviated as "WOTUS." As it relates to Mosaic's operations and facilities, the scope of the term WOTUS dictates legal requirements for our National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System wastewater discharge permits and for impacts to surface waters and wetlands associated with our phosphate mining operations. A broad definition of WOTUS, and thus the scope of federal jurisdiction, increases the time required to identify wetlands and waterways subject to federal regulatory and

------

permitting requirements, and the amount and type of mitigation required to compensate for impacts to jurisdictional WOTUS caused by our mining operations.

The current regulatory definition of WOTUS was promulgated on April 21, 2020, by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and was designated the "Navigable Waters Protection Rule" ("NWPR"). The NWPR was intended to provide clarity, predictability and consistency so that the regulated community could better understand where the CWA applies and where it does not. On June 9, 2021, EPA announced its plans to repeal and replace the NWPR, and in December 2021 issued a proposed regulation to revise the WOTUS definition and replace the NWPR.

On December 30, 2022, EPA and the Corps promulgated a revised, expanded definition of the term WOTUS which will become effective on March 20, 2023. The 2022 WOTUS rule asserts a broader geographic scope of federal jurisdiction than either the 2020 NWPR or any previous WOTUS regulatory definition. Two separate legal challenges to the 2022 WOTUS rule have been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas; one lawsuit brought by the State of Texas and the second by agricultural interests. The plaintiffs in both cases recently filed motions requesting the Court enjoin implementation of the 2022 WOTUS rule.

Numerous stakeholders urged EPA and the Corps to postpone issuing the final 2022 WOTUS rule until after the U.S. Supreme Court decided *Sackett v. EPA*, which is expected to clarify Clean Water Act jurisdiction. The Court held oral argument in the *Sackett* case on October 3, 2022. A final decision that interprets the constitutional scope of the term WOTUS is anticipated to be issued by the Court during the first quarter of 2023.

*Water Quality Regulations for Nutrient Discharges.* New nutrient regulatory initiatives could have a material effect on either us or our customers. For example, the Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Task Force, established by executive order of the U.S. President and comprised of five gulf states and eleven federal agencies, has delivered a final strategy for long-term ecosystem restoration for the Gulf Coast. The strategy calls for, among other matters, reduction of the flow of excess nutrients into the Gulf of Mexico through state nutrient reduction frameworks, new nutrient reduction approaches and reduction of agricultural and urban sources of excess nutrients. Implementation of the strategy will require legislative or regulatory action at the state level. We cannot predict what the requirements of any such legislative or regulatory action could be or whether or how it would affect us or our customers.

*Reclamation Obligations.* During phosphate mining, we remove overburden in order to retrieve phosphate rock reserves. Once we have finished mining in an area, we use the overburden and sand tailings produced by the beneficiation process to reclaim the area in accordance with approved reclamation plans and applicable laws. We have incurred and will continue to incur significant costs to fulfill our reclamation obligations.

*Management of Residual Materials and Closure of Management Areas.* Mining and processing of potash and phosphate generate residual materials that must be managed both during the operation of the facility and upon and after facility closure. Potash tailings, consisting primarily of salt and clay, are stored in surface disposal sites. Phosphate clay residuals from mining are deposited in clay settling ponds. Processing of phosphate rock with sulfuric acid generates phosphogypsum that currently is stored in Gypstacks.

During the life of the tailings management areas, clay settling ponds and Gypstacks, we have incurred and will continue to incur significant costs to manage our potash and phosphate residual materials in accordance with environmental laws and regulations and with permit requirements. Additional legal and permit requirements will take effect when these facilities are closed. Our AROs are further discussed in Note 14 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

*New Wales Water Loss Incident.* In August 2016, a sinkhole developed under one of the two cells of the Phase II Gypstack at our New Wales facility in Polk County, Florida, resulting in process water from the stack draining into the sinkhole. The incident was reported to the FDEP and the EPA and in connection with the incident, our subsidiary, Mosaic Fertilizer, LLC ("***Mosaic Fertilizer***"), entered into a consent order (the "***Order***") with the FDEP in October 2016 under which Mosaic Fertilizer agreed to, among other things, implement an approved remediation plan to close the sinkhole; perform additional water monitoring and if necessary, assessment and rehabilitation activities in the event of identified offsite impacts; provide financial assurance; and evaluate the risk of potential future sinkhole formation at our active Florida Gypstack operations.

*Financial Assurance.* Separate from our accounting treatment for reclamation and closure liabilities, some jurisdictions in which we operate require us either to pass a test of financial strength or provide credit support, typically cash deposits, surety

------

bonds, financial guarantees or letters of credit, to address phosphate mining reclamation liabilities and closure liabilities for clay settling areas and Gypstacks. See "Other Commercial Commitments" under "Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements and Obligations" above for additional information about these requirements. We also have obligations under certain consent decrees and a separate financial assurance arrangement relating to our facilities in Florida and Louisiana. Two consent decrees that became effective in 2016 resolved claims under RCRA and state hazardous waste laws relating to our management of certain waste materials onsite at certain fertilizer manufacturing facilities in Florida and Louisiana. Under these consent decrees, in 2016 we deposited $630 million in cash into two trust funds to provide additional financial assurance for the estimated costs of closure and post-closure care of our phosphogypsum management systems. In addition, in 2017, we issued a letter of credit in the amount of $50 million to further support our financial assurance obligation under the Florida 2015 Consent Decree. While our actual Gypstack Closure Costs are generally expected to be paid by us in the normal course of our Phosphates business over a period that may not end until three decades or more after a Gypstack has been closed, the funds on deposit in the RCRA Trusts can be drawn by the applicable governmental authority in the event we cannot perform our closure and long-term care obligations. If and when our estimated Gypstack Closure Costs with respect to the facilities associated with a RCRA Trust are sufficiently lower than the amount on deposit in that RCRA Trust, we have the right to request that the excess funds be released to us. The same is true for the RCRA Trust balance remaining after the completion of our obligations, which will be performed over a period that may not end until three decades or more after a Gypstack has been closed. See the discussion under "EPA RCRA Initiative" in Note 14 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information about these matters.

We established and in 2021 fully funded a trust valued at $25 million (Canadian dollars) in satisfaction of financial assurance requirements for closure of our Saskatchewan Potash facilities. Trust performance is subject to review by the Province of Saskatchewan every five years during its existence.

In 2020, we executed and thereafter have maintained surety bonds in the amount of approximately $82 million to establish financial assurance for closure of our Carlsbad, New Mexico potash facility with the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management and the New Mexico Environment Department.

*Examination of Working Places in Metal and Nonmetal Mines*. In order to comply with U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration requirements to examine working places in metal and nonmetal mines, we have adjusted our daily mine workplace examination procedures and added additional requirements for the documentation of adverse conditions when they are identified during the daily examinations.

***Climate Change***

We are committed to finding ways to meet the challenges of crop nutrient and animal feed ingredient production and distribution in the context of the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. While focused on helping the world grow the food it needs, we have proven our commitment to using our resources more efficiently and have implemented innovative energy recovery technologies that result in our generation of much of the energy we need, particularly in our U.S. Phosphates operations, from high efficiency heat recovery systems that result in lower greenhouse gas emissions. In 2021, we announced our goal to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions in Florida by 2030 and companywide by 2040.

*Climate Change Regulation.* Various governmental initiatives to limit greenhouse gas emissions are under way or under consideration around the world. These initiatives could restrict our operating activities, require us to make changes in our operating activities that would increase our operating costs, reduce our efficiency or limit our output, require us to make capital improvements to our facilities, increase our energy, raw material and transportation costs or limit their availability, or otherwise adversely affect our results of operations, liquidity or capital resources, and these effects could be material to us.

The direct greenhouse gas emissions from our operations result primarily from:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Combustion of natural gas to produce steam and dry potash products at our Belle Plaine, Saskatchewan potash solution mine. To a lesser extent, at our potash shaft mines, natural gas is used as a fuel to heat fresh air supplied to the shaft mines and for drying potash products.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• The use of natural gas as a feedstock in the production of ammonia at our Faustina, Louisiana facility.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Process reactions from naturally occurring carbonates in phosphate rock.

------

In addition, the production of energy and raw materials that we purchase from unrelated parties for use in our business and energy used in the transportation of our products and raw materials are sources of greenhouse gas emissions.

Governmental greenhouse gas emission initiatives include, among others, the December 2015 agreement (the "***Paris Agreement***") which was the outcome of the 21<sup>st</sup> session of the Conference of the Parties under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The Paris Agreement, which was signed by nearly 200 nations including the U.S. and Canada, entered into force in late 2016 and sets out a goal of limiting the average rise in temperatures for this century to below 2 degrees Celsius. Each signatory is expected to develop its own plan (referred to as a Nationally Determined Contribution, or "***NDC***") for reaching that goal.

On January 20, 2021 the U.S. rejoined the Paris Agreement, which became effective February 19, 2021. In 2015, prior to this announcement, the U.S. had submitted an NDC aiming to achieve, by 2025, an economy-wide target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 26-28% below its 2005 level. The NDC also aims to use best efforts to reduce emissions by 28%. The U.S. target covers all greenhouse gases that were a part of the 2014 Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks. While the future of the U.S.'s involvement in the Paris Agreement and the status of this NDC are unclear, various legislative or regulatory initiatives relating to greenhouse gases have been adopted or considered by the U.S. Congress, the EPA or various states and those initiatives already adopted may be used to implement a U.S. NDC. Additionally, more stringent laws and regulations may be enacted to accomplish the goals set out in the NDC.

Brazil ratified the Paris Agreement on September 21, 2016, committing to an NDC that includes an economy-wide target of 1.3 GtCO2e by 2025 and 1.2 GtCO2e by 2030. In 2020, Brazil submitted a new NDC, which reaffirms the country's commitment to reducing total net greenhouse gas emissions by 37% in 2025 and by 43% in 2030. The NDC further commits to achieving climate neutrality in 2060. Since 2009, Brazil has a National Policy on Climate Change. This Policy is implemented by two instruments: the National Plan on Climate Change and the National Climate Change Fund. Additionally, Brazil has sector-specific policies, such as the National Plan for Low Carbon Emission in Agriculture. As part of its commitments in the Paris Agreement, Brazil enforced a Biofuels National Policy ("***RenovaBio***") program in 2020, which sets a carbon credit mechanism based on emission reductions from the use of biofuels. RenovaBio aims to increase biofuels rate in the country's energy matrix and reached 97% of its target on the first year. Under RenovaBio, fossil fuel distributors are required to compensate for the carbon emissions through the acquisition of CBIOS (decarbonization certificates), issued by biofuel producers (e.g., ethanol plants). Since 2020, the Brazilian Congress became active in proposing other climate-related legislation and could approve new instruments to combat climate change in this current legislature. We will continue to monitor developments relating to the anticipated legislation, as well as the potential future effect on our operating activities, energy, raw material and transportation costs, results of operations, liquidity or capital resources.

Canada's intended NDC aims to achieve, by 2030, an economy-wide target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 40-45% below 2005 levels. In late 2016, the Canadian federal government announced plans for a comprehensive tax on carbon emissions, under which provinces opting out of the tax would have the option of adopting a cap-and-trade system. In the plans, the federal government also committed to implementing a federal carbon pricing backstop system that will apply in any province or territory that does not have a carbon pricing system in place by 2018. As of January 1, 2023, a carbon tax of $65 per tonne now applies in Canada for any emitter not covered under the federal backstop program or approved provincial program. A revised plan was submitted by Saskatchewan to the federal government in 2022, which was subsequently approved in its entirety in November 2022. Our Saskatchewan Potash facilities are subject to the Saskatchewan climate change plan regarding emissions at our facilities; however, indirect costs from the carbon tax associated with electricity, natural gas consumption, and transportation are currently passed through to Mosaic. As implementation of the Paris Agreement proceeds, more stringent laws and regulations may be enacted to accomplish the goals set out in Canada's NDC. We will also continue to monitor developments relating to the anticipated legislation, as well as the potential future effect on our operating activities, energy, raw material and transportation costs, results of operations, liquidity or capital resources.

It is possible that future legislation or regulation addressing climate change, including in response to the Paris Agreement or any new international agreements, could adversely affect our operating activities, energy, raw material and transportation costs, results of operations, liquidity or capital resources, and these effects could be material or adversely impact our competitive advantage. In addition, to the extent climate change restrictions imposed in countries where our competitors operate, such as China, India, former Soviet Union countries or Morocco, are less stringent than in the U.S., Brazil or Canada, our competitors could gain cost or other competitive advantages over us.

*Operating Impacts Due to Climate Change.* The prospective impact of climate change on our operations and those of our customers and farmers remains uncertain. Scientists have hypothesized that the impacts of climate change could include

------

changes in rainfall patterns, water shortages, changing sea levels, changing storm patterns and intensities, and changing temperature levels and that these changes could be severe. These impacts could vary by geographic location. Severe climate change could impact our costs and operating activities, the location and cost of global grain and oilseed production, and the supply and demand for grains and oilseeds. At the present time, we cannot predict the prospective impact of climate change on our results of operations, liquidity or capital resources, or whether any such effects could be material to us.

***Remedial Activities***

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act ("***CERCLA***") (aka Superfund) and state analogues impose liability, without regard to fault or to the legality of a party's conduct, on certain categories of persons, including those who have disposed of "hazardous substances" at a location. Under Superfund, or its various state analogues, one party may be responsible for the entire site, regardless of fault or the locality of its disposal activity. We have contingent environmental remedial liabilities that arise principally from three sources which are further discussed below: (i) facilities currently or formerly owned by our subsidiaries or their predecessors; (ii) facilities adjacent to currently or formerly owned facilities; and (iii) third-party Superfund or state equivalent sites where we are alleged to have disposed of hazardous materials. Taking into consideration established accruals for environmental remedial matters of approximately $185.5 million as of December 31, 2022, expenditures for these known conditions currently are not expected, individually or in the aggregate, to have a material effect on our business or financial condition. However, material expenditures could be required in the future to remediate the contamination at known sites or at other current or former sites.

*Remediation at Our Facilities.* Many of our formerly owned or current facilities have been in operation for a number of years. The historical use and handling of regulated chemical substances, crop and animal nutrients and additives as well as by-product or process tailings at these facilities by us and predecessor operators have resulted in soil, surface water and groundwater impacts.

At many of these facilities, spills or other releases of regulated substances have occurred previously and potentially could occur in the future, possibly requiring us to undertake or fund cleanup efforts under Superfund or otherwise. In some instances, we have agreed, pursuant to consent orders or agreements with the appropriate governmental agencies, to undertake certain investigations, which currently are in progress, to determine whether remedial action may be required to address site impacts. At other locations, we have entered into consent orders or agreements with appropriate governmental agencies to perform required remedial activities that will address identified site conditions. Taking into account established accruals, future expenditures for these known conditions currently are not expected, individually or in the aggregate, to have a material adverse effect on our business or financial condition. However, material expenditures by us could be required in the future to remediate the environmental impacts at these or at other current or former sites.

*Remediation at Third-Party Facilities.* Various third parties have alleged that our historical operations have impacted neighboring offsite areas or nearby third-party facilities. In some instances, we have agreed, pursuant to orders from or agreements with appropriate governmental agencies or agreements with private parties, to undertake or fund investigations, some of which currently are in progress, to determine whether remedial action, under Superfund or otherwise, may be required to address offsite impacts. Our remedial liability at these sites, either alone or in the aggregate, taking into account established accruals, currently is not expected to have a material adverse effect on our business or financial condition. As more information is obtained regarding these sites, this expectation could change.

*Liability for OffSite Disposal Locations.* Currently, we are involved or concluding involvement for offsite disposal at several Superfund or equivalent state sites. Moreover, we previously have entered into settlements to resolve liability with regard to Superfund or equivalent state sites. In some cases, such settlements have included "reopeners," which could result in additional liability at such sites in the event of newly discovered contamination or other circumstances. Our remedial liability at such disposal sites, either alone or in the aggregate, currently is not expected to have a material adverse effect on our business or financial condition. As more information is obtained regarding these sites and the potentially responsible parties involved, this expectation could change.

***Product Requirements and Impacts***

International, federal, state and provincial standards require us to register many of our products before these products can be sold. The standards also impose labeling requirements on these products and require us to manufacture the products to formulations set forth on the labels. We believe that, when handled and used as intended, based on the available data, crop nutrient materials do not pose harm to human health or the environment and that any additional standards or regulatory

------

requirements relating to product requirements and impacts will not have a material adverse effect on our business or financial condition.

***Environmental Justice***

The U.S. federal and some state governments increasingly are adopting standards or policies requiring environmental justice reviews in some permitting actions. In general, they require governmental agencies to evaluate projects for disproportionate impacts to disadvantaged or already burdened communities. If such conditions are found, they might result in a permit denial, or restrictive or cost prohibitive conditions imposed on our operations and may impair our business and operations and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

***Additional Information***

For additional information about phosphate mine permitting in Florida, our environmental liabilities, the environmental proceedings in which we are involved, our AROs related to environmental matters, and our related accounting policies, see Environmental Liabilities and AROs under Critical Accounting Estimates above and Notes 2, 14, and 23 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

***Sustainability***

We are committed to making informed choices that improve our corporate governance, financial strength, operational efficiency, environmental stewardship, community engagement and resource management. Through these efforts, we intend to sustain our business and experience lasting success.

We have included, or incorporate by reference, throughout this Form 10-K discussions of various matters relating to our sustainability, in its broadest sense, that we believe may be material to our investors. These matters include, but are not limited to, discussions about: corporate governance, including the leadership and respective roles of our Board of Directors and its committees, and management; recent and prospective developments in our business; product development; risk, enterprise risk management and risk oversight; the regulatory and permitting environment for our business and ongoing regulatory and permitting initiatives; executive compensation practices; employee and contractor safety; human capital matters and other EHS matters, including climate change, water management, energy and other operational efficiency initiatives, reclamation and AROs. Other matters relating to sustainability are included in our sustainability reports that are available on our website at www.mosaicco.com/ourresponsibility. Our sustainability reports are not incorporated by reference in this Form 10-K.

**<u>Contingencies</u>**

Information regarding contingencies in Note 23 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements is incorporated herein by reference.

**<u>Related Parties</u>**

Information regarding related party transactions is set forth in Note 24 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements and is incorporated herein by reference.

**<u>Recently Issued Accounting Guidance</u>**

Recently issued accounting guidance is set forth in Note 3 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements and is incorporated herein by reference.

**<u>Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward Looking Information</u>**

All statements, other than statements of historical fact, appearing in this report constitute "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward looking statements include, among other things, statements about our expectations, beliefs, intentions or strategies for the future, including statements about proposed or pending future transactions or strategic plans, statements concerning our future operations, financial condition and prospects, statements regarding our expectations for capital expenditures, statements concerning our level of indebtedness and other information, and any statements of assumptions regarding any of the foregoing. In particular, forward-

------

looking statements may include words such as "anticipate," "believe," "could," "estimate," "expect," "intend," "may," "potential," "predict," "project" or "should". These statements involve certain risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially from expectations as of the date of this filing.

Factors that could cause reported results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, the following:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• business and economic conditions and governmental policies affecting the agricultural industry where we or our customers operate, including price and demand volatility resulting from periodic imbalances of supply and demand;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• because of political and economic instability, civil unrest or changes in government policies in Brazil, Saudi Arabia, Peru or other countries in which we do business, our operations could be disrupted as higher costs of doing business could result, including those associated with implementation of new freight tables and new mining legislation;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• the continued impact of the novel coronavirus Covid-19 pandemic on the global economy and our business, suppliers, customers, employees and the communities in which we operate, as further described in Part I, Item 1A of this Form 10-K;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• a potential drop in oil demand, which could lead to a significant decline in production, and its impact on the availability and price of sulfur, a key raw material input for our Phosphates and Mosaic Fertilizantes segment operations;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• changes in farmers' application rates for crop nutrients;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• changes in the operation of world phosphate or potash markets, including consolidation in the crop nutrient industry, particularly if we do not participate in the consolidation;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• the expansion or contraction of production capacity or selling efforts by competitors or new entrants in the industries in which we operate, including the effects of actions by members of Canpotex to prove the production capacity of potash expansion projects, through proving runs or otherwise;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• the effect of future product innovations or development of new technologies on demand for our products;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• seasonality in our business that results in the need to carry significant amounts of inventory and seasonal peaks in working capital requirements, which may result in excess inventory or product shortages;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• changes in the costs, or constraints on supplies, of raw materials or energy used in manufacturing our products, or in the costs or availability of transportation for our products;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• economic and market conditions including supply chain challenges and increased costs and delays caused by transportation and labor shortages;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• declines in our selling prices or significant increases in costs that can require us to write down our inventories to the lower of cost or market, or require us to impair goodwill or other long-lived assets, or establish a valuation allowance against deferred tax assets;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• the lag in realizing the benefit of falling market prices for the raw materials we use to produce our products that can occur while we consume raw materials that we purchased or committed to purchase in the past at higher prices;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• disruptions of our operations at any of our key production, distribution, transportation or terminaling facilities, including those of Canpotex or any joint venture in which we participate;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• shortages or other unavailability of trucks, railcars, tugs, barges and ships for carrying our products and raw materials;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• the effects of and change in trade, monetary, environmental, tax and fiscal policies, laws and regulations;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• foreign exchange rates and fluctuations in those rates;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• tax regulations, currency exchange controls and other restrictions that may affect our ability to optimize the use of our liquidity;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• risks associated with our international operations, including any potential and actual adverse effects related to the Miski Mayo Mine;

------

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• adverse weather and climate conditions affecting our operations, including the impact of potential hurricanes, excessive heat, cold, snow, rainfall or drought;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• difficulties or delays in receiving, challenges to, increased costs of obtaining or satisfying conditions of, or revocation or withdrawal of required governmental and regulatory approvals, including permitting activities;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• changes in the environmental and other governmental regulation that applies to our operations, including federal legislation or regulatory action expanding the types and extent of water resources regulated under federal law and the possibility of further federal or state legislation or regulatory action affecting or related to greenhouse gas emissions, including carbon taxes or other measures that may be implemented in Canada or other jurisdictions in which we operate, or of restrictions or liabilities related to elevated levels of naturally-occurring radiation that arise from disturbing the ground in the course of mining activities or possible efforts to reduce the flow of nutrients into the Gulf of Mexico, the Mississippi River basin or elsewhere;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• the potential costs and effects of implementation of federal or state water quality standards for the discharge of nitrogen and/or phosphorus into Florida waterways;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• the financial resources of our competitors, including state-owned and government-subsidized entities in other countries;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• the possibility of defaults by our customers on trade credit that we extend to them or on indebtedness that they incur to purchase our products and that we guarantee;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• any significant reduction in customers' liquidity or access to credit that they need to purchase our products;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• the effectiveness of the processes we put in place to manage our significant strategic priorities, including our investment in MWSPC, and to successfully integrate and grow acquired businesses;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• actual costs of various items differing from management's current estimates, including, among others, asset retirement, environmental remediation, reclamation or other environmental obligations and Canadian resource taxes and royalties, or the costs of MWSPC or its existing or future funding;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• the costs and effects of legal and administrative proceedings and regulatory matters affecting us, including environmental, tax or administrative proceedings, complaints that our operations are adversely impacting nearby farms, businesses, other property uses or properties, settlements thereof and actions taken by courts with respect to approvals of settlements, costs related to defending and resolving global audit, appeal or court activity and other further developments in legal proceedings and regulatory matters;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• the success of our efforts to attract and retain highly qualified and motivated employees;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• strikes, labor stoppages or slowdowns by our work force or increased costs resulting from unsuccessful labor contract negotiations, and the potential costs and effects of compliance with new regulations affecting our workforce, which increasingly focus on wages and hours, healthcare, retirement and other employee benefits;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• brine inflows at our potash mines;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• accidents or other incidents involving our properties or operations, including potential fires, explosions, seismic events, sinkholes, unsuccessful tailings management, ineffective mine safety procedures, or releases of hazardous or volatile chemicals;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• terrorism, armed conflict or other malicious intentional acts, including cybersecurity risks such as attempts to gain unauthorized access to, or disable, our information technology systems, or our costs of addressing malicious intentional acts;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• actions by the holders of controlling equity interests in businesses in which we hold a noncontrolling interest;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• changes in our relationships with other members of Canpotex or any joint venture in which we participate or their or our exit from participation in Canpotex or any such export association or joint venture, and other changes in our commercial arrangements with unrelated third parties;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*•* difficulties in realizing benefits under our long-term natural gas based pricing ammonia supply agreement with CF, including the risks that the cost savings initially anticipated from the agreement may not be fully realized over the term of the agreement or that the price of natural gas or the market price for ammonia during the agreement's term

------

are at levels at which the agreement's natural gas based pricing is disadvantageous to us, compared with purchases in the spot market; and

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• other risk factors reported from time to time in our SEC reports.

Material uncertainties and other factors known to us are discussed in Item 1A, "Risk Factors," of our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022 and incorporated by reference herein as if fully stated herein.

We base our forward-looking statements on information currently available to us, and we undertake no obligation to update or revise any of these statements, whether as a result of changes in underlying factors, new information, future events or other developments.

------

**Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

To the Stockholders and Board of Directors

The Mosaic Company:

*Opinion on the Consolidated Financial Statements*

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of The Mosaic Company and subsidiaries (the Company) as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, the related consolidated statements of earnings, comprehensive income, equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2022, and the related notes (collectively, the consolidated financial statements). In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2022, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB), the Company's internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2022, based on criteria established in Internal Control – Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission, and our report dated February 23, 2023 expressed an unqualified opinion on the effectiveness of the Company's internal control over financial reporting.

*Basis for Opinion*

These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the consolidated financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the consolidated financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the consolidated financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

*Critical Audit Matters*

The critical audit matters communicated below are matters arising from the current period audit of the consolidated financial statements that were communicated or required to be communicated to the audit committee and that: (1) relate to accounts or disclosures that are material to the consolidated financial statements and (2) involved our especially challenging, subjective, or complex judgments. The communication of critical audit matters does not alter in any way our opinion on the consolidated financial statements, taken as a whole, and we are not, by communicating the critical audit matters below, providing separate opinions on the critical audit matters or on the accounts or disclosures to which they relate.

*Evaluation of asset retirement obligations for water treatment costs*

As discussed in Note 14 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company has recorded asset retirement obligations (AROs) of $1,905.6 million as of December 31, 2022. The ARO includes the planned treatment of contaminated water ("water treatment costs") and other asset retirement activities at the Company's Florida and Louisiana facilities.

We identified the evaluation of asset retirement obligations for water treatment costs as a critical audit matter. Specialized skills and knowledge were required to evaluate the Company's selection of planned water treatment activities to satisfy their legal obligation. In addition, there was a high degree of subjective auditor judgment due to the sensitivity of the AROs to minor changes to significant assumptions, such as the volume of contaminated water and the forecasted level of contamination used to estimate the water treatment costs per thousand gallons ("unit costs").

The following are the primary procedures performed to address this critical audit matter. We evaluated the design and tested the operating effectiveness of certain internal controls related to the Company's ARO process. This included controls related

------

to the knowledge, skill, and ability of third-party specialists and their relationship to the Company, determination of necessary activities required to treat contaminated water, and the development of the significant assumptions utilized in the process. We compared water treatment unit cost estimates to actual spending and water quality measurements. We evaluated the Company's ability to accurately estimate water treatment costs by comparing the Company's prior year estimates to the actual water treatment costs incurred. We performed sensitivity analyses over the volume of contaminated water and the unit costs assumptions to assess their impact on the water treatment costs estimate. Due to the specialized skills and knowledge used by the Company to select water treatment activities, we involved an environmental engineering professional with specialized skills and knowledge. This professional assisted in assessing the professional qualifications of the Company's environmental engineers and engineering firm, including the knowledge, skill, and ability of the engineers, and the relationship of the engineers and engineering firm to the Company. In addition, the environmental engineering professional evaluated the Company's planned asset retirement activities by analyzing the Company's specialist's reports. This professional evaluated significant engineering assumptions listed above and compared the planned activities per the specialist's reports to other information obtained during the audit, such as:

- permits obtained which specify the Company's legal obligations

- reports to state regulators on the level of contamination in water balances.

We evaluated the Company's changes in assumptions for the volume of contaminated water and the forecasted level of contamination by comparing them to actual results from the prior year, as well as assessing operational changes that could impact estimated water volumes, contamination levels, or necessary treatment activities.

*Evaluation of the realizability of certain deferred tax assets*

As discussed in Note 13 of the consolidated financial statements, the Company recognizes deferred income tax assets and liabilities attributable to temporary differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases in each jurisdiction. A valuation allowance is recorded in each jurisdiction in which a deferred income tax asset is recorded when it is more likely than not that the deferred income tax asset will not be realized. As of December 31, 2022, the Company had gross deferred tax assets of $1,793.0 million and a related valuation allowance of $909.9 million.

We identified the evaluation of the realizability of certain deferred tax assets as a critical audit matter. Specifically, the evaluation of foreign tax credit carryforwards, required subjective auditor judgment to assess certain forecasted revenue and cost assumptions used to estimate forecasted future taxable income over the periods in which those temporary differences become deductible. Changes to these assumptions could have an effect on the Company's evaluation of the realizability of the deferred tax assets. In addition, there is complexity in the application of the relevant tax regulations to the Company's forecasted future taxable income.

The following are the primary procedures we performed to address this critical audit matter. We evaluated the design and tested the operating effectiveness of certain internal controls related to the Company's deferred tax asset valuation process. This included controls related to the Company's development of assumptions listed above and application of the relevant tax regulations in estimating forecasted future taxable income. We analyzed certain forecasted revenue and cost assumptions by comparing to external forecasts from industry publications and performed sensitivity analyses to assess the impact of changes in those assumptions on the Company's determination of the ability to utilize certain deferred tax assets. To assess the Company's ability to forecast, we compared the Company's historical revenue and cost forecasts to actual results. We involved federal and international tax professionals with specialized skills and knowledge, who assisted in assessing the Company's application of the relevant tax regulations and evaluating the realizability of certain deferred tax assets.

/s/ KPMG LLP

We have served as the Company's auditor since 2004.

Tampa, Florida

February 23, 2023

------

**Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

To the Stockholders and Board of Directors

The Mosaic Company:

*Opinion on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting*

We have audited The Mosaic Company and subsidiaries' (the Company) internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2022, based on criteria established in Internal Control – Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. In our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2022, based on criteria established in Internal Control – Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB), the consolidated balance sheets of the Company as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, the related consolidated statements of earnings, comprehensive income, equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2022, and the related notes (collectively, the consolidated financial statements), and our report dated February 23, 2023 expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements.

*Basis for Opinion*

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

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audit also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

*Definition and Limitations of Internal Control Over Financial Reporting*

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

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

/s/ KPMG LLP

Tampa, Florida

February 23, 2023

------

***Consolidated Statements of Earnings***

**In millions, except per share amounts**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** |
| | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** |
| Net sales | $19125.2 | $12357.4 | $8681.7 |
| Cost of goods sold | 13369.4 | 9157.1 | 7616.8 |
| Gross margin | 5755.8 | 3200.3 | 1064.9 |
| Selling, general and administrative expenses | 498.0 | 430.5 | 371.5 |
| Impairment, restructuring and other expenses |  | 158.1 |  |
| Other operating expenses | 472.5 | 143.2 | 280.5 |
| Operating earnings | 4785.3 | 2468.5 | 412.9 |
| Interest expense, net | (137.8) | (169.1) | (180.6) |
| Foreign currency transaction gain (loss) | 97.5 | (78.5) | (64.3) |
| Other (expense) income | (102.5) | 3.9 | 12.9 |
| Earnings from consolidated companies before income taxes | 4642.5 | 2224.8 | 180.9 |
| Provision for (benefit from) income taxes | 1224.3 | 597.7 | (578.5) |
| Earnings from consolidated companies | 3418.2 | 1627.1 | 759.4 |
| Equity in net earnings (loss) of nonconsolidated companies | 196.0 | 7.8 | (93.8) |
| Net earnings including noncontrolling interests | 3614.2 | 1634.9 | 665.6 |
| Less: Net earnings (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests | 31.4 | 4.3 | (0.5) |
| Net earnings attributable to Mosaic | $3582.8 | $1630.6 | $666.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Basic net earnings per share attributable to Mosaic | $10.17 | $4.31 | $1.76 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Basic weighted average number of shares outstanding | 352.4 | 378.1 | 379.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Diluted net earnings per share attributable to Mosaic | $10.06 | $4.27 | $1.75 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Diluted weighted average number of shares outstanding | 356.0 | 381.6 | 381.3 |

---

**See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements**

------

***Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income***

**In millions**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** |
| | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** |
| Net earnings including noncontrolling interest | $3614.2 | $1634.9 | $665.6 |
| Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Foreign currency translation (loss) | (255.0) | (108.2) | (249.5) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Net actuarial gain and prior service cost | 19.7 | 36.9 | 19.9 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Realized gain on interest rate swap | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Net (loss) gain on marketable securities held in trust fund | (24.8) | (17.6) | 12.8 |
| Other comprehensive (loss) | (258.6) | (87.4) | (215.2) |
| Comprehensive income | 3355.6 | 1547.5 | 450.4 |
| Less: Comprehensive income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interest | 33.2 | 2.5 | (7.7) |
| Comprehensive income attributable to Mosaic | $3322.4 | $1545.0 | $458.1 |

---

**See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements**

------

***Consolidated Balance Sheets***

**In millions, except per share amounts**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| | **December 31,** | **December 31,** |
| | **2022** | **2021** |
| **Assets** |  |  |
| Current assets: |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Cash and cash equivalents | $735.4 | $769.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Receivables, net | 1699.9 | 1531.9 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Inventories | 3543.1 | 2741.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Other current assets | 578.2 | 282.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Total current assets | 6556.6 | 5325.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Property, plant and equipment, net | 12678.7 | 12475.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Investments in nonconsolidated companies | 885.9 | 691.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Goodwill | 1116.3 | 1172.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Deferred income taxes | 752.3 | 997.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Other assets | 1396.2 | 1374.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Total assets | $23386.0 | $22036.4 |
| **Liabilities and Equity** |  |  |
| Current liabilities: |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Short-term debt | $224.9 | $302.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Current maturities of long-term debt | 985.3 | 596.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Structured accounts payable arrangements | 751.2 | 743.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Accounts payable | 1292.5 | 1260.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Accrued liabilities | 2279.9 | 1883.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Total current liabilities | 5533.8 | 4787.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Long-term debt, less current maturities | 2411.9 | 3382.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Deferred income taxes | 1010.1 | 1016.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Other noncurrent liabilities | 2236.0 | 2102.1 |
| Equity: |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Preferred stock, $0.01 par value, 15,000,000 shares authorized, none issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2022 and 2021 |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Common stock, $0.01 par value, 1,000,000,000 shares authorized, 391,964,464 shares issued and 339,071,423 shares outstanding as of December 31, 2022, 390,815,099 shares issued and 368,732,231 shares outstanding as of December 31, 2021 | 3.4 | 3.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Capital in excess of par value |  | 478.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Retained earnings | 14203.4 | 12014.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Accumulated other comprehensive loss | (2152.2) | (1891.8) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Total Mosaic stockholders' equity | 12054.6 | 10604.1 |
| Non-controlling interests | 139.6 | 144.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Total equity | 12194.2 | 10748.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Total liabilities and equity | $23386.0 | $22036.4 |

---

**See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements**

------

***Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows***

**In millions, except per share amounts**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** |
| | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** |
| **Cash Flows from Operating Activities** |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Net earnings including noncontrolling interests | $3614.2 | $1634.9 | $665.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Adjustments to reconcile net earnings including noncontrolling interests to net cash provided by operating activities: |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Depreciation, depletion and amortization | 933.9 | 812.9 | 847.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Deferred and other income taxes | 344.4 | 98.8 | (684.0) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Equity in net (earnings) loss of nonconsolidated companies, net of dividends | (191.5) | (2.1) | 97.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Accretion expense for asset retirement obligations | 81.6 | 71.9 | 68.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Accretion expense for leases | 15.9 | 13.4 | 24.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Share-based compensation expense | 27.9 | 29.5 | 17.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Unrealized (gain) loss on derivatives | 4.3 | 7.2 | (26.6) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Foreign currency adjustments | (67.9) | (2.6) | 14.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Mine closure costs |  | 158.1 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Loss on sale of securities | 46.6 |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Write down of inventory to net realizable value | 38.0 |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Pension settlement loss | 41.9 |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Other | 39.0 | (5.3) | 31.9 |
| Changes in assets and liabilities: |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Receivables, net | (215.2) | (683.6) | (153.6) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Inventories, net | (749.6) | (1067.9) | 191.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Other current assets and noncurrent assets | (247.4) | (18.0) | 66.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Accounts payable and accrued liabilities | 219.8 | 995.1 | 333.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Other noncurrent liabilities | (0.1) | 144.7 | 89.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Net cash provided by operating activities | 3935.8 | 2187.0 | 1582.6 |
| **Cash Flows from Investing Activities** |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Capital expenditures | (1247.3) | (1288.6) | (1170.6) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Purchases of available-for-sale securities - restricted | (762.5) | (433.6) | (618.7) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Proceeds from sale of available-for-sale securities - restricted | 743.0 | 410.1 | 607.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Other | 7.2 | (10.2) | (7.4) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Net cash used in investing activities | (1259.6) | (1322.3) | (1189.5) |
| **Cash Flows from Financing Activities** |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Payments of short-term debt | (1761.2) | (726.6) | (1542.5) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Proceeds from issuance of short-term debt | 1980.5 | 726.6 | 1521.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Payments from inventory financing arrangement | (1651.5) |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Proceeds from inventory financing arrangement | 1348.8 | 302.7 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Payments of structured accounts payable arrangements | (1476.6) | (1028.4) | (1156.2) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Proceeds from structured accounts payable arrangements | 1460.5 | 1122.7 | 1037.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Collections of transferred receivables | 2352.1 | 445.0 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Payments of transferred receivables | (2433.2) | (363.9) |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Payments of long-term debt | (610.3) | (608.3) | (66.9) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Repurchases of stock | (1665.2) | (410.9) |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Cash dividends paid | (197.7) | (103.7) | (75.8) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Dividends paid to non-controlling interest | (38.0) | (31.3) | (0.6) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Other | 13.1 | (6.0) | (0.3) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Net cash used in financing activities | (2678.7) | (682.1) | (283.8) |
| Effect of exchange rate changes on cash | (29.7) | 9.3 | (47.2) |
| Net change in cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash | (32.2) | 191.9 | 62.1 |
| Cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash—beginning of year | 786.3 | 594.4 | 532.3 |
| Cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash—end of year | $754.1 | $786.3 | $594.4 |

---

**See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements**

------

***Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows (Continued)***

**In millions, except per share amounts**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** |
| | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** |
| **Reconciliation of cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash reported within the consolidated balance sheets to the consolidated statements of cash flows:** |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Cash and cash equivalents | $735.4 | $769.5 | $574.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Restricted cash in other current assets | 8.2 | 8.3 | 8.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Restricted cash in other assets | 10.5 | 8.5 | 12.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Total cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash shown in the statement of cash flows | $754.1 | $786.3 | $594.4 |

---

**See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements**

------

***Consolidated Statements of Equity***

**In millions, except per share data**

---

| | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | | **Dollars** | **Dollars** | **Dollars** | **Dollars** | **Dollars** | **Dollars** |
| |<br>**Shares** | **Mosaic Stockholders** | **Mosaic Stockholders** | **Mosaic Stockholders** | **Mosaic Stockholders** | | |
|  | **Common<br>Stock** | **Common<br>Stock** | **Capital in<br>Excess<br>of Par Value** | **Retained<br>Earnings** | **Accumulated<br>Other<br>Comprehensive<br>Loss** |<br>**Non-<br>Controlling<br>Interests** |<br>**Total<br>Equity** |
| **Balance as of December 31, 2019** | 378.8 | $3.8 | $858.4 | $9921.5 | $(1598.2) | $182.1 | $9367.6 |
| Total comprehensive income (loss) |  |  |  | 666.1 | (208.0) | (7.7) | 450.4 |
| Vesting of restricted stock units | 0.3 |  | (2.7) |  |  |  | (2.7) |
| Stock based compensation |  |  | 17.1 |  |  |  | 17.1 |
| Dividends ($0.20 per share) |  |  |  | (76.6) |  |  | (76.6) |
| Dividends for noncontrolling interests |  |  |  |  |  | (0.6) | (0.6) |
| **Balance as of December 31, 2020** | 379.1 | 3.8 | 872.8 | 10511.0 | (1806.2) | 173.8 | 9755.2 |
| Total comprehensive income (loss) |  |  |  | 1630.6 | (85.6) | 2.5 | 1547.5 |
| Vesting of restricted stock units | 0.8 |  | (11.3) |  |  |  | (11.3) |
| Stock based compensation |  |  | 26.4 |  |  |  | 26.4 |
| Stock option exercises |  |  | 3.2 |  |  |  | 3.2 |
| Repurchases of stock | (11.2) | (0.1) | (410.8) |  |  |  | (410.9) |
| Dividends ($0.30 per share) |  |  |  | (127.4) |  |  | (127.4) |
| Dividends for noncontrolling interests |  |  |  |  |  | (31.3) | (31.3) |
| Purchase of noncontrolling interests |  |  | (2.3) |  |  | (0.6) | (2.9) |
| **Balance as of December 31, 2021** | 368.7 | 3.7 | 478.0 | 12014.2 | (1891.8) | 144.4 | 10748.5 |
| Total comprehensive income (loss) |  |  |  | 3582.8 | (260.4) | 33.2 | 3355.6 |
| Vesting of restricted stock units | 1.2 |  | (19.2) |  |  |  | (19.2) |
| Stock based compensation |  |  | 31.5 |  |  |  | 31.5 |
| Stock option exercises |  |  | 16.0 |  |  |  | 16.0 |
| Repurchases of stock | (30.8) | (0.3) | (506.3) | (1166.6) |  |  | (1673.2) |
| Dividends ($0.60 per share) |  |  |  | (227.0) |  |  | (227.0) |
| Dividends for noncontrolling interests |  |  |  |  |  | (38.0) | (38.0) |
| **Balance as of December 31, 2022** | 339.1 | $3.4 | $— | $14203.4 | $(2152.2) | $139.6 | $12194.2 |

---

**See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements**

------

***Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements***

**Tables in millions, except per share amounts**

**1. ORGANIZATION AND NATURE OF BUSINESS**

The Mosaic Company ("***Mosaic***," and, with its consolidated subsidiaries, "***we***," "***us***," "***our***," or the "***Company***") produces and markets concentrated phosphate and potash crop nutrients. We conduct our business through wholly- and majority-owned subsidiaries and businesses in which we own less than a majority or a noncontrolling interest, including consolidated variable interest entities and investments accounted for by the equity method.

We are organized into the following business segments:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Our **Phosphates** business segment owns and operates mines and production facilities in Florida which produce concentrated phosphate crop nutrients and phosphate-based animal feed ingredients, and processing plants in Louisiana which produce concentrated phosphate crop nutrients. We have a 75% economic interest in the Miski Mayo Phosphate Mine in Peru. These results are consolidated in the Phosphates segment. The Phosphates segment also includes our 25% interest in the Ma'aden Wa'ad Al Shamal Phosphate Company (the "***MWSPC***"), a joint venture to develop, own and operate integrated phosphate production facilities in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. We market approximately 25% of the MWSPC phosphate production. We recognize our equity in the net earnings or losses relating to MWSPC on a one-quarter lag in our Consolidated Statements of Earnings.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Our **Potash** business segment owns and operates potash mines and production facilities in Canada and the U.S. which produce potash-based crop nutrients, animal feed ingredients and industrial products. Potash sales include domestic and international sales. We are a member of Canpotex, Limited ("***Canpotex***"), an export association of Canadian potash producers through which we sell our Canadian potash outside the U.S. and Canada.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Our **Mosaic Fertilizantes** business segment includes five Brazilian phosphate rock mines, four phosphate chemical plants and a potash mine in Brazil. The segment also includes our distribution business in South America, which consists of sales offices, crop nutrient blending and bagging facilities, port terminals and warehouses in Brazil and Paraguay. We also have a majority interest in Fospar S.A., which owns and operates a single superphosphate granulation plant and a deep-water port and throughput warehouse terminal facility in Brazil.

Intersegment eliminations, unrealized mark-to-market gains/losses on derivatives, debt expenses, Streamsong Resort<sup>®</sup> results of operations, and the results of the China and India distribution businesses are included within Corporate, Eliminations and Other.

**2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES**

***Statement Presentation and Basis of Consolidation***

The accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America ("***U.S. GAAP***"). Throughout the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, amounts in tables are in millions of dollars except for per share data and as otherwise designated.

The accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements include the accounts of Mosaic and its majority-owned subsidiaries. Certain investments in companies in which we do not have control but have the ability to exercise significant influence are accounted for by the equity method.

***Accounting Estimates***

Preparation of the Consolidated Financial Statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of net sales and expenses during the reporting periods. The most significant estimates made by management relate to the recoverability of non-current assets including goodwill, the useful lives and net realizable values of long-lived assets, environmental and reclamation liabilities, including asset retirement obligations ("***ARO***"), and income tax-related accounts, including the valuation allowance against deferred income tax assets. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

------

***Revenue Recognition***

We generate revenues primarily by producing and marketing phosphate and potash crop nutrients. Revenue is recognized when control of the product is transferred to the customer, which is generally upon transfer of title to the customer based on the contractual terms of each arrangement. Title is typically transferred to the customer upon shipment of the product. In certain circumstances, which are referred to as final price deferred arrangements, we ship product prior to the establishment of a valid sales contract. In such cases, we retain control of the product and do not recognize revenue until a sales contract has been agreed to with the customer.

Revenue is measured as the amount of consideration we expect to receive in exchange for the transfer of our goods. Our products are generally sold based on market prices prevailing at the time the sales contract is signed or through contracts which are priced at the time of shipment, except for the final priced deferred arrangements discussed above. Sales incentives are recorded as a reduction of revenue at the time of initial sale. We estimate the variable consideration related to our sales incentive programs based on the sales terms with customers and historical experience. Shipping and handling costs are included as a component of cost of goods sold.

We generally expense sales commissions when incurred because the amortization period would have been one year or less. These costs are recorded within sales and marketing expenses.

We have elected to recognize the cost for freight and shipping as an expense in cost of sales, when control over the product has passed to the customer.

For information regarding sales by product type and by geographic area, see Note 25 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

***Non-Income Taxes***

We pay Canadian resource taxes consisting of the Potash Production Tax and resource surcharge. The Potash Production Tax is a Saskatchewan provincial tax on potash production and consists of a base payment and a profits tax. In addition to the Canadian resource taxes, royalties are payable to the mineral owners with respect to potash reserves or production of potash. These resource taxes and royalties are recorded in our cost of goods sold. Our Canadian resource tax and royalty expenses were $1.0 billion, $301.5 million and $176.1 million during 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively.

We have approximately $105.0 million of assets recorded as of December 31, 2022 related to PIS and Cofins, which is a Brazilian federal value-added tax, mostly earned in 2008 through 2022 that we believe will be realized through offsetting income tax payments or other federal taxes or receiving cash refunds. In 2021, we had approximately $112.5 million of assets recorded for these matters. Should the Brazilian government determine that these are not valid credits upon audit, this could impact our results in such period. We have recorded the PIS and Cofins credits at amounts which we believe are probable of collection. Information regarding PIS and Cofins taxes already audited is included in Note 23 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

***Foreign Currency Translation***

The Company's reporting currency is the U.S. dollar; however, for operations located in Canada and Brazil, the functional currency is the local currency. Assets and liabilities of these foreign operations are translated to U.S. dollars at exchange rates in effect at the balance sheet date, while income statement accounts and cash flows are translated to U.S. dollars at the average exchange rates for the period. For these operations, translation gains and losses are recorded as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income in equity until the foreign entity is sold or liquidated. Transaction gains and losses result from transactions that are denominated in a currency other than the functional currency of the operation, primarily accounts receivable and intercompany loans in our Canadian entities denominated in U.S. dollars, intercompany loans receivable in our U.S. entities denominated in Brazilian real, and accounts payable in Brazil denominated in U.S. dollars. These foreign currency transaction gains and losses are presented separately in the Consolidated Statement of Earnings.

***Cash and Cash Equivalents***

Cash and cash equivalents include short-term, highly liquid investments with original maturities of 90 days or less and other highly liquid investments that are payable on demand such as money market accounts, certain certificates of deposit and repurchase agreements. The carrying amount of such cash equivalents approximates their fair value due to the short-term and highly liquid nature of these instruments.

------

***Concentration of Credit Risk***

In the U.S., we sell our products to manufacturers, distributors and retailers, primarily in the Midwest and Southeast. Internationally, our potash products are sold primarily through Canpotex, an export association. A concentration of credit risk arises from our sales and accounts receivable associated with the international sales of potash product through Canpotex. We consider our concentration risk related to the Canpotex receivable to be mitigated by their credit policy, which requires the underlying receivables to be substantially insured or secured by letters of credit. As of December 31, 2022, and 2021, there were $244.4 million and $382.5 million, respectively, of trade accounts receivable due from Canpotex. During 2022, 2021 and 2020, sales to Canpotex were $3.0 billion, $1.1 billion and $795.2 million, respectively.

***Inventories***

Inventories of raw materials, work-in-process products, finished goods and operating materials and supplies are stated at the lower of cost or net realizable value. Costs for substantially all inventories are determined using the weighted average cost basis. To determine the cost of inventory, we allocate fixed expense to the costs of production based on the normal capacity, which refers to a range of production levels and is considered the production expected to be achieved over a number of periods or seasons under normal circumstances, taking into account the loss of capacity resulting from planned maintenance. Fixed overhead costs allocated to each unit of production should not increase due to abnormally low production. Those excess costs are recognized as a current period expense. When a production facility is completely shut down temporarily, it is considered "idle", and all related expenses are charged to cost of goods sold.

Net realizable value of our inventory is defined as forecasted selling prices less reasonably predictable selling costs. Significant management judgment is involved in estimating forecasted selling prices including various demand and supply variables. Examples of demand variables include grain and oilseed prices, stock-to-use ratios and changes in inventories in the crop nutrients distribution channels. Examples of supply variables include forecasted prices of raw materials, such as phosphate rock, sulfur, ammonia and natural gas, estimated operating rates and industry crop nutrient inventory levels. Results could differ materially if actual selling prices differ materially from forecasted selling prices. Charges for lower of cost or market are recognized in our Consolidated Statements of Earnings in the period when there is evidence of a decline of market value below cost.

***Property, Plant and Equipment and Recoverability of Long-Lived Assets***

Property, plant and equipment are stated at cost. Costs of significant assets include capitalized interest incurred during the construction and development period. Repairs and maintenance, including planned major maintenance and plant turnaround costs, are expensed when incurred.

Depletion expenses for mining operations, including mineral reserves, are generally determined using the units-of-production method based on estimates of recoverable reserves. Depreciation is computed principally using the straight-line method and units-of-production method over the following useful lives: machinery and equipment three to 25 years, and buildings and leasehold improvements three to 40 years.

We estimate initial useful lives based on experience and current technology. These estimates may be extended through sustaining capital programs. Factors affecting the fair value of our assets or periods of expected use may also affect the estimated useful lives of our assets and these factors can change. Therefore, we periodically review the estimated remaining lives of our facilities and other significant assets and adjust our depreciation rates prospectively where appropriate.

Long-lived assets, including fixed assets and right-of-use assets, are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount may not be recoverable. An impairment assessment involves management judgment and estimates of factors such as industry and market conditions, the economic life of the asset, sales volume and prices, inflation, raw materials costs, cost of capital, tax rates and capital spending. The carrying amount of a long-lived asset group is not recoverable if it exceeds the sum of the undiscounted cash flows expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of the asset group. If it is determined that an impairment loss has occurred, the loss is measured as the amount by which the carrying amount of the long-lived asset group exceeds its fair value.

***Leases***

Right of use ("***ROU***") assets represent our right to use an underlying asset for the lease term. Lease liabilities represent our obligation to make lease payments arising from the lease. Operating lease ROU assets and liabilities are recognized at the

------

commencement date of the lease, based on the present value of lease payments over the lease term. As most of our leases do not provide an implicit rate, we use our incremental borrowing rate based on the information available at the commencement date in determining the present value of lease payments. The Company's incremental borrowing rate for a lease is the rate of interest it would have to pay on a collateralized basis to borrow an amount equal to the lease payments under similar terms. For both operating and finance leases, the initial ROU asset equals the lease liability, plus initial direct costs, less lease incentives received. Our lease agreements may include options to extend or terminate the lease, which are included in the lease term at the commencement date when it is reasonably certain that we will exercise that option. In general, we do not consider optional periods included in our lease agreements as reasonably certain of exercise at inception.

At inception, we determine whether an arrangement is a lease and the appropriate lease classification. Operating leases with terms greater than twelve months are included as operating lease ROU assets within other assets and the associated lease liabilities within accrued liabilities and other noncurrent liabilities on our consolidated balance sheets. Finance leases with terms greater than twelve months are included as finance ROU assets within property and equipment and the associated finance lease liabilities within current maturities of long-term debt and long-term debt on our consolidated balance sheets.

Leases with terms of less than twelve months, referred to as short-term leases, do not create a ROU asset or lease liability on the balance sheet.

We have lease agreements with lease and non-lease components, which are generally accounted for separately. For full-service railcar leases, we account for the lease and non-lease components as a single lease component. Additionally, for certain equipment leases, we apply assumptions using a portfolio approach, given the generally consistent terms of the agreements. Lease payments based on usage (for example, per-mile or per-hour charges), referred to as variable lease costs, are recorded separately from the determination of the ROU asset and lease liability.

***Contingencies***

Accruals for environmental remediation efforts are recorded when costs are probable and can be reasonably estimated. In determining these accruals, we use the most current information available, including similar past experiences, available technology, consultant evaluations, regulations in effect, the timing of remediation and cost-sharing arrangements. Adjustments to accruals, recorded as needed in our Consolidated Statement of Earnings each quarter, are made to reflect changes in and current status of these factors.

We are involved from time to time in claims and legal actions incidental to our operations, both as plaintiff and defendant. We have established what we currently believe to be adequate accruals for pending legal matters. These accruals are established as part of an ongoing worldwide assessment of claims and legal actions that takes into consideration such items as advice of legal counsel, individual developments in court proceedings, changes in the law, changes in business focus, changes in the litigation environment, changes in opponent strategy and tactics, new developments as a result of ongoing discovery and our experience in defending and settling similar claims. The litigation accruals at any time reflect updated assessments of the then-existing claims and legal actions. The final outcome or potential settlement of litigation matters could differ materially from the accruals which we have established. Legal costs are expensed as incurred.

***Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits***

Mosaic offers a number of benefit plans that provide pension and other benefits to qualified employees. These plans include defined benefit pension plans, supplemental pension plans, defined contribution plans and other postretirement benefit plans.

We accrue the funded status of our plans, which is representative of our obligations under employee benefit plans and the related costs, net of plan assets measured at fair value. The cost of pensions and other retirement benefits earned by employees is generally determined with the assistance of an actuary using the projected benefit method prorated on service and management's best estimate of expected plan investment performance, salary escalation, retirement ages of employees and expected healthcare costs.

***Additional Accounting Policies***

To facilitate a better understanding of our consolidated financial statements we have disclosed the following significant accounting policies (with the exception of those identified above) throughout the following notes, with the related financial

------

disclosures by major caption:

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **Note** | **Topic** | **Page** |
| 9 | <u>[Investments in Non-Consolidated Companies](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_286)</u> | <u>F-[52](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_286)</u> |
| 10 | <u>[Goodwill](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_289)</u> | <u>F-[53](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_289)</u> |
| 11 | <u>[Structured Accounts Payable Arrangements](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_292)</u> | <u>F-[54](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_292)</u> |
| 12 | <u>[Marketable Securities Held in Trusts](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_298)</u> | <u>F-[56](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_298)</u> |
| 13 | <u>[Income Taxes](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_301)</u> | <u>F-[59](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_301)</u> |
| 14 | <u>[Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_304)</u> | <u>F-[64](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_304)</u> |
| 15 | <u>[Accounting for Derivative and Hedging Activities](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_307)</u> | <u>F-[66](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_307)</u> |
| 16 | <u>[Fair Value Measurements](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_310)</u> | <u>F-[67](#i666d5b1bcefe4159bb4ef878a11bd2e3_310)</u> |

---

**3. RECENTLY ISSUED ACCOUNTING GUIDANCE**

In September 2022, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("***FASB***") issued guidance which requires that a buyer in a supplier financing program make annual disclosures about the program's key terms, the balance sheet presentation of related amounts, the confirmed amount outstanding at the end of the period and associated rollforward information. This ASU is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2022 (fiscal 2023), except for the amendment on rollforward information, which is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2023 (fiscal 2024). We are currently evaluating the effect of adopting this new accounting pronouncement but expect the impact to be minimal.

------

**4. LEASES**

***Leasing Activity***

We have operating and finance leases for heavy mobile equipment, railcars, fleet vehicles, field and plant equipment, river and cross-gulf vessels, corporate offices, land, and computer equipment. Our leases have remaining lease terms of one year to 40 years, some of which include options to extend the lease for up to 20 years and some of which include options to terminate the lease within one year.

Supplemental balance sheet information related to leases as of December 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021 is as follows:

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **December 31,** | **December 31,** | |
|<br>**Type of Lease Asset or Liability** | **2022** | **2021** |<br>**Balance Sheet Classification** |
| | *(in millions)* | *(in millions)* | |
| *Operating Leases* |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Right-of-use assets | $182.5 | $120.2 | Other assets |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Lease liabilities: |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Short-term | 50.7 | 59.7 | Accrued liabilities |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Long-term | 135.2 | 64.3 | Other noncurrent liabilities |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Total | $185.9 | $124.0 |  |
| *Finance Leases* |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Right-of-use assets: |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Gross assets | $484.2 | $459.1 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Less: accumulated depreciation | 166.1 | 122.8 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Net assets | $318.1 | $336.3 | Property, plant and equipment, net |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Lease liabilities: |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Short-term | $71.4 | $41.2 | Current maturities of long-term debt |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Long-term | 122.9 | 171.8 | Long-term debt, less current maturities |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Total | $194.3 | $213.0 |  |

---

Lease expense is generally included within cost of goods sold and selling, general and administrative expenses, except for interest on lease liabilities, which is recorded within net interest. The components of lease expense were as follows:

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **December 31,** | **December 31,** | **December 31,** |
| *(in millions)* | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** |
| Operating lease cost | $86.6 | $78.8 | $81.7 |
| Finance lease cost: |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Amortization of right-of-use assets | 45.9 | 40.6 | 37.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Interest on lease liabilities | 5.3 | 6.3 | 13.3 |
| Short-term lease cost | 0.8 | 3.1 | 3.1 |
| Variable lease cost | 19.3 | 19.2 | 21.8 |
| Total lease cost | $157.9 | $148.0 | $157.6 |

---

Rental expense for 2022, 2021 and 2020 was $237.2 million, $211.8 million and $226.9 million, respectively.

------

Supplemental cash flow information related to leases was as follows:

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **December 31,** | **December 31,** | **December 31,** |
| *(In millions)* | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** |
| Cash paid for amounts included in the measurement of lease liabilities: |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Operating cash flows from operating leases | $88.1 | $78.8 | $96.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Operating cash flows from finance leases | 5.3 | 6.3 | 8.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Financing cash flows from finance leases | 46.5 | 142.5 | 46.9 |
| Right-of-use assets obtained in exchange for lease obligations: |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Operating leases | $56.7 | $18.4 | $22.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Finance leases | 27.2 | 8.9 | 36.4 |

---

Other information related to leases was as follows:

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| | **December 31, 2022** |
| **Weighted Average Remaining Lease Term** | |
| Operating leases | 7.1 years |
| Finance leases | 2.6 years |
| **Weighted Average Discount Rate** |  |
| Operating leases | 7.0% |
| Finance leases | 3.0% |

---

Future lease payments under non-cancellable leases recorded as of December 31, 2022, were as follows:

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Operating Leases** | **Finance Leases** |
| *(in millions)* | | |
| 2023 | $61.7 | $76.0 |
| 2024 | 43.5 | 93.0 |
| 2025 | 29.8 | 10.8 |
| 2026 | 21.1 | 9.4 |
| 2027 | 18.0 | 7.2 |
| Thereafter | 62.0 | 10.3 |
| Total future lease payments | $236.1 | $206.7 |
| Less imputed interest | (50.2) | (12.4) |
| Total | $185.9 | $194.3 |

---

------

**5. OTHER FINANCIAL STATEMENT DATA**

The following provides additional information concerning selected balance sheet accounts:

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| | **December 31,** | **December 31,** |
| *(in millions)* | **2022** | **2021** |
| **Receivables** |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Trade - External | $1242.8 | $954.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Trade - Affiliate | 249.6 | 390.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Non-trade | 208.4 | 187.7 |
|  | 1700.8 | 1532.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Less allowance for doubtful accounts | 0.9 | 0.5 |
|  | $1699.9 | $1531.9 |
| **Inventories** |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Raw materials | $177.2 | $296.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Work in process | 844.8 | 741.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Finished goods | 2158.3 | 1534.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Final price deferred <sup>(a)</sup> | 184.2 | 31.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Operating materials and supplies | 178.6 | 138.0 |
|  | $3543.1 | $2741.4 |
| **Other current assets** |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Income and other taxes receivable | $189.4 | $126.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Prepaid expenses | 237.4 | 107.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Assets held for sale | 101.9 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Other | 49.5 | 49.1 |
|  | $578.2 | $282.5 |
| **Other assets** |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Restricted cash | $10.5 | $8.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;MRO inventory | 141.9 | 144.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Marketable securities held in trust - restricted | 666.0 | 731.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Operating lease right-of-use assets | 182.5 | 120.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Indemnification asset | 23.7 | 21.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Long-term receivable | 26.9 | 41.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Cloud computing cost | 32.9 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Other | 311.8 | 307.3 |
|  | $1396.2 | $1374.7 |

---

------

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| | **December 31,** | **December 31,** |
| *(in millions)* | **2022** | **2021** |
| **Accrued liabilities** |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Accrued dividends | $72.9 | $43.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Payroll and employee benefits | 237.0 | 235.9 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Asset retirement obligations | 212.3 | 222.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Customer prepayments <sup>(b)</sup> | 743.9 | 437.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Accrued income and other taxes | 208.3 | 184.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Operating lease obligation | 50.7 | 59.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Servicing liability |  | 81.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Other | 754.8 | 618.9 |
|  | $2279.9 | $1883.6 |
| **Other noncurrent liabilities** |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Asset retirement obligations | $1693.3 | $1526.9 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Operating lease obligation | 135.2 | 64.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Accrued pension and postretirement benefits | 103.3 | 114.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Unrecognized tax benefits | 32.5 | 156.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Other | 271.7 | 239.9 |
|  | $2236.0 | $2102.1 |

---

**______________________________**

(a)Final price deferred is product that has shipped to customers, but we retain control and do not recognize revenue until a sales contract has been agreed to with the customer.

(b)The timing of recognition of revenue related to our performance obligations may be different than the timing of collection of cash related to those performance obligations. Specifically, we collect prepayments from certain customers in Brazil. In addition, cash collection from Canpotex may occur prior to delivery of product to the end customer. We generally satisfy our contractual liabilities within one quarter of incurring the liability.

Interest expense, net was comprised of the following in 2022, 2021 and 2020:

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** |
| *(in millions)* | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** |
| Interest income | $31.0 | $25.2 | $33.5 |
| Less interest expense | 168.8 | 194.3 | 214.1 |
| Interest expense, net | $(137.8) | $(169.1) | $(180.6) |

---

------

**6. PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT**

Property, plant and equipment consist of the following:

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| | **December 31,** | **December 31,** |
| *(in millions)* | **2022** | **2021** |
| Land | $345.6 | $341.6 |
| Mineral properties and rights | 6018.2 | 5791.3 |
| Buildings and leasehold improvements | 3522.6 | 3452.5 |
| Machinery and equipment | 10606.8 | 9893.6 |
| Construction in-progress | 1130.4 | 1234.4 |
|  | 21623.6 | 20713.4 |
| Less: accumulated depreciation and depletion | 8944.9 | 8238.1 |
|  | $12678.7 | $12475.3 |

---

Depreciation and depletion expense was $932.1 million, $811.8 million and $846.4 million for 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively. Interest capitalized on major construction projects was $26.8 million, $30.1 million and $33.3 million for 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively.

**7. EARNINGS PER SHARE**

The numerator for basic and diluted earnings per share ("***EPS***") is net earnings attributable to Mosaic. The denominator for basic EPS is the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the period. The denominator for diluted EPS also includes the weighted average number of additional common shares that would have been outstanding if the dilutive potential common shares had been issued, unless the shares are anti-dilutive.

The following is a reconciliation of the numerator and denominator for the basic and diluted EPS computations:

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** |
| *(in millions)* | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** |
| Net earnings attributable to Mosaic | $3582.8 | $1630.6 | $666.1 |
| Basic weighted average number of shares outstanding attributable to common stockholders | 352.4 | 378.1 | 379.0 |
| Dilutive impact of share-based awards | 3.6 | 3.5 | 2.3 |
| Diluted weighted average number of shares outstanding | 356.0 | 381.6 | 381.3 |
| Basic net earnings per share | $10.17 | $4.31 | $1.76 |
| Diluted net earnings per share | $10.06 | $4.27 | $1.75 |

---

A total of 0.1 million shares for 2022, 0.5 million shares for 2021 and 2.3 million shares for 2020 of common stock subject to issuance related to share-based awards have been excluded from the calculation of diluted EPS because the effect would have been anti-dilutive.

------

**8. CASH FLOW INFORMATION**

Supplemental disclosures of cash paid for interest and income taxes and non-cash investing and financing information is as follows:

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** |
| *(in millions)* | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** |
| Cash paid during the period for: |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Interest | $196.4 | $220.0 | $232.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Less amount capitalized | 26.8 | 30.1 | 33.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Cash interest, net | $169.6 | $189.9 | $199.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Income taxes | $1114.5 | $208.6 | $6.2 |

---

Acquiring or constructing property, plant and equipment by incurring a liability does not result in a cash outflow for us until the liability is paid. In the period the liability is incurred, the change in operating accounts payable on the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows is adjusted by such amount. In the period the liability is paid, the amount is reflected as a cash outflow from investing activities. The applicable net change in operating accounts payable that was classified to investing activities on the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows was $(65.2) million, $18.6 million and $(29.8) million for 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively.

We accrued $72.9 million related to the dividends declared in 2022 that will be paid in 2023. At December 31, 2021 and 2020, we had accrued dividends of $43.6 million and $20.4 million which were paid in 2022 and 2021, respectively.

Included in proceeds from issuance of short-term debt and payments of short-term debt were $1.8 billion and ($1.6) billion related to our commercial paper arrangement.

We had non-cash investing and financing transactions related to right-of-use assets obtained in exchange for lease obligations assets under finance leases in 2022 of $27.2 million. Non-cash investing and financing transactions related to assets acquired under capital leases were $8.9 million and $36.4 million for 2021 and 2020, respectively.

Depreciation, depletion and amortization includes $932.1 million, $811.8 million and $846.4 million related to depreciation and depletion of property, plant and equipment, and $1.8 million, $1.1 million and $1.2 million related to amortization of intangible assets for 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively.

**9. INVESTMENTS IN NON-CONSOLIDATED COMPANIES**

We have investments in various international and domestic entities and ventures. The equity method of accounting is applied to such investments when the ownership structure prevents us from exercising a controlling influence over operating and financial policies of the businesses but still allow us to have significant influence. Under this method, our equity in the net earnings or losses of the investments is reflected as equity in net earnings of non-consolidated companies on our Consolidated Statements of Earnings. The effects of material intercompany transactions with these equity method investments are eliminated, including the gross profit on sales to and purchases from our equity-method investments which is deferred until the time of sale to the final third-party customer. The cash flow presentation of dividends received from equity method investees is determined by evaluation of the facts, circumstances and nature of the distribution.

A summary of our equity-method investments, which were in operation as of December 31, 2022, is as follows:

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **Entity** | **Economic Interest** |
| Gulf Sulphur Services LTD., LLLP<sup>(a)</sup> | 50.0% |
| River Bend Ag, LLC | 50.0% |
| IFC S.A. | 45.0% |
| MWSPC | 25.0% |
| Canpotex | 36.2% |

---

<sup>(a)</sup> In the first quarter of 2023, Mosaic assumed ownership of Savage's 50% equity and now wholly-owns Gulf Sulphur Services LTD., LLLP.

------

The summarized financial information shown below includes all non-consolidated companies carried on the equity method.

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** |
| *(in millions)* | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** |
| Net sales | $11852.8 | $4758.2 | $3463.2 |
| Net earnings (loss) | 956.9 | 70.1 | (405.3) |
| Mosaic's share of equity in net earnings (loss) | 196.0 | 7.8 | (93.8) |
| Total assets | 11707.8 | 10685.6 | 8944.4 |
| Total liabilities | 8973.7 | 8864.7 | 7184.9 |
| Mosaic's share of equity in net assets | 693.2 | 466.9 | 452.5 |

---

The difference between our share of equity in net assets as shown in the above table and the investment in non-consolidated companies as shown on the Consolidated Balance Sheets is mainly due to the July 1, 2016, equity contribution of $120 million we made to MWSPC, representing the remaining liability for our portion of mineral rights value transferred to MWSPC from Saudi Arabian Mining Company ("***Ma*'*aden***"). As of December 31, 2022, MWSPC represented 70% of the total assets and 62% of the total liabilities in the table above. MWSPC commenced ammonia operations in late 2016 and, on December 1, 2018, commenced commercial operations of its DAP plant, thereby bringing the entire project to the commercial production phase. In 2022, 2021 and 2020 our share of equity in net earnings (loss) was $194.5 million, $5.0 million, and $(97.3) million, respectively.

MWSPC owns and operates a mine and two chemical complexes that produce phosphate fertilizers and other downstream phosphates products in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The cost to develop and construct the integrated phosphate production facilities (the "***Project***") was approximately $8.0 billion, which has been funded primarily through investments by us, Ma'aden and SABIC (together, the "***Project Investors***"), and through borrowing arrangements and other external project financing facilities ("***Funding Facilities***"). We market approximately 25% of the phosphate production of the joint venture.

On June 20, 2020, MWSPC refinanced its commercial loans while retaining its loans with the Saudi Industrial Development Fund. The refinancing extended debt repayment to 2037 and deferred principal payments until June 30, 2022. The refinancing removes recourse to Mosaic by all lenders to MWSPC. Mosaic's contractual commitment to make future cash contributions to MWSPC was also eliminated.

As of December 31, 2022, our cash investment was $770 million. We have not made any contributions since 2017 and do not expect future contributions will be needed.

Canpotex is a Saskatchewan export association used by two Canadian potash producers to market, sell and distribute Canadian potash products outside of Canada and the U.S. to unrelated third party customers at market prices. It operates as a break-even entity. We have concluded that the sales to Canpotex are not at arms'-length, due to the unique pricing and payment structure and financial obligations of the stockholders. Therefore, the full profit on sales to Canpotex is eliminated until Canpotex no longer has control of the related inventory and has sold it to an unrelated third party customer. We eliminate the intra-entity profit with Canpotex at the end of each reporting period and present that profit elimination by reversing revenue and cost of goods sold for the inventory still remaining at Canpotex. Any equity earnings or loss, which have historically been insignificant, are recorded in the equity in net earnings or loss line within the Consolidated Statement of Earnings.

**10. GOODWILL**

Goodwill is carried at cost, not amortized, and represents the excess of the purchase price and related costs over the fair value assigned to the net identifiable assets of a business acquired. We test goodwill for impairment on a quantitative basis at the reporting unit level on an annual basis or upon the occurrence of events that may indicate possible impairment. Impairment is measured as the excess carrying value over the fair value of goodwill.

------

The changes in the carrying amount of goodwill, by reporting unit, as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, are as follows:

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| *(in millions)* | **Potash** | **Mosaic Fertilizantes** | **Corporate, Eliminations and Other** | **Total** |
| Balance as of December 31, 2020 | $1063.2 | $97.7 | $12.1 | $1173 |
| Foreign currency translation | 1.0 | (1.8) |  | (0.8) |
| Balance as of December 31, 2021 | $1064.2 | $95.9 | $12.1 | $1172.2 |
| Foreign currency translation | (57.6) | 1.7 |  | (55.9) |
| Balance as of December 31, 2022 | $1006.6 | $97.6 | $12.1 | $1116.3 |

---

As of October 31, 2022, we performed our annual quantitative assessment. In performing our assessment, we estimated the fair value of each of our reporting units using the income approach, also known as the discounted cash flow ("***DCF***") method. The income approach utilized the present value of cash flows to estimate fair value. The future cash flows for our reporting units were projected based on our estimates, at that time, for revenue, operating income and other factors (such as working capital and capital expenditures for each reporting unit). To determine if the fair value of each of our reporting units with goodwill exceeded its carrying value, we assumed sales volume growth rates based on our long-term expectations, our internal selling prices and projected raw material prices for years one through five, which were anchored in projections from CRU International Limited ("***CRU***"), an independent third party data source. Selling prices and raw material prices for years six and beyond were based on anticipated market growth and long-term CRU outlooks. The discount rates used in our DCF method were based on a weighted-average cost of capital ("***WACC***"), determined from relevant market comparisons. A terminal value growth rate of 2% was applied to all years thereafter for the projected period and reflected our estimate of stable growth. We then calculated a present value of the respective cash flows for each reporting unit to arrive at an estimate of fair value under the income approach. Finally, we compared our estimates of fair values for our reporting units, to our October 31, 2022 total public market capitalization, based on our common stock price at that date.

In making this assessment, we considered, among other things, expectations of projected net sales and cash flows, assumptions impacting the WACC, changes in our stock price and changes in the carrying values of our reporting units with goodwill. We also considered overall business conditions.

The Potash, Mosaic Fertilizantes and Corporate, Eliminations and Other reporting units were evaluated and not considered at risk of goodwill impairment at October 31, 2022.

As of December 31, 2022, $9.3 million of goodwill was tax deductible.

**11. FINANCING ARRANGEMENTS**

***Mosaic Credit Facility***

On August 19, 2021, we entered into a committed unsecured five-year credit facility of up to $2.5 billion (the "***Mosaic Credit Facility***"), comprised of a $2.5 billion revolving facility, with a maturity date of August 19, 2026, which is intended to serve as our primary senior unsecured bank credit facility. The Mosaic Credit Facility increased and extended our prior unsecured revolving credit facility of up to $2.2 billion (the "***Prior Credit Facility***"), which matured on November 18, 2022.

The Mosaic Credit Facility has cross-default provisions that, in general, provide that a failure to pay principal or interest under, or any other amount payable under, any indebtedness with outstanding principal amount of $100 million or more, or breach or default under such indebtedness that permits the holders thereof to accelerate the maturity thereof, will result in a cross-default.

The Mosaic Credit Facility requires Mosaic to maintain certain financial ratios, including a ratio of Consolidated Indebtedness, which has been redefined to exclude unrestricted cash and cash equivalents, to Consolidated Capitalization Ratio (as defined) of no greater than 0.65 to 1.0 as well as a minimum Interest Coverage Ratio (as defined) of not less than 3.0 to 1.0. We were in compliance with these ratios as of December 31, 2022.

The Mosaic Credit Facility also contains other events of default and covenants that limit various matters. These provisions include limitations on indebtedness, liens, investments and acquisitions (other than capital expenditures), certain mergers, certain sales of assets and other matters customary for credit facilities of this nature.

------

As of December 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021, we had outstanding letters of credit that utilized a portion of the amount available for revolving loans under the Mosaic Credit Facility of $10.9 million. The net available borrowings for revolving loans under the Mosaic Credit Facility were approximately $2.49 billion as of December 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021, respectively. Unused commitment fees accrued at an average annual rate of 0.15% under the Mosaic Credit Facility during 2022 and 2021, decreasing from the average annual rate of 0.40% under the Prior Credit Facility. Unused commitment fees generated expenses of $3.8 million and $7.0 million during 2022 and 2021, respectively. As of December 2020, unused commitment fees accrued at an average rate of 0.40%, generating expenses of $6.0 million.

***Short-Term Debt***

Short-term debt consists of the revolving credit facility under the Mosaic Credit Facility, under which there were no borrowings as of December 31, 2022, working capital financing arrangements and various other short-term borrowings related to our international operations in India, China and Brazil. These other short-term borrowings outstanding were $224.9 million and $302.8 million as of December 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021, respectively.

We have an inventory financing arrangement whereby we can sell up to $625 million of certain inventory for cash and subsequently repurchase the inventory at an agreed upon price and time in the future, not to exceed 180 days. Under the terms of the agreement, we may borrow up to 90% of the value of the inventory. It is later repurchased by Mosaic at the original sale price plus interest and any transaction costs. As of December 31, 2022 and 2021, we had financed inventory of $0.0 million and $302.7 million, respectively, under this arrangement, which is included in short-term debt on the Consolidated Balance Sheet.

We have Receivable Purchasing Agreements ("***RPAs***"), with banks whereby, from time-to-time, we sell certain receivables. The net face value of the purchased receivables may not exceed $600 million at any point in time. The purchase price of the receivable sold under the RPA is the face value of the receivable less an agreed upon discount. The receivables sold under the RPAs are accounted for as true sales. Upon sale, these receivables are removed from the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Cash received is presented as cash provided by operating activities in the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.

The Company sold approximately $2.5 billion and $589.7 million as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, of accounts receivable under these arrangements. Discounts on sold receivables were not material for any period presented. Following the sale to the bank, we continue to service the collection of the receivable on behalf of the bank without further consideration. As of December 31, 2022 there was no amount outstanding to be remitted to the bank. As of December 31, 2021, $81.1 million had been collected but not yet remitted to the bank. This amount is classified in accrued liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Cash collected and remitted are included in financing activities in the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.

In September 2022, we established a commercial paper program which allows us to issue unsecured commercial paper notes with maturities that vary, but do not exceed 397 days from the date of issue, up to a maximum aggregate face or principal amount outstanding at any time of $2.5 billion. We plan to use the revolving credit facility as a liquidity backstop for borrowings under the commercial paper program. As of December 31, 2022, we had $224.8 million outstanding under this program with a weighted average interest rate of 4.66% and a remaining average term of 10 days.

We had additional outstanding bilateral letters of credit of $54.4 million as of December 31, 2022, which includes $50.0 million as required by the 2015 Consent Decrees as described further in Note 14 of our Consolidated Financial Statements.

***Long-Term Debt, including Current Maturities***

On November 13, 2017, we issued new senior notes consisting of $550 million aggregate principal amount of 3.250% senior notes due 2022 and $700 million aggregate principal amount of 4.050% senior notes due 2027 (collectively, the "***Senior Notes of 2017***"). In 2022, we paid the outstanding balance of $550 million on our 3.250% senior notes, due November 15, 2022, without premium or penalty.

We have additional senior notes outstanding, consisting of $900 million aggregate principal amount of 4.25% senior notes due 2023, $500 million aggregate principal amount of 5.45% senior notes due 2033 and $600 million aggregate principal amount of 5.625% senior notes due 2043 (collectively, the "***Senior Notes of 2013***"); and $300 million aggregate principal amount of 4.875% senior notes due 2041 (collectively, the "***Senior Notes of 2011***").

------

The Senior Notes of 2011, the Senior Notes of 2013 and the Senior Notes of 2017 are Mosaic's senior unsecured obligations and rank equally in right of payment with Mosaic's existing and future senior unsecured indebtedness. The indenture governing these notes contains restrictive covenants limiting debt secured by liens, sale and leaseback transactions and mergers, consolidations and sales of substantially all assets, as well as other events of default.

A debenture issued by Mosaic Global Holdings, Inc., one of our consolidated subsidiaries, due in 2028 (the "***2028 Debenture***"), is outstanding as of December 31, 2022, with a balance of $147.1 million. The indenture governing the 2028 Debenture also contain restrictive covenants limiting debt secured by liens, sale and leaseback transactions and mergers, consolidations and sales of substantially all assets, as well as events of default. The obligations under the 2028 Debenture are guaranteed by the Company and several of its subsidiaries.

Long-term debt primarily consists of unsecured notes, finance leases, unsecured debentures and secured notes. Long-term debt as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, consisted of the following:

---

| | | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| *(in millions)* | **December 31, 2022 <br>Stated Interest Rate** | **December 31, 2022<br>Effective Interest Rate** | **Maturity Date** | **December 31, 2022<br>Stated Value** | **Combination Fair <br>Market <br>Value Adjustment** | **Discount on Notes Issuance** | **December 31, 2022<br>Carrying Value** | **December 31, 2021<br>Stated Value** | **Combination Fair <br>Market <br>Value Adjustment** | **Discount on Notes Issuance** | **December 31, 2021<br>Carrying Value** |
| Unsecured notes | 4.05% - <br>5.63% | 5.10% | 2023-<br>2043 | $3000.0 | $— | $(6.1) | $2993.9 | $3550.0 | $— | $(6.6) | $3543.4 |
| Unsecured debentures | 7.30% | 7.19% | 2028 | 147.1 | 0.6 |  | 147.7 | 147.1 | 0.7 |  | 147.8 |
| Finance leases | 0.67% - <br>19.72% | 2.96% | 2023-<br>2032 | 194.3 |  |  | 194.3 | 213.0 |  |  | 213.0 |
| Other<sup>(a)</sup> | 6.53% - <br>8.00% | 5.19% | 2023-<br>2026 | 54.2 | 7.1 |  | 61.3 | 64.9 | 9.7 |  | 74.6 |
| Total long-term debt | Total long-term debt | Total long-term debt |  | 3395.6 | 7.7 | (6.1) | 3397.2 | 3975.0 | 10.4 | (6.6) | 3978.8 |
| Less current portion | Less current portion | Less current portion |  | 983.9 | 2.0 | (0.6) | 985.3 | 594.8 | 2.3 | (0.5) | 596.6 |
| Total long-term debt, less current maturities | Total long-term debt, less current maturities | Total long-term debt, less current maturities |  | $2411.7 | $5.7 | $(5.5) | $2411.9 | $3380.2 | $8.1 | $(6.1) | $3382.2 |

---

**______________________________**

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<sup>(a)</sup> Includes deferred financing fees related to our long term debt.

Scheduled maturities of long-term debt are as follows for the periods ending December 31:

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| *(in millions)* | |
| 2023 | $985.3 |
| 2024 | 110.8 |
| 2025 | 21.9 |
| 2026 | 21.7 |
| 2027 | 707.8 |
| Thereafter | 1549.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Total | $3397.2 |

---

***Structured Accounts Payable Arrangements***

In Brazil, we finance some of our potash-based fertilizer, sulfur, ammonia and other raw material product purchases through third-party contractual arrangements. These arrangements provide that the third-party intermediary advance the amount of the scheduled payment to the vendor, less an appropriate discount, at a scheduled payment date and Mosaic makes payment to the third-party intermediary at dates ranging from 130 to 344 days from date of shipment. At December 31, 2022 and 2021, these structured accounts payable arrangements were $751.2 million and $743.7 million, respectively.

**12. MARKETABLE SECURITIES HELD IN TRUSTS**

In August 2016, Mosaic deposited $630 million into two trust funds (together, the "***RCRA Trusts***") created to provide additional financial assurance in the form of cash for the estimated costs ("***Gypstack Closure Costs***") of closure and long-term care of our Florida and Louisiana phosphogypsum management systems ("***Gypstacks***"), as described further in Note 14 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Our actual Gypstack Closure Costs are generally expected to be paid by us in the normal course of our Phosphates business; however, funds held in each of the RCRA Trusts can be drawn by the

------

applicable governmental authority in the event we cannot perform our closure and long-term care obligations. When our estimated Gypstack Closure Costs with respect to the facilities associated with a RCRA Trust are sufficiently lower than the amount on deposit in that RCRA Trust, we have the right to request that the excess funds be released to us. The same is true for the RCRA Trust balance remaining after the completion of our obligations, which will be performed over a period that may not end until three decades or more after a Gypstack has been closed. The investments held by the RCRA Trusts are managed by independent investment managers with discretion to buy, sell, and invest pursuant to the objectives and standards set forth in the related trust agreements. Amounts reserved to be held or held in the RCRA Trusts (including losses or reinvested earnings) are included in other assets on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.

The RCRA Trusts hold investments, which are restricted from our general use, in marketable debt securities classified as available-for-sale and are carried at fair value. As a result, unrealized gains and losses are included in other comprehensive income until realized, unless it is determined that the entire unamortized cost basis of the investment is not expected to be recovered. A credit loss would then be recognized in operations for the amount of the expected credit loss. As of December 31, 2022, we expect to recover our amortized cost on all available-for-sale securities and have not established an allowance for credit loss.

We review the fair value hierarchy classification on a quarterly basis. Changes in the ability to observe valuation inputs may result in a reclassification of levels for certain securities within the fair value hierarchy. We determine the fair market values of our available-for-sale securities and certain other assets based on the fair value hierarchy described below:

Level 1: Values based on unadjusted quoted prices in active markets that are accessible at the measurement date for identical assets or liabilities.

Level 2: Values based on quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets, quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active, or model-based valuation techniques for which all significant assumptions are observable in the market.

Level 3: Values generated from model-based techniques that use significant assumptions not observable in the market. These unobservable assumptions reflect our own estimates of assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. Valuation techniques include use of option pricing models, discounted cash flow models and similar techniques.

------

The estimated fair value of the investments in the RCRA Trusts as of December 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021 are as follows:

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **December 31, 2022** | **December 31, 2022** | **December 31, 2022** | **December 31, 2022** |
| *(in millions)* | **Amortized <br>Cost** | **Gross <br>Unrealized <br>Gains** | **Gross <br>Unrealized <br>Losses** | **Fair <br>Value** |
| **Level 1** |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Cash and cash equivalents | $7.7 | $— | $— | $7.7 |
| **Level 2** |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Corporate debt securities | 203.8 | 0.1 | (17.1) | 186.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Municipal bonds | 197.0 | 0.4 | (8.0) | 189.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;U.S. government bonds | 269.6 |  | (3.6) | 266.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Other holdings | 0.2 |  |  | 0.2 |
| Total | $678.3 | $0.5 | $(28.7) | $650.1 |
|  | **December 31, 2021** | **December 31, 2021** | **December 31, 2021** | **December 31, 2021** |
| *(in millions)* | **Amortized <br>Cost** | **Gross <br>Unrealized <br>Gains** | **Gross <br>Unrealized <br>Losses** | **Fair <br>Value** |
| **Level 1** |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Cash and cash equivalents | $8.1 | $— | $— | $8.1 |
| **Level 2** |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Corporate debt securities | 198.8 | 5.6 | (0.9) | 203.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Municipal bonds | 198.1 | 6.5 | (0.5) | 204.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;U.S. government bonds | 305.3 |  | (6.1) | 299.2 |
| Total | $710.3 | $12.1 | $(7.5) | $714.9 |

---

The following tables show gross unrealized losses and fair values of the RCRA Trusts' available-for-sale securities that have been in a continuous unrealized loss position for which an allowance for credit losses has not been recorded as of December 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021.

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **December 31, 2022** | **December 31, 2022** | **December 31, 2021** | **December 31, 2021** |
| **Securities that have been in a continuous loss position for less than 12 months *(in millions)*:** | **Fair <br>Value** | **Gross <br>Unrealized <br>Losses** | **Fair <br>Value** | **Gross <br>Unrealized <br>Losses** |
| Corporate debt securities | $105.6 | $(6.5) | $67.1 | $(0.8) |
| Municipal bonds | 104.7 | (2.9) | 39.9 | (0.4) |
| U.S. government bonds | 264.9 | (3.5) | 152.2 | (2.5) |
| Total | $475.2 | $(12.9) | $259.2 | $(3.7) |
|  | **December 31, 2022** | **December 31, 2022** | **December 31, 2021** | **December 31, 2021** |
| **Securities that have been in a continuous loss position for more than 12 months *(in millions)*:** | **Fair <br>Value** | **Gross <br>Unrealized <br>Losses** | **Fair <br>Value** | **Gross <br>Unrealized <br>Losses** |
| Corporate debt securities | $72.8 | $(10.6) | $3.6 | $(0.1) |
| Municipal bonds | 61.9 | (5.1) | 4.5 | (0.1) |
| U.S. government bonds | 0.8 | (0.1) | 143.4 | (3.6) |
| Total | $135.5 | $(15.8) | $151.5 | $(3.8) |

---

------

The following table summarizes the balance by contractual maturity of the available-for-sale debt securities invested by the RCRA Trusts as of December 31, 2022. Actual maturities may differ from contractual maturities because the issuers of the securities may have the right to prepay obligations before the underlying contracts mature.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| *(in millions)* | **December 31, 2022** |
| Due in one year or less | $18.3 |
| Due after one year through five years | 296.1 |
| Due after five years through ten years | 302.8 |
| Due after ten years | 25.2 |
| Total debt securities | $642.4 |

---

For the year ended December 31, 2022, realized gains and (losses) were $0.3 million and $(46.9) million, respectively. For the year ended December 31, 2021, realized gains and (losses) were $5.8 million and $(3.4) million, respectively and for the year ended December 31, 2020, realized gains and (losses) were $17.7 million and $(1.5) million, respectively.

**13. INCOME TAXES**

In preparing our Consolidated Financial Statements, we utilize the asset and liability approach in accounting for income taxes. We recognize income taxes in each of the jurisdictions in which we have a presence. For each jurisdiction, we estimate the actual amount of income taxes currently payable or receivable, as well as deferred income tax assets and liabilities attributable to temporary differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases. Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which these temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date.

The provision for income taxes for 2022, 2021 and 2020, consisted of the following:

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** |
| *(in millions)* | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** |
| *Current:* |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Federal | $62.7 | $(12.7) | $(22.0) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;State | 51.9 | 5.6 | 1.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Non-U.S. | 770.4 | 386.9 | 114.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Total current | 885.0 | 379.8 | 93.7 |
| *Noncurrent:* |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Federal | $0.2 | $— | $— |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;State |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Non-U.S. | (0.7) | 110.0 | 3.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Total noncurrent | (0.5) | 110.0 | 3.2 |
| *Deferred:* |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Federal | $215.4 | $141.9 | $(66.7) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;State | 31.0 | 21.4 | (12.9) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Non-U.S. | 93.4 | (55.4) | (595.8) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Total deferred | 339.8 | 107.9 | (675.4) |
| Provision for (benefit from) income taxes | $1224.3 | $597.7 | $(578.5) |

---

------

The components of earnings from consolidated companies before income taxes, and the effects of significant adjustments to tax computed at the federal statutory rate, were as follows:

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** |
| *(in millions)* | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** |
| U.S. earnings (loss) | $1587.8 | $900.1 | $(449.0) |
| Non-U.S. earnings | 3054.7 | 1324.7 | 629.9 |
| Earnings (loss) from consolidated companies before income taxes | $4642.5 | $2224.8 | $180.9 |
| Computed tax at the U.S. federal statutory rate | 21.0% | 21.0% | 21.0% |
| State and local income taxes, net of federal income tax benefit | 1.1% | 1.2% | (7.0)% |
| Percentage depletion in excess of basis | (1.8)% | (1.1)% | (10.3)% |
| Impact of non-U.S. earnings | 5.8% | 6.3% | 42.1% |
| Change in valuation allowance | —% | (0.3)% | (330.0)% |
| Non-U.S. incentives | (2.6)% | (5.7)% | (35.6)% |
| Withholding tax | 1.6% | 3.3% | 1.9% |
| Other items (none in excess of 5% of computed tax) | 1.3% | 2.2% | (1.9)% |
| Effective tax rate | 26.4% | 26.9% | (319.8)% |

---

<u>2022 Effective Tax Rate</u>

In the year ended December 31, 2022, there were two items impacting the effective tax rate: 1) items attributable to ordinary business operations during the year, and 2) other items specific to the period.

The tax impact of our ordinary business operations is affected by the mix of earnings across jurisdictions in which we operate, by a benefit associated with depletion, by a benefit associated with non-U.S. incentives, changes in valuation allowances and by the impact of certain entities being taxed in both their foreign jurisdiction and the U.S., including foreign tax credits for various taxes incurred.

Tax expense specific to the period included a net expense of $26.2 million. The net expense relates to the following: $29.0 million related to true-up of estimates primarily related to our U.S. tax return, $4.8 million related to changes to valuation allowances in Brazil, $4.0 million related to interest of effectively settled unrecognized tax benefits and $1.2 million of other miscellaneous costs. The tax expenses are partially offset by a net tax benefit related to $12.8 million of RSUs vested in CY22 above grant price.

<u>2021 Effective Tax Rate</u>

In the year ended December 31, 2021, there were two items impacting the effective tax rate: 1) items attributable to ordinary business operations during the year, and 2) other items specific to the period, including the Esterhazy mine closure costs.

The tax impact of our ordinary business operations is affected by the mix of earnings across jurisdictions in which we operate, by a benefit associated with depletion, by a benefit associated with non-U.S. incentives, changes in valuation allowances and by the impact of certain entities being taxed in both their foreign jurisdiction and the U.S., including foreign tax credits for various taxes incurred.

Tax expense specific to the period included a net benefit of $0.6 million. The net expense relates to the following: $23.9 million related to true-up of estimates primarily related to our U.S. tax return and $20.4 million related to an increase in non-U.S. reserves. The tax expenses are partially offset by net tax benefits related to $43.7 million of Esterhazy mine closure costs and $1.2 million related to a benefit for withholding taxes related to undistributed earnings and other miscellaneous tax expenses.

<u>2020 Effective Tax Rate</u>

In the year ended December 31, 2020, there were two items impacting the effective tax rate: 1) items attributable to ordinary business operations during the year, and 2) other items specific to the period, including impacts recorded due to the

------

Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (the "***CARES Act***"). The CARES Act provides various tax relief measures to taxpayers impacted by the coronavirus.

The tax impact of our ordinary business operations is affected by the mix of earnings across jurisdictions in which we operate by a benefit associated with depletion, by a benefit associated with non-U.S. incentives, changes in valuation allowances and by the impact of certain entities being taxed in both their foreign jurisdiction and the U.S., including foreign tax credits for various taxes incurred.

Tax expense specific to the period included a net benefit of $609.0 million. The net benefit relates to the following: $582.6 million for changes to valuation allowances in the U.S. and foreign jurisdictions, $23.6 million related to certain provisions of the CARES Act, $5.5 million related to release of the sequestration on AMT and miscellaneous tax expense of $2.7 million. The change to the valuation allowance in Brazil is related to the Acquired Business. As of December 31, 2020, the Acquired Business has achieved cumulative income and therefore we were able to rely on future forecasts of taxable income which support realization of its deferred tax assets.

***Deferred Tax Liabilities and Assets***

Significant components of our deferred tax liabilities and assets as of December 31 were as follows:

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| | **December 31,** | **December 31,** |
| *(in millions)* | **2022** | **2021** |
| *Deferred tax liabilities:* |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Depreciation and amortization | $430.5 | $456.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Depletion | 613.5 | 430.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Partnership tax basis differences | 59.3 | 66.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Other liabilities | 37.6 | 39.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Total deferred tax liabilities | $1140.9 | $991.7 |
| *Deferred tax assets:* |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Capital loss carryforwards | 3.6 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Foreign tax credit carryforwards | 736.7 | 775.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Net operating loss carryforwards | 255.8 | 232.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Pension plans and other benefits | 14.3 | 19.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Asset retirement obligations | 369.4 | 337.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Disallowed interest expense under §163(j) |  | 31.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Other assets | 413.2 | 351.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Subtotal | 1793.0 | 1747.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Valuation allowance | 909.9 | 774.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Net deferred tax assets | 883.1 | 972.6 |
| Net deferred tax liabilities | $257.8 | $19.1 |

---

We have certain non-U.S. entities that are taxed in both their local jurisdiction and the U.S. As a result, we have deferred tax balances for both jurisdictions. As of December 31, 2022 and 2021, these non-U.S. deferred taxes are offset by approximately $202.2 million and $185.1 million, respectively, of anticipated foreign tax credits included within our depreciation and depletion components of deferred tax liabilities above. We have recorded a valuation allowance against the anticipated foreign tax credits of $202.2 million and $229.6 million for December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively.

***Tax Carryforwards***

As of December 31, 2022, we had estimated carryforwards for tax purposes as follows: net operating losses of $1.0 billion, capital losses of $17.1 million, foreign tax credits of $736.7 million and $5.3 million of non-U.S. business credits. These carryforward benefits may be subject to limitations imposed by the Internal Revenue Code, and in certain cases, provisions of foreign law. Approximately $518.6 million of our net operating loss carryforwards relate to Brazil and can be carried forward indefinitely but are limited to 30 percent of taxable income each year. The majority of the remaining net operating loss carryforwards relate to U.S. federal and certain U.S. states and can be carried forward indefinitely. Of the $736.7 million of

------

foreign tax credits, approximately $218.1 million have an expiration date of 2026, approximately $19.6 million have an expiration date of 2029, and approximately $14.7 million have an expiration date of 2030. The realization of our foreign tax credit carryforwards is dependent on market conditions, tax law changes, and other business outcomes including our ability to generate certain types of taxable income in the future. Due to current business operations and future forecasts, the Company has determined that no valuation allowance is required on its general basket foreign tax credits. As a result of changes in U.S. tax law due to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the Company recorded valuation allowances against its branch basket foreign tax credits of $473.2 million as of December 31, 2022.

As of December 31, 2022, we have not recognized a deferred tax liability for un-remitted earnings of approximately $4.3 billion from certain foreign operations because we believe our subsidiaries have invested the undistributed earnings indefinitely, or the earnings will be remitted in a tax-neutral transaction. It is not practicable for us to determine the amount of unrecognized deferred tax liability on these reinvested earnings. As part of the accounting for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, we recorded local country withholding taxes related to certain entities from which we began repatriating undistributed earnings and will continue to record local country withholding taxes, including foreign exchange impacts, on all future earnings.

***Valuation Allowance***

In assessing the need for a valuation allowance, we consider whether it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. We evaluate our ability to realize the tax benefits associated with deferred tax assets by analyzing the relative impact of all the available positive and negative evidence regarding our forecasted taxable income using both historical and projected future operating results, the reversal of existing taxable temporary differences, taxable income in prior carry-back years (if permitted) and the availability of tax planning strategies. The ultimate realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon the generation of certain types of future taxable income during the periods in which those temporary differences become deductible. In making this assessment, we consider the scheduled reversal of deferred tax liabilities, our ability to carry back the deferred tax asset, projected future taxable income, and tax planning strategies. A valuation allowance will be recorded in each jurisdiction in which a deferred income tax asset is recorded when it is more likely than not that the deferred income tax asset will not be realized. Changes in deferred tax asset valuation allowances typically impact income tax expense.

For the year ended December 31, 2022, the valuation allowance increased by $135.2 million, of which a $83.6 million increase related to changes in the valuation allowance to U.S. branch foreign tax credits, a $13.2 million increase related to changes in valuation allowances and currency translation in Brazil, and $46.8 million changes in valuation allowances in other foreign jurisdictions. These increases to the valuation allowance were partially offset by a decrease of $1.5 million to net operating losses for certain U.S. states, and $7.0 million changes in valuation allowances in other foreign jurisdictions.

For the year ended December 31, 2021, the valuation allowance increased by $91.7 million, of which a $111.2 million increase related to changes in the valuation allowance to U.S. branch foreign tax credits. These increases to the valuation allowance were partially offset by a decrease of $13.9 million related to changes in valuation allowances and currency translation in Brazil, $2.4 million decrease to net operating losses for certain U.S. states, and $3.4 million changes in valuation allowances in other foreign jurisdictions.

For the year ended December 31, 2020, the valuation allowance decreased by $774.1 million, of which a $763.5 million decrease related to changes in valuation allowances and currency translation in Brazil, $3.5 million related to net operating losses for certain U.S. states and $32.2 million related to our conclusion that we are more likely than not to use attributes at other foreign jurisdictions. These decreases to the valuation allowance were partially offset by the following increases: $24.1 million increase related to U.S. branch foreign tax credits and $0.9 million related to net operating losses in Peru.

Changes to our income tax valuation allowance were as follows:

------

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** |
| *(in millions)* | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** |
| Income tax valuation allowance, related to deferred income taxes |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Balance at beginning of period | $774.7 | $683.0 | $1457.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Charges or (reductions) to costs and expenses | 135.2 | 91.7 | (774.1) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Balance at end of period | $909.9 | $774.7 | $683.0 |

---

***Uncertain Tax Positions***

Accounting for uncertain income tax positions is determined by prescribing a minimum probability threshold that a tax position must meet before a financial statement benefit is recognized. This minimum threshold is that a tax position is more likely than not to be sustained upon examination by the applicable taxing authority, including resolution of any related appeals or litigation processes, based on the technical merits of the position. The tax benefit to be recognized is measured as the largest amount of benefit that is greater than a fifty percent likelihood of being realized upon ultimate settlement.

As of December 31, 2022, we had $25.2 million of gross uncertain tax positions. If recognized, the benefit to our effective tax rate in future periods would be approximately $25.2 million of that amount. During 2022, we recorded net decreases in our uncertain tax positions of $99.4 million related to certain U.S. and non-U.S. tax matters, of which $3.0 million impacted the effective tax rate. This increase was offset by items not included in gross uncertain tax positions.

Based upon the information available as of December 31, 2022, it is reasonably possible that the amount of unrecognized tax benefits will change in the next twelve months; however, the change cannot reasonably be estimated.

A summary of gross unrecognized tax benefit activity is as follows:

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** |
| *(in millions)* | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** |
| Gross unrecognized tax benefits, beginning of period | $124.6 | $36.9 | $39.5 |
| Gross increases: |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Prior period tax positions | 0.7 | 84.7 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Current period tax positions | 3.0 | 3.0 | 2.8 |
| Gross decreases: |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Prior period tax positions | (99.7) |  | (5.9) |
| Currency translation | (3.4) |  | 0.5 |
| Gross unrecognized tax benefits, end of period | $25.2 | $124.6 | $36.9 |

---

We recognize interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits as a component of our income tax expense. Interest and penalties accrued in our Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2022 and 2021 were $5.0 million and $31.1 million, respectively, and are included in other noncurrent liabilities in the Consolidated Balance Sheets.

***Open Tax Periods***

We operate in multiple tax jurisdictions, both within the U.S. and outside the U.S., and face audits from various tax authorities regarding transfer pricing, deductibility of certain expenses, and intercompany transactions, as well as other matters. With few exceptions, we are no longer subject to examination for tax years prior to 2013.

Mosaic is continually under audit by various tax authorities in the normal course of business. Such tax authorities may raise issues contrary to positions taken by the Company. If such positions are ultimately not sustained by the Company, this could result in material assessments to the Company. The costs related to defending, if needed, such positions on appeal or in court may be material. The Company believes that any issues considered are properly accounted for.

------

We are currently under audit by the Internal Revenue Service for the tax years ended December 31, 2018 and December 31, 2020. Based on the information available, we do not anticipate significant changes to our unrecognized tax benefits as a result of these examinations other than the amounts discussed above.

We are currently under audit by the Canada Revenue Agency for the tax years ended December 31, 2015 through December 31, 2018. Based on the information available, we do not anticipate significant changes to our unrecognized tax benefits as a result of these examinations other than the amounts discussed above.

***Enacted Legislation***

On August 9, 2022, the CHIPS Act of 2022 (the "***CHIPS Ac****t*") was signed into law by President Biden creating a new advanced manufacturing investment credit under new Internal Revenue Code section 48D. On August 16, 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act (the "***IRA***") was signed into law by President Biden including the following key provisions: (i) a 15 percent book minimum tax (corporate AMT) on "adjusted financial statement income" ("***AFS***I") of applicable corporations; (ii) various clean energy tax incentives in the form of tax credits, some of which include transferability provisions; and (iii) a one-percent excise tax on certain corporate stock buybacks. The Company does not deem the CHIPS Act or the IRA to have a material impact on its financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2022.

**14. ASSET RETIREMENT OBLIGATIONS**

We recognize our estimated ARO's in the period in which we have an existing legal obligation associated with the retirement of a tangible long-lived asset and the amount of the liability can be reasonably estimated. The ARO is recognized at fair value when the liability is incurred with a corresponding increase in the carrying amount of the related long lived asset. We depreciate the tangible asset over its estimated useful life. The liability is adjusted in subsequent periods through accretion expense which represents the increase in the present value of the liability due to the passage of time. Such depreciation and accretion expenses are included in cost of goods sold for operating facilities and other operating expense for indefinitely closed facilities.

Our legal obligations related to asset retirement require us to: (i) reclaim lands disturbed by mining as a condition to receive permits to mine phosphate ore reserves; (ii) treat low pH process water in Gypstacks to neutralize acidity; (iii) close and monitor Gypstacks at our Florida and Louisiana facilities at the end of their useful lives; (iv) remediate certain other conditional obligations; (v) remove all surface structures and equipment, plug and abandon mine shafts, contour and revegetate, as necessary, and monitor for five years after closing our Carlsbad, New Mexico facility; (vi) decommission facilities, manage tailings and execute site reclamation at our Saskatchewan potash mines at the end of their useful lives; (vii) de-commission mines in Brazil and Peru acquired as part of the acquisition (the "***Acquisition***") of Vale Fertilizantes S.A. (now known as Mosaic Fetilizantes P&K S.A. and (viii) de-commission plant sites and close Gypstacks in Brazil, also as part of the Acquisition. The estimated liability for these legal obligations is based on the estimated cost to satisfy the above obligations which is discounted using a credit-adjusted risk-free rate.

------

A reconciliation of our AROs is as follows:

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** |
| *(in millions)* | **2022** | **2021** |
| AROs, beginning of period | $1749.3 | $1393.9 |
| Liabilities incurred | 14.9 | 20.2 |
| Liabilities settled | (205.6) | (163.1) |
| Accretion expense | 81.6 | 71.9 |
| Revisions in estimated cash flows | 264.5 | 443.3 |
| Foreign currency translation | 0.9 | (16.9) |
| AROs, end of period | 1905.6 | 1749.3 |
| Less current portion | 212.3 | 222.4 |
| Non-current portion of AROs | $1693.3 | $1526.9 |

---

*North America Gypstack Closure Costs*

A majority of our ARO relates to Gypstack Closure Costs in Florida and Louisiana. For financial reporting purposes, we recognize our estimated Gypstack Closure Costs at their present value. This present value determined for financial reporting purposes is reflected on our Consolidated Balance Sheets in accrued liabilities and other noncurrent liabilities. As of December 31, 2022 and 2021, the present value of our Gypstack Closure Costs ARO reflected in our Consolidated Balance Sheet was approximately $1.0 billion and $883.2 million, respectively.

As discussed below, we have arrangements to provide financial assurance for the estimated Gypstack Closure Costs associated with our facilities in Florida and Louisiana.

*EPA RCRA Initiative.* On September 30, 2015, we and our subsidiary, Mosaic Fertilizer, LLC ("***Mosaic Fertilizer***"), reached agreements with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("***EPA***"), the U.S. Department of Justice ("***DOJ***"), the Florida Department of Environmental Protection ("***FDEP***") and the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality on the terms of two consent decrees (collectively, the "***2015 Consent Decrees***") to resolve claims relating to our management of certain waste materials onsite at our Riverview, New Wales, Green Bay, South Pierce and Bartow fertilizer manufacturing facilities in Florida and our Faustina and Uncle Sam facilities in Louisiana. This followed a 2003 announcement by the EPA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance that it would be targeting facilities in mineral processing industries, including phosphoric acid producers, for a thorough review under the U.S. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ("***RCRA***") and related state laws. As discussed below, a separate consent decree was previously entered into with the EPA and the FDEP with respect to RCRA compliance at the Plant City Facility that we acquired as part of our acquisition CF Phosphate Assets Acquisition of the Florida phosphate assets and assumption of certain related liabilities of CF Industries, Inc. ("***CF***").

The remaining monetary obligations under the 2015 Consent Decrees include:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Modification of certain operating practices and undertaking certain capital improvement projects over a period of several years that are expected to result in remaining capital expenditures likely to exceed $20 million in the aggregate.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Provision of additional financial assurance for the estimated Gypstack Closure Costs for Gypstacks at the covered facilities. The RCRA Trusts are discussed in Note 12 to our Consolidated Financial Statements. In addition, we have agreed to guarantee the difference between the amounts held in each RCRA Trust (including any earnings) and the estimated closure and long-term care costs.

As of December 31, 2022, the undiscounted amount of our Gypstack Closure Costs ARO associated with the facilities covered by the 2015 Consent Decrees, determined using the assumptions used for financial reporting purposes, was approximately $2.1 billion, and the present value of our Gypstack Closure Costs ARO reflected in our Consolidated Balance Sheet for those facilities was approximately $692.3 million.

*Plant City and Bonnie Facilities.* As part of the CF Phosphate Assets Acquisition, we assumed certain AROs related to Gypstack Closure Costs at both the Plant City Facility and a closed Florida phosphate concentrates facility in Bartow, Florida (the "***Bonnie Facility***") that we acquired. Associated with these assets are two related financial assurance arrangements for which we became responsible and that provided sources of funds for the estimated Gypstack Closure Costs for these

------

facilities. Pursuant to federal or state laws, the applicable government entities are permitted to draw against such amounts in the event we cannot perform such closure activities. One of the financial assurance arrangements was initially a trust (the "***Plant City Trust***") established to meet the requirements under a consent decree with the EPA and the FDEP with respect to RCRA compliance at the Plant City Facility. The Plant City Trust also satisfied Florida financial assurance requirements at that site. Beginning in September 2016, as a substitute for the financial assurance provided through the Plant City Trust, we have provided financial assurance for the Plant City Facility in the form of a surety bond (the "***Plant City Bond***"). The amount of the Plant City Bond is $300.8 million, which reflects our closure cost estimates as of December 31, 2022. The other financial assurance arrangement was also a trust fund (the "***Bonnie Facility Trust***") established to meet the requirements under Florida financial assurance regulations that apply to the Bonnie Facility. In July 2018, we received $21.0 million from the Bonnie Facility Trust by substituting for the trust fund a financial test mechanism ("***Bonnie Financial Test***") supported by a corporate guarantee as allowed by state regulations. Both financial assurance funding obligations require estimates of future expenditures that could be impacted by refinements in scope, technological developments, new information, cost inflation, changes in regulations, discount rates and the timing of activities. Under our current approach to satisfying applicable requirements, additional financial assurance would be required in the future if increases in cost estimates exceed the face amount of the Plant City Bond or the amount supported by the Bonnie Financial Test.

As of December 31, 2022 and 2021, the aggregate amounts of AROs associated with the combined Plant City Facility and Bonnie Facility Gypstack Closure Costs included in our consolidated balance sheet were $327.5 million and $262.9 million, respectively. The aggregate amount represented by the Plant City Bond exceeds the present value of the aggregate amount of ARO associated with that facility. This is because the amount of financial assurance we are required to provide represents the aggregate undiscounted estimated amount to be paid by us in the normal course of our Phosphates business over a period that may not end until three decades or more after the Gypstack has been closed, whereas the ARO included in our Consolidated Balance Sheet reflects the discounted present value of those estimated amounts.

**15. DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS AND HEDGING ACTIVITIES**

We periodically enter into derivatives to mitigate our exposure to foreign currency risks, interest rate movements and the effects of changing commodity prices. We record all derivatives on the Consolidated Balance Sheets at fair value. The fair value of these instruments is determined by using quoted market prices, third-party comparables, or internal estimates. We net our derivative asset and liability positions when we have a master netting arrangement in place. Changes in the fair value of the foreign currency, commodity and freight derivatives are immediately recognized in earnings. As of December 31, 2022 and 2021, the gross asset position of our derivative instruments was $38.8 million and $45.3 million, respectively, and the gross liability position of our liability instruments was $50.1 million and $45.5 million, respectively.

We do not apply hedge accounting treatments to our foreign currency exchange contracts, commodities contracts, or freight contracts. Unrealized gains and (losses) on foreign currency exchange contracts used to hedge cash flows related to the production of our products are included in cost of goods sold in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings. Unrealized gains and (losses) on commodities contracts and certain forward freight agreements are also recorded in cost of goods sold in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings. Unrealized gains or (losses) on foreign currency exchange contracts used to hedge cash flows that are not related to the production of our products are included in the foreign currency transaction gain/(loss) caption in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings.

From time to time, we enter into fixed-to-floating interest rate contracts. We apply fair value hedge accounting treatment to these contracts. Under these arrangements, we agree to exchange, at specified intervals, the difference between fixed and floating interest amounts calculated by reference to an agreed-upon notional principal amount. The mark-to-market of these fair value hedges is recorded as gains or (losses) in interest expense. We had no fixed-to-floating interest rate swap agreements in effect as of December 31, 2022 and 2021.

------

The following is the total absolute notional volume associated with our outstanding derivative instruments:

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| *(in millions of Units)* | | | | |
| **Instrument** | **Derivative Category** | **Unit of Measure** | **December 31,<br>2022** | **December 31,<br>2021** |
| Foreign currency derivatives | Foreign Currency | U.S. Dollars | 2361.1 | 3185.8 |
| Natural gas derivatives | Commodity | MM BTU | 14.2 | 23.6 |

---

***Credit-Risk-Related Contingent Features***

Certain of our derivative instruments contain provisions that are governed by International Swap and Derivatives Association agreements with the counterparties. These agreements contain provisions that allow us to settle for the net amount between payments and receipts, and also state that if our debt were to be rated below investment grade, certain counterparties to the derivative instruments could request full collateralization on derivative instruments in net liability positions. The aggregate fair value of all derivative instruments with credit-risk-related contingent features that were in a liability position as of December 31, 2022 and 2021 was $34.8 million and $8.6 million, respectively. We have no cash collateral posted in association with these contracts. If the credit-risk-related contingent features underlying these agreements were triggered on December 31, 2022, we would have been required to post an additional $26.7 million of collateral assets, which are either cash or U.S. Treasury instruments, to the counterparties.

***Counterparty Credit Risk***

We enter into foreign exchange, certain commodity and interest rate derivatives, primarily with a diversified group of highly rated counterparties. We continually monitor our positions and the credit ratings of the counterparties involved and limit the amount of credit exposure to any one party. While we may be exposed to potential losses due to the credit risk of non-performance by these counterparties, material losses are not anticipated. We closely monitor the credit risk associated with our counterparties and customers and to date have not experienced material losses.

**16. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS**

Following is a summary of the valuation techniques for assets and liabilities recorded in our Consolidated Balance Sheets at fair value on a recurring basis:

*Foreign Currency Derivatives*–The foreign currency derivative instruments that we currently use are forward contracts and zero-cost collars, which typically expire within 18 months. Most of the valuations are adjusted by a forward yield curve or interest rates. In such cases, these derivative contracts are classified within Level 2. Some valuations are based on exchange-quoted prices, which are classified as Level 1. Changes in the fair market values of these contracts are recognized in the Consolidated Financial Statements as a component of cost of goods sold in our Corporate, Eliminations and Other segment or foreign currency transaction gain (loss). As of December 31, 2022, and 2021, the gross asset position of our foreign currency derivative instruments was $20.7 million and $27.0 million, respectively, and the gross liability position of our foreign currency derivative instruments was $49.2 million and $45.4 million, respectively.

*Commodity Derivatives*–The commodity contracts primarily relate to natural gas. The commodity derivative instruments that we currently use are forward purchase contracts, swaps and three-way collars. The natural gas contracts settle using NYMEX futures or AECO price indexes, which represent fair value at any given time. The contracts' maturities and settlements are scheduled for future months and settlements are scheduled to coincide with anticipated gas purchases during those future periods. Quoted market prices from NYMEX and AECO are used to determine the fair value of these instruments. These market prices are adjusted by a forward yield curve and are classified within Level 2. Changes in the fair market values of these contracts are recognized in the Consolidated Financial Statements as a component of cost of goods sold in our Corporate, Eliminations and Other segment. As of December 31, 2022 and 2021, the gross asset position of our commodity derivative instruments was $18.1 million and $18.3 million, respectively, and the gross liability position of our commodity derivative instruments was $0.9 million and $0.1 million, respectively.

*Interest Rate Derivatives*–We manage interest expense through interest rate contracts to convert a portion of our fixed-rate debt into floating-rate debt. From time to time, we also enter into interest rate swap agreements to hedge our exposure to changes in future interest rates related to anticipated debt issuances. Valuations are based on external pricing sources and are classified as Level 2. Changes in the fair market values of these contracts are recognized in the Consolidated Financial

------

Statements as a component of interest expense. We did not hold any interest rate derivative positions as of December 31, 2022 or 2021.

***Financial Instruments***

The carrying amounts and estimated fair values of our financial instruments are as follows:

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **December 31,** | **December 31,** | **December 31,** | **December 31,** |
| | **2022** | **2022** | **2021** | **2021** |
| *(in millions)* | **Carrying**<br>**Amount** | **Fair**<br>**Value** | **Carrying**<br>**Amount** | **Fair**<br>**Value** |
| Cash and cash equivalents | $735.4 | $735.4 | $769.5 | $769.5 |
| Accounts receivable | 1699.9 | 1699.9 | 1531.9 | 1531.9 |
| Accounts payable | 1292.5 | 1292.5 | 1260.7 | 1260.7 |
| Structured accounts payable arrangements | 751.2 | 751.2 | 743.7 | 743.7 |
| Short-term debt | 224.9 | 224.9 | 302.8 | 302.8 |
| Long-term debt, including current portion | 3397.2 | 3276.5 | 3978.8 | 4516.1 |

---

For cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, net, accounts payable, structured accounts payable arrangements and short-term debt, the carrying amount approximates fair value because of the short-term maturity of those instruments. The fair value of long-term debt, including the current portion, is estimated using quoted market prices for the publicly registered notes and debentures, classified as Level 1 and Level 2, respectively, within the fair value hierarchy, depending on the market liquidity of the debt. For information regarding the fair value of our marketable securities held in trusts, see Note 12 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

**17. GUARANTEES AND INDEMNITIES**

We enter into various contracts that include indemnification and guarantee provisions as a routine part of our business activities. Examples of these contracts include asset purchase and sale agreements, surety bonds, financial assurances to regulatory agencies in connection with reclamation and closure obligations, commodity sale and purchase agreements, and other types of contractual agreements with vendors and other third parties. These agreements indemnify counterparties for matters such as reclamation and closure obligations, tax liabilities, environmental liabilities, litigation and other matters, as well as breaches by Mosaic of representations, warranties and covenants set forth in these agreements. In many cases, we are essentially guaranteeing our own performance, in which case the guarantees do not fall within the scope of the accounting and disclosures requirements under U.S. GAAP.

Our more significant guarantees and indemnities are as follows:

*Guarantees to Brazilian Financial Parties.* From time to time, we issue guarantees to financial parties in Brazil for certain amounts owed the institutions by certain customers of Mosaic. The guarantees are for all or part of the customers' obligations. In the event that the customers default on their payments to the institutions and we would be required to perform under the guarantees, we have in most instances obtained collateral from the customers. We monitor the nonperformance risk of the counterparties and have noted no material concerns regarding their ability to perform on their obligations. The guarantees generally have a one-year term but may extend up to two years or longer depending on the crop cycle, and we expect to renew many of these guarantees on a rolling 12-month basis. As of December 31, 2022, we have estimated the maximum potential future payment under the guarantees to be $77.5 million. The fair value of our guarantees is immaterial to the Consolidated Financial Statements as of December 31, 2022 and 2021.

*Other Indemnities.* Our maximum potential exposure under other indemnification arrangements can range from a specified dollar amount to an unlimited amount, depending on the nature of the transaction. Total maximum potential exposure under these indemnification arrangements is not estimable due to uncertainty as to whether claims will be made or how they will be resolved. We do not believe that we will be required to make any material payments under these indemnity provisions.

Because many of the guarantees and indemnities we issue to third parties do not limit the amount or duration of our obligations to perform under them, there exists a risk that we may have obligations in excess of the amounts described above.

------

For those guarantees and indemnities that do not limit our liability exposure, we may not be able to estimate what our liability would be until a claim is made for payment or performance due to the contingent nature of these arrangements.

**18. PENSION PLANS AND OTHER BENEFITS**

We sponsor pension and postretirement benefits through a variety of plans including defined benefit plans, defined contribution plans and postretirement benefit plans in North America and certain of our international locations. We reserve the right to amend, modify or terminate the Mosaic sponsored plans at any time, subject to provisions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("***ERISA***"), prior agreements and our collective bargaining agreements.

***Defined Benefit***

During fiscal 2022, we terminated the defined benefit pension plan in the U.S, which was a frozen defined benefit pension plan at the time of termination. In connection with the plan termination, we settled all future obligations under the terminated plan through a combination of lump-sum payments to eligible participants who elected to receive them through a lump-sum window, and the transfer of any remaining benefit obligations under the terminated plans to a third-party insurance company under a group annuity contract. As a result of these actions, we recognized a non-cash pre-tax pension settlement charge of $41.9 million in our 2022 Consolidated Statements of Earnings (Loss) in Other (expense) income. The remaining over-funded plan assets of $11.4 million have been or will be utilized to fund remaining expenses related to the terminated plans, as well as obligations associated with other qualified retirement plans.

We sponsor various defined benefit pension plans in Canada. Benefits are based on different combinations of years of service and compensation levels, depending on the plan. Generally, contributions to Canadian plans are made in accordance with Pension Benefits Acts instituted by the provinces of Saskatchewan and Ontario. Certain employees in Canada, whose pension benefits exceed Canada Revenue Agency limitations, are covered by supplementary non-qualified, unfunded pension plans.

We sponsor various defined benefit pension plans in Brazil, and we acquired through the Acquisition multi-employer pension plans for certain of our Brazil associates. All our pension plans are governed by the Brazilian pension plans regulatory agency, National Superintendence of Supplementary Pensions. Our Brazil plans are not individually significant to the Company's consolidated financial statements after factoring in the multi-employer pension plan indemnification that we acquired through the Acquisition. We made contributions to these plans, net of indemnification, of $0.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021, respectively and $0.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2020.

------

***Accounting for Pension Plans***

The year-end status of the North American pension plans was as follows:

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Pension Plans** | **Pension Plans** |
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** |
| *(in millions)* | **2022** | **2021** |
| Change in projected benefit obligation: |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Benefit obligation at beginning of period | $739.6 | $796.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Service cost | 4.2 | 4.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Interest cost | 16.8 | 14.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Actuarial gain | (158.8) | (31.1) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Currency fluctuations | (19.0) | 0.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Benefits paid and transfers | (322.2) | (45.2) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Liability loss due to curtailment/settlement | 38.9 |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Projected benefit obligation at end of period | $299.5 | $739.6 |
| Change in plan assets: |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Fair value at beginning of period | $807.0 | $845.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Currency fluctuations | (21.3) | 0.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Actual return | (124.9) | 1.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Company contribution | 7.0 | 5.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Benefits paid and transfers | (322.2) | (45.2) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Fair value at end of period | $345.6 | $807.0 |
| Funded status of the plans as of the end of period | $46.1 | $67.4 |
| Amounts recognized in the consolidated balance sheets: |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Noncurrent assets | $52.9 | $78.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Current liabilities | (0.5) | (0.9) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Noncurrent liabilities | (6.3) | (9.8) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Amounts recognized in accumulated other comprehensive (income) loss |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Prior service cost | $10.9 | $13.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Actuarial loss | 67.2 | 83.1 |

---

The accumulated benefit obligation for the defined benefit pension plans was $299.1 million and $739.1 million as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively.

------

The components of net annual periodic benefit costs and other amounts recognized in other comprehensive income include the following components:

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Pension Plans** | **Pension Plans** | **Pension Plans** |
| *(in millions)* | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** |
|  | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** |
| *Net Periodic Benefit Cost* |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Service cost | $4.2 | $4.4 | $4.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Interest cost | 16.8 | 14.6 | 20.9 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Expected return on plan assets | (26.1) | (30.4) | (34.2) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Amortization of: |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Prior service cost | 2.1 | 2.1 | 2.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Actuarial loss | 1.9 | 3.8 | 9.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Preliminary net periodic benefit cost | $(1.1) | $(5.5) | $2.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Curtailment/settlement expense | 40.8 |  | 1.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Total net periodic benefit cost | $39.7 | $(5.5) | $3.4 |
| *Other Changes in Plan Assets and Benefit Obligations Recognized in Other Comprehensive Income* |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Prior service credit | $(2.1) | $(2.1) | $(2.3) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Net actuarial gain | (11.6) | (5.6) | (8.6) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Total recognized in other comprehensive income (loss) | $(13.7) | $(7.7) | $(10.9) |
| Total recognized in net periodic benefit income and other comprehensive income | $26.0 | $(13.2) | $(7.5) |

---

The estimated net actuarial (gain) loss and prior service cost (credit) for the pension plans and postretirement plans that will be amortized from accumulated other comprehensive income into net periodic benefit cost in 2023 is $4.2 million.

The following estimated benefit payments, which reflect estimated future service are expected to be paid by the related plans in the years ending December 31:

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| *(in millions)* | **Pension Plans<br>Benefit Payments** | **Other Postretirement<br>Plans Benefit Payments** | **Medicare Part D<br>Adjustments** |
| 2023 | $23.9 | $2.6 | $0.1 |
| 2024 | 9.0 | 2.4 | 0.1 |
| 2025 | 9.7 | 2.2 | 0.1 |
| 2026 | 10.3 | 1.9 |  |
| 2027 | 10.8 | 1.8 |  |
| 2028-2032 | 46.1 | 6.8 | 0.1 |

---

In 2023, we expect to contribute cash of at least $4.1 million to the pension plans to meet minimum funding requirements.

<u>Plan Assets and Investment Strategies</u>

The Company's overall investment strategy is to obtain sufficient return and provide adequate liquidity to meet the benefit obligations of our pension plans. The majority of investments are made in public securities to ensure adequate liquidity to support benefit payments. Domestic and international stocks and bonds provide diversification to the portfolio.

For the Canadian pension plans the primary investment objective is to secure the promised pension benefits through capital preservation and appreciation to better manage the asset/liability gap and interest rate risk. A secondary investment objective is to most effectively manage investment volatility to reduce the variability of the Company's required contributions. The plans are expected to achieve an annual overall return, over a five-year rolling period, consistent with or in excess of total fund benchmarks that reflect each plan's strategic allocations and respective market benchmarks at the individual asset class level. Management of the asset/liability gap of the plans and performance results are reviewed quarterly. Currently, our policy

------

includes an 80% allocation to fixed income and 20% to return-seeking strategies for the salaried and hourly plans. The Canadian Actual allocations may experience temporary fluctuations based on market movements and investment strategies.

A significant amount of the assets are invested in funds that are managed by a group of professional investment managers through Mosaic's investment advisor. These funds are mainly commingled funds. Performance is reviewed by Mosaic management monthly by comparing each fund's return to a benchmark with an in-depth quarterly review presented by Mosaic's investment advisor to the Global Pension Investment Committee. We do not have significant concentrations of credit risk or industry sectors within the plan assets. Assets may be indirectly invested in Mosaic stock, but any risk related to this investment would be immaterial due to the insignificant percentage of the total pension assets that would be invested in Mosaic stock.

<u>Fair Value Measurements of Plan Assets</u>

The following tables provide fair value measurement, by asset class, of the Company's defined benefit plan assets:

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| *(in millions)* | **December 31, 2022** | **December 31, 2022** | **December 31, 2022** | **December 31, 2022** |
| **Pension Plan Asset Category - U.S. and Canadian** | **Total** | **Level 1** | **Level 2** | **Level 3** |
| Cash | $3.9 | $3.9 | $— | $— |
| Equity securities<sup>(a)</sup> | 33.8 |  | 33.8 |  |
| Fixed income<sup>(b)</sup> | 269.0 |  | 269.0 |  |
| Private equity funds | 22.3 |  |  | 22.3 |
| Remaining U.S. plan assets cash | 16.6 | 16.6 |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Total assets at fair value | $345.6 | $20.5 | $302.8 | $22.3 |
| *(in millions)* | **December 31, 2021** | **December 31, 2021** | **December 31, 2021** | **December 31, 2021** |
| **Pension Plan Asset Category - U.S. and Canadian** | **Total** | **Level 1** | **Level 2** | **Level 3** |
| Cash | $5.2 | $5.2 | $— | $— |
| Equity securities<sup>(a)</sup> | 71.3 |  | 71.3 |  |
| Fixed income<sup>(b)</sup> | 720.0 |  | 720.0 |  |
| Private equity funds | 10.5 |  |  | 10.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Total assets at fair value | $807.0 | $5.2 | $791.3 | $10.5 |

---

**______________________________**

(a)This class, which includes several funds, was invested approximately 63% in U.S. equity securities and 36% in international equity securities as of December 31, 2022, and 44% in U.S. equity securities and 56% in international equity securities as of December 31, 2021.

(b)This class, which includes several funds, was invested approximately 32% in corporate debt securities, 66% in governmental securities in the U.S. and Canada and 2% in other foreign entity debt securities as of December 31, 2022, and 44% in corporate debt securities, 49% in governmental securities in the U.S. and Canada and 7% in other foreign entity debt securities as of December 31, 2021.

<u>Rates and Assumptions</u>

The approach used to develop the discount rate for the pension and postretirement plans is commonly referred to as the yield curve approach. Under this approach, we use a hypothetical curve formed by the average yields of available corporate bonds rated AA and above and match it against the projected benefit payment stream. Each category of cash flow of the projected benefit payment stream is discounted back using the respective interest rate on the yield curve. Using the present value of projected benefit payments, a weighted-average discount rate is derived.

The approach used to develop the expected long-term rate of return on plan assets combines an analysis of historical performance, the drivers of investment performance by asset class and current economic fundamentals. For returns, we utilized a building block approach starting with inflation expectations and added an expected real return to arrive at a long-term nominal expected return for each asset class. Long-term expected real returns are derived from future expectations of the U.S. Treasury real yield curve.

------

Weighted average assumptions used to determine benefit obligations were as follows:

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Pension Plans** | **Pension Plans** | **Pension Plans** |
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** |
| | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** |
| Discount rate | 5.05% | 2.84% | 2.40% |
| Expected return on plan assets | 4.89% | 3.25% | 3.89% |
| Rate of compensation increase | 3.00% | 3.00% | 3.00% |

---

Weighted-average assumptions used to determine net benefit cost were as follows:

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Pension Plans** | **Pension Plans** | **Pension Plans** |
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** |
| | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** |
| Discount rate | 2.84% | 2.44% | 3.12% |
| Service cost discount rate | 3.05% | 2.64% | 3.15% |
| Interest cost discount rate | 2.40% | 1.90% | 2.83% |
| Expected return on plan assets | 3.25% | 3.89% | 4.88% |
| Rate of compensation increase | 3.00% | 3.00% | 3.00% |

---

***Defined Contribution Plans***

Eligible salaried and non-union hourly employees in the U.S. participate in a defined contribution investment plan which permits employees to defer a portion of their compensation through payroll deductions and provides matching contributions. We match 100% of the first 3% of the participant's contributed pay plus 50% of the next 3% of the participant's contributed pay, subject to Internal Revenue Service limits. Participant contributions, matching contributions and the related earnings immediately vest. Mosaic also provides an annual non-elective employer contribution feature for eligible salaried and non-union hourly employees based on the employee's age and eligible pay. Participants are generally vested in the non-elective employer contributions after three years of service. In addition, a discretionary feature of the plan allows the Company to make additional contributions to employees. Certain union employees participate in a defined contribution retirement plan based on collective bargaining agreements.

Canadian salaried and non-union hourly employees participate in an employer funded plan with employer contributions similar to the U.S. plan. The plan provides a profit sharing component which is paid each year. We also sponsor one mandatory union plan in Canada. Benefits in these plans vest after two years of consecutive service.

The expense attributable to defined contribution plans in the U.S. and Canada was $55.7 million, $55.8 million and $48 million for 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively.

***Postretirement Medical Benefit Plans***

We provide certain health care benefit plans for certain retired employees ("***Retiree Health Plans***") which may be either contributory or non-contributory and contain certain other cost-sharing features such as deductibles and coinsurance.

The North American Retiree Health Plans are unfunded and the projected benefit obligation was $22.6 million and $31.1 million as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. This liability should continue to decrease due to our limited exposure. The related income statement effects of the Retiree Health Plans are not material to the Company. We anticipate contributing cash of at least $2.6 million in 2023 to the postretirement medical benefit plans to fund anticipated benefit payments.

------

The year-end status of the Brazil postretirement medical benefit plans with a discount rate of 10.30% and 7.69% on each of December 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021, respectively was as follows:

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Postretirement Medical Benefits** | **Postretirement Medical Benefits** |
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** |
| *(in millions)* | **2022** | **2021** |
| Change in accumulated postretirement benefit obligation ("***APBO***"): |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;APBO at beginning of year | $58.0 | $96.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Service cost | 0.1 | 0.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Interest cost | 5.8 | 6.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Actuarial gain | (7.6) | (22.8) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Currency fluctuations | 3.8 | (3.9) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Benefits paid | (1.0) | (1.7) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Plan Amendments |  | (17.3) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;APBO at end of year | $59.1 | $58.0 |
| Change in plan assets: |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Company contribution | $1.0 | $1.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Benefits paid | (1.0) | (1.7) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Fair value at end of year | $— | $— |
| Unfunded status of the plans as of the end of the year | $(59.1) | $(58.0) |
| Amounts recognized in the consolidated balance sheets: |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Current liabilities | $(1.2) | $— |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Noncurrent liabilities | (57.9) | (58.0) |
| Amounts recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Prior service credit | $(14.1) | $(14.8) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Actuarial loss | $6.6 | $16.1 |

---

------

**19. ACCUMULATED OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS) (**"***AOCI***"**)**

The following table sets forth the changes in AOCI by component during the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020:

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| *(in millions)* | **Foreign Currency Translation Gain (Loss)** | **Net Actuarial Gain and Prior Service Cost** | **Amortization of Gain on Interest Rate Swap** | **Net Gain (Loss) on Marketable Securities Held in Trust** | **Total** |
| Balance at December 31, 2019 | $(1476.8) | $(129.6) | $2.1 | $6.1 | (1598.2) |
| Other comprehensive income (loss) | (246.1) | 12.2 | 2.0 | 16.6 | (215.3) |
| Tax (expense) or benefit | (3.4) | 7.7 | (0.4) | (3.8) | 0.1 |
| Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax | (249.5) | 19.9 | 1.6 | 12.8 | (215.2) |
| Addback: loss attributable to noncontrolling interest | 7.2 |  |  |  | 7.2 |
| Balance at December 31, 2020 | $(1719.1) | $(109.7) | $3.7 | $18.9 | $(1806.2) |
| Other comprehensive income (loss) | (117.0) | 56.5 | 2.0 | (22.7) | (81.2) |
| Tax (expense) or benefit | 8.8 | (19.6) | (0.5) | 5.1 | (6.2) |
| Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax | (108.2) | 36.9 | 1.5 | (17.6) | (87.4) |
| Addback: loss attributable to noncontrolling interest | 1.8 |  |  |  | 1.8 |
| Balance at December 31, 2021 | $(1825.5) | $(72.8) | $5.2 | $1.3 | $(1891.8) |
| Other comprehensive income (loss) | (261.1) | 28.6 | 2.0 | (32.4) | (262.9) |
| Tax (expense) or benefit | 6.1 | (8.9) | (0.5) | 7.6 | 4.3 |
| Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax | (255.0) | 19.7 | 1.5 | (24.8) | (258.6) |
| Less: gain attributable to noncontrolling interest | (1.8) |  |  |  | (1.8) |
| Balance at December 31, 2022 | $(2082.3) | $(53.1) | $6.7 | $(23.5) | $(2152.2) |

---

------

**20. SHARE REPURCHASES**

In August 2021, our Board of Directors authorized a $1.0 billion share repurchase program. Following the completion of this program in 2022, our Board of Directors approved two additional share repurchase programs for a total of $3.0 billion. Our repurchase programs allow the Company to repurchase shares of our Common Stock through open market purchases, accelerated share repurchase arrangements, privately negotiated transactions or otherwise. These programs have no set expiration dates.

On February 24, 2022, pursuant to existing stock repurchase authorizations, we entered into an accelerated share repurchase ("***ASR***") agreement with a third-party financial institution to repurchase $400 million of our Common Stock. At inception, we paid the financial institution $400 million and took initial delivery of 7,056,229 shares of our Common Stock. Under the terms of the ASR agreement, upon settlement, we would either receive additional shares from the financial institution or be required to deliver additional shares or cash to the financial institution. In the second quarter of 2022, the ASR agreement was completed and we paid the financial institution an additional $54.2 million. When combining the initial $400 million paid at the inception of the ASR agreement and the cash settlement of $54.2 million at the termination of the ASR agreement, we repurchased 7,056,229 shares at an average repurchase price of $64.37 per share.

During the year ended December 31, 2022, under the 2022 repurchase programs, we repurchased 30,810,173 shares of Common Stock in the open market for approximately $1.7 billion. This includes the 7,056,229 shares purchased under the ASR agreement.

During the year ended December 31, 2021, under the 2021 repurchase program, we repurchased 11,200,371 shares of Common Stock for a total of approximately $410.9 million. This includes 8,544,144 shares we purchased in an underwritten secondary offering by Vale S.A. when they fully divested their interest in Mosaic.

The extent to which we repurchase our shares and the timing of any such repurchases depend on a number of factors, including market and business conditions, the price of our shares, and corporate, regulatory and other considerations.

**21. SHARE-BASED PAYMENTS**

The Mosaic Company 2014 Stock and Incentive Plan (the "***2014 Stock and Incentive Plan***") was approved by our stockholders and became effective on May 15, 2014. It permits up to 25 million shares of common stock to be issued under share-based awards granted under the plan. The 2014 Stock and Incentive Plan provides for grants of stock options, restricted stock, restricted stock units, performance units and a variety of other share-based and non-share-based awards. Our employees, officers, directors, consultants, agents, advisors and independent contractors, as well as other designated individuals, are eligible to participate in the 2014 Stock and Incentive Plan.

The Mosaic Company 2004 Omnibus Stock and Incentive Plan (the "***Omnibus Plan***"), which was approved by our stockholders and became effective in 2004 and subsequently amended, provided for the grant of shares and share options to employees for up to 25 million shares of common stock. While awards may no longer be made under the Omnibus Plan, it will remain in effect with respect to the awards that had been granted thereunder prior to its termination.

Mosaic settles stock option exercises, restricted stock units and certain performance units and performance shares with newly issued common shares. The Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors administers the 2014 Stock and Incentive Plan and the Omnibus Plan subject to their respective provisions and applicable law.

***Stock Options***

Stock options are granted with an exercise price equal to the market price of our stock at the date of grant and have a ten-year contractual term. The fair value of each option award is estimated on the date of the grant using the Black-Scholes option valuation model. Stock options vest in equal annual installments in the first three years following the date of grant (graded vesting). Stock options are expensed on a straight-line basis over the required service period, based on the estimated fair value of the award on the date of grant, net of estimated forfeitures.

<u>Valuation Assumptions</u>

Assumptions used to calculate the fair value of stock options awarded in 2017 are noted in the following table. There were no stock options granted or issued in 2022, 2021, or 2020. Expected volatility is based on the simple average of implied and

------

historical volatility using the daily closing prices of the Company's stock for a period equal to the expected term of the option. The risk-free interest rate is based on the U.S. Treasury rate at the time of the grant for instruments of comparable life.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| | **Year Ended December 31, 2017** |
| Weighted average assumptions used in option valuations: |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Expected volatility | 35.35% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Expected dividend yield | 1.97% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Expected term (in years) | 7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Risk-free interest rate | 2.34% |

---

A summary of the status of our stock options as of December 31, 2022, and activity during 2022, is as follows:

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Shares<br>(in millions)** | **Weighted<br>Average<br>Exercise<br>Price** | **Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Term (Years)** | **Aggregate<br>Intrinsic<br>Value** |
| Outstanding as of December 31, 2021 | 1.1 | $38.47 |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Granted |  |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Exercised | (0.4) | $40.15 |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Cancelled or forfeited | (0.1) | $53.55 |  |  |
| Outstanding as of December 31, 2022 | 0.6 | $36.12 | 2.98 | $6.5 |
| Exercisable as of December 31, 2022 | 0.6 | $36.12 | 2.98 | $6.5 |

---

The outstanding and exercisable options as of December 31, 2022, includes 534,126 options issued from the 2014 Stock and Incentive Plan and 117,330 options issued from the 2004 Stock and Incentive Plan.

***Restricted Stock Units***

Restricted stock units are issued to various employees, officers and directors at a value equal to the market price of our stock at the date of grant. The fair value of restricted stock units is equal to the market price of our stock at the date of grant. Restricted stock units generally cliff vest after three years of continuous service and are expensed on a straight-line basis over the required service period, based on the estimated grant date fair value, net of estimated forfeitures.

A summary of the status of our restricted stock units as of December 31, 2022, and activity during 2022, is as follows:

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Shares<br>(in millions)** | **Weighted<br>Average<br>Grant<br>Date Fair<br>Value Per<br>Share** |
| Restricted stock units as of December 31, 2021 | 2.4 | $22.44 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Granted | 0.4 | 55.54 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Issued and cancelled or forfeited | (0.6) | $26.71 |
| Restricted stock units as of December 31, 2022 | 2.2 | $27.68 |

---

***Performance Units***

During the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, 540,915, 717,952 and 1,309,170 total stockholder return ("***TSR***") performance units were granted, respectively. Final performance units are awarded based on the increase or decrease, subject to certain limitations, in Mosaic's share price from the grant date to the third anniversary of the award, plus dividends (a measure of total stockholder return or TSR). The beginning and ending stock prices are based on a 30 trading-day average stock price. Holders of the awards must be employed at the end of the performance period in order for any units to vest, except in the event of death, disability or retirement at or after age 60, certain changes in control or the exercise of Committee or Board discretion as provided in the related award agreements.

------

The fair value of each TSR performance unit is determined using a Monte Carlo simulation. This valuation methodology utilizes assumptions consistent with those of our other share-based awards and a range of ending stock prices; however, the expected term of the awards is three years, which impacts the assumptions used to calculate the fair value of performance units as shown in the table below. 195,755 and 262,308 of the TSR performance awards issued in 2022 and 2021, respectively, are to be settled in cash, and are therefore accounted for as a liability with changes in value recorded through earnings during the service period. The remaining TSR performance units issued in 2022 and 2021, and all of the 2020 TSR performance units, are considered equity-classified fixed awards measured at grant-date fair value and not subsequently re-measured. All of the TSR performance units cliff vest after three years of continuous service and are expensed on a straight-line basis over the required service period, based on the estimated grant date fair value of the award net of estimated forfeitures.

A summary of the assumptions used to estimate the fair value of TSR performance units is as follows:

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** |
| | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** |
| Performance units granted | 540915 | 717952 | 1309170 |
| Average fair value of performance units on grant date | $55.08 | $27.91 | $13.52 |
| Weighted average assumptions used in performance unit valuations: |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Expected volatility | 54.77% | 58.26% | 43.49% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Expected dividend yield | 0.81% | 0.68% | 1.24% |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Expected term (in years) | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Risk-free interest rate | 1.68% | 0.32% | 0.61% |

---

The performance units granted as of December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020 include 195,755, 262,308, 419,472 cash-settled performance units, respectively.

A summary of our performance unit activity during 2022 is as follows:

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Shares<br>(in millions)** | **Weighted<br>Average<br>Grant<br>Date Fair<br>Value Per<br>Share** |
| Outstanding as of December 31, 2021 | 2.8 | $18.91 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Granted | 0.5 | 55.08 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Issued and cancelled or forfeited | (0.7) | $25.70 |
| Outstanding as of December 31, 2022 | 2.6 | $21.89 |

---

The outstanding performance units as of December 31, 2022, and 2021 include 791,624 and 885,562 cash-settled performance units, respectively.

***Share-Based Compensation Expense***

We recorded share-based compensation expense of $61.1 million, $63.5 million and $24.5 million for 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively. The tax benefit related to share exercises and lapses in the year was $7.5 million, $6.5 million and $5.2 million for 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively.

As of December 31, 2022, there was $31.1 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to options, restricted stock units and performance units and shares granted under the 2014 Stock and Incentive Plan and the Omnibus Plan. The unrecognized compensation cost is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of one year. No options vested in 2022, 2021 and 2020.

We received $16.0 million from exercises of share-based payment arrangements for 2022. There was no cash received from exercises of share-based payment arrangements for 2021 or 2020. We incurred a tax benefit for tax deductions from options of $13.4 million, $14.0 million and $3.3 million in 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively.

------

**22. COMMITMENTS**

We lease certain plants, warehouses, terminals, office facilities, railcars and various types of equipment under operating leases, some of which include rent payment escalation clauses, with lease terms ranging from one to 29 years. In addition to minimum lease payments, some of our office facility leases require payment of our proportionate share of real estate taxes and building operating expenses. Our future obligations under these leases are included in Note 4 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

We also have purchase obligations to purchase goods and services, primarily for raw materials used in products sold to customers. In 2013, we entered into an ammonia supply agreement with CF (the "***CF Ammonia Supply Agreement***") that commenced in 2017, under which Mosaic agreed to purchase approximately 545,000 to 725,000 tonnes of ammonia per year at a price tied to the prevailing price of U.S. natural gas. On October 14, 2022, we received notice from CF to exercise the bilateral, contractual right to end the ammonia supply agreement in its current form, effective January 1, 2025.

We have long-term agreements for the purchase of sulfur, which is used in the production of phosphoric acid, and natural gas, which is a significant raw material used primarily in the solution mining process in our Potash segment as well as in our phosphate concentrates plants. Also, we have agreements for capital expenditures primarily in our Potash segment related to our expansion projects.

A schedule of future minimum long-term purchase commitments, based on expected market prices as of December 31, 2022 is as follows:

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| *(in millions)* | **Purchase<br>Commitments** |
| 2023 | $4393.0 |
| 2024 | 1054.2 |
| 2025 | 307.7 |
| 2026 | 216.3 |
| 2027 | 40.0 |
| Subsequent years | 92.3 |
|  | $6103.5 |

---

Purchases made under long-term commitments were $4.6 billion in 2022, $3.1 billion in 2021, and $1.9 billion in 2020, respectively.

Most of our export sales of potash crop nutrients are marketed through a North American export association, Canpotex, which may fund its operations in part through third-party financing facilities. As a member, Mosaic or our subsidiaries are contractually obligated to reimburse Canpotex for their pro rata share of any operating expenses or other liabilities incurred. The reimbursements are made through reductions to members' cash receipts from Canpotex.

We incur liabilities for reclamation activities and Gypstack closures in our Florida and Louisiana operations where, in order to obtain necessary permits, we must either pass a test of financial strength or provide credit support, typically in the form of cash deposits, surety bonds or letters of credit. The surety bonds generally expire within one year or less but a substantial portion of these instruments provide financial assurance for continuing obligations and, therefore, in most cases, must be renewed on an annual basis. As of December 31, 2022, we had $724.2 million in surety bonds outstanding, of which $382.3 million is for reclamation obligations, primarily related to mining in Florida. In addition, included in the total amount is $300.8 million, reflecting our updated closure cost estimates, delivered to the EPA as a substitute for the financial assurance provided through the Plant City Trust. The remaining balance in surety bonds outstanding of $41.1 million is for other matters.

**23. CONTINGENCIES**

We have described below the material judicial and administrative proceedings to which we are subject.

***Environmental Matters***

We have contingent environmental liabilities that arise principally from three sources: (i) facilities currently or formerly owned by our subsidiaries or their predecessors; (ii) facilities adjacent to currently or formerly owned facilities; and

------

(iii) third-party Superfund or state equivalent sites. At facilities currently or formerly owned by our subsidiaries or their predecessors, the historical use and handling of regulated chemical substances, crop and animal nutrients and additives and by-product or process tailings have resulted in soil, surface water and/or groundwater contamination. Spills or other releases of regulated substances, subsidence from mining operations and other incidents arising out of operations, including accidents, have occurred previously at these facilities, and potentially could occur in the future, possibly requiring us to undertake or fund cleanup or result in monetary damage awards, fines, penalties, other liabilities, injunctions or other court or administrative rulings. In some instances, pursuant to consent orders or agreements with governmental agencies, we are undertaking certain remedial actions or investigations to determine whether remedial action may be required to address contamination. At other locations, we have entered into consent orders or agreements with appropriate governmental agencies to perform required remedial activities that will address identified site conditions. Taking into consideration established accruals of approximately $185.5 million and $57.3 million, as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, expenditures for these known conditions currently are not expected, individually or in the aggregate, to have a material effect on our business or financial condition. However, material expenditures could be required in the future to remediate the contamination at known sites or at other current or former sites or as a result of other environmental, health and safety matters. Below is a discussion of certain environmental matters.

*New Wales Phase II East Stack.* In April 2022, we confirmed the presence of a cavity in and liner tear beneath the southern part of the active phosphogypsum stack at the Company's New Wales facility in Florida which resulted in process water draining beneath the stack. The circumstances were reported to the FDEP and the EPA. Phase I of the repairs, consisting of stabilizing the cavity by depositing low pressure grout into it began in July 2022 and now is complete. Phase II will then inject high pressure grout beneath the stack to restore the geological confining layer beneath it. That work began in early in 2023 and is expected to conclude in the fourth quarter of 2023.

As of December 31, 2022, we have a reserve of $73.1 million for the estimated repairs. We are unable to estimate at this time potential future additional financial impacts or a range of loss, if any, due to the ongoing evaluation.

*EPA RCRA Initiative.* We have certain financial assurance and other obligations under consent decrees and a separate financial assurance arrangement relating to our facilities in Florida and Louisiana. These obligations are discussed in Note 14 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

*Other Environmental Matters.* Superfund and equivalent state statutes impose liability without regard to fault or to the legality of a party's conduct on certain categories of persons who are considered to have contributed to the release of "hazardous substances" into the environment. Under Superfund, or its various state analogues, one party may, under certain circumstances, be required to bear more than its proportionate share of cleanup costs at a site where it has liability if payments cannot be obtained from other responsible parties. Currently, certain of our subsidiaries are involved or concluding involvement at several Superfund or equivalent state sites. Our remedial liability from these sites, alone or in the aggregate, currently is not expected to have a material effect on our business or financial condition. As more information is obtained regarding these sites and the potentially responsible parties involved, this expectation could change.

We believe that, pursuant to several indemnification agreements, our subsidiaries are entitled to at least partial, and in many instances complete, indemnification for the costs that may be expended by us or our subsidiaries to remedy environmental issues at certain facilities. These agreements address issues that resulted from activities occurring prior to our acquisition of facilities or businesses from parties including, but not limited to, ARCO (BP); Beatrice Fund for Environmental Liabilities; Conoco; Conserv; Estech, Inc.; Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation; Kerr-McGee Inc.; PPG Industries, Inc.; The Williams Companies; CF; and certain other private parties. Our subsidiaries have already received and anticipate receiving amounts pursuant to the indemnification agreements for certain of their expenses incurred to date as well as future anticipated expenditures. We record potential indemnifications as an offset to the established accruals when they are realizable or realized. The failure of an indemnitor to fulfill its obligations could result in future costs that could be material.

***Louisiana Parishes Coastal Zone Cases***

Several Louisiana parishes and the City of New Orleans have filed lawsuits against hundreds of oil and gas companies seeking regulatory, restoration and compensatory damages in connection with historical oil, gas and sulfur mining and transportation operations in the coastal zone of Louisiana. Mosaic is the corporate successor to certain companies which performed these types of operations in the coastal zone of Louisiana. Mosaic has been named in two of the lawsuits filed to date. In addition, in several other cases, historical oil, gas and sulfur operations which may have been related to Mosaic's corporate predecessors have been identified in the complaints. Based upon information known to date, Mosaic has contractual indemnification rights against third parties for any loss or liability arising out of these claims pursuant to indemnification

------

agreements entered into by Mosaic's corporate predecessor(s) with third parties. There may also be insurance contracts which may respond to some or all of the claims. However, the financial ability of the third-party indemnitors, the extent of potential insurance coverage and the extent of potential liability from these claims is currently unknown.

As of October of 2022, a memorandum of understanding has been executed by the State of Louisiana and the plaintiff parishes that filed claims against Mosaic and its corporate predecessors on one hand, and Mosaic Global Holdings Inc. and its third-party indemnitors on the other hand which, when fully implemented, will release and dismiss Mosaic and its corporate predecessors from the coastal zone cases. Funding obligations in the memorandum of understanding are expected to be undertaken by third-party indemnitors and/or insurers.

***Brazil Legal Contingencies***

Our Brazilian subsidiaries are engaged in a number of judicial and administrative proceedings regarding labor, environmental, mining and civil claims that allege aggregate damages and/or fines of approximately $807.7 million. We estimate that our probable aggregate loss with respect to these claims is approximately $62.3 million, which is included in our accrued liabilities in our Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2022. Approximately $608.5 million of the maximum potential loss above, relates to labor claims of which approximately $53.3 million is included in accrued liabilities in our Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2022

Based on Brazil legislation and the current status of similar labor cases involving unrelated companies, we believe we have recorded adequate loss contingency reserves sufficient to cover our estimate of probable losses. If the status of similar cases involving unrelated companies were to adversely change in the future, our maximum exposure could increase and additional accruals could be required.

***Brazil Tax Contingencies***

Our Brazilian subsidiaries are engaged in a number of judicial and administrative proceedings relating to various non-income tax matters. We estimate that our maximum potential liability with respect to these matters is approximately $472.5 million, of which $205.0 million is subject to an indemnification agreement entered into with Vale S.A in connection with the Acquisition.

Approximately $331.4 million of the maximum potential liability relates to a Brazilian federal value added tax, PIS and COFINS, and tax credit cases, while the majority of the remaining amount relates to various other non-income tax cases. The maximum potential liability can increase with new audits. Based on Brazil legislation and the current status of similar tax cases involving unrelated taxpayers, we believe we have recorded adequate loss contingency reserves sufficient to cover our estimate of probable losses, which are immaterial. If the status of similar tax cases involving unrelated taxpayer changes in the future, additional accruals could be required.

***Other Claims***

We also have certain other contingent liabilities with respect to judicial, administrative and arbitration proceedings and claims of third parties, including tax matters, arising in the ordinary course of business. We do not believe that any of these contingent liabilities will have a material adverse impact on our business or financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

**24. RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS**

We enter into transactions and agreements with certain of our non-consolidated companies and other related parties from time to time. As of December 31, 2022, the net amount due to our non-consolidated companies totaled $56.8 million. As of December 31, 2021, the net amount due from our non-consolidated companies totaled $63.0 million.

------

The Consolidated Statements of Earnings included the following transactions with our non-consolidated companies:

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** |
| *(in millions)* | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** |
| Transactions with non-consolidated companies included in net sales | $3015.3 | $1120.9 | $819.6 |
| Transactions with non-consolidated companies included in cost of goods sold | $3245.2 | $1483.8 | $950.1 |

---

As part of the MWSPC joint venture, we market approximately 25% of the MWSPC production, for which approximately $23.1 million, $12.2 million and $8.5 million is included in revenue for the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively.

We financed the purchase and construction of two articulated tug and barge units through a bridge loan agreement with Gulf Marine Solutions, LLC ("***GMS***"). GMS is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Gulf Sulphur Services ("***GSS***"), an entity in which we and a joint venture partner, Savage Companies ("***Savage***"), each indirectly own a 50% equity interest. We are the primary beneficiary of GMS, a variable interest entity, and consolidate GMS's operations. Effective during the first quarter of 2023, Mosaic assumed ownership of Savage's 50% equity and now wholly-owns GSS. Several subsidiaries of Savage continue to provide vessel operations services to Mosaic under time charter agreements.

**25. BUSINESS SEGMENTS**

The reportable segments are determined by management based upon factors such as products and services, production processes, technologies, market dynamics, and for which segment financial information is available for our chief operating decision maker.

For a description of our business segments see Note 1 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. We evaluate performance based on the operating earnings of the respective business segments, which includes certain allocations of corporate selling, general and administrative expenses. The segment results may not represent the actual results that would be expected if they were independent, stand-alone businesses. Intersegment eliminations, including profit on intersegment sales, mark-to-market gains/losses on derivatives, debt expenses, Streamsong Resort<sup>®</sup> results of operations and the results of the China and India distribution business are included within Corporate, Eliminations and Other. Certain selling, general and administrative costs that are not controllable by the business segments are included within Corporate, Eliminations and Other.

------

Segment information for the years 2022, 2021 and 2020 is as follows:

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| *(in millions)* | **Phosphates** | **Potash** | **Mosaic Fertilizantes** | **Corporate,**<br>**Eliminations**<br>**and Other** <sup>(a)</sup> | **Total** |
| **Year Ended December 31, 2022** |  |  |  |  |  |
| Net sales to external customers | $4546.4 | $5122.8 | $8287.2 | $1168.8 | $19125.2 |
| Intersegment net sales | 1637.8 | 85.7 |  | (1723.5) |  |
| Net sales | 6184.2 | 5208.5 | 8287.2 | (554.7) | 19125.2 |
| Gross margin | 1759.0 | 2843.0 | 1045.6 | 108.2 | 5755.8 |
| Canadian resource taxes |  | 927.9 |  |  | 927.9 |
| Gross margin (excluding Canadian resource taxes) | 1759.0 | 3770.9 | 1045.6 | 108.2 | 6683.7 |
| Operating earnings | 1347.2 | 2767.7 | 910.4 | (240.0) | 4785.3 |
| Capital expenditures | 631.8 | 281.6 | 306.4 | 27.5 | 1247.3 |
| Depreciation, depletion and amortization expense | 485.1 | 307.3 | 125.5 | 16.0 | 933.9 |
| Equity in net earnings of nonconsolidated companies | 192.4 |  |  | 3.6 | 196.0 |
| **Year Ended December 31, 2021** |  |  |  |  |  |
| Net sales to external customers | $3889.7 | $2587.9 | $5088.5 | $791.3 | $12357.4 |
| Intersegment net sales | 1033.2 | 38.9 |  | (1072.1) |  |
| Net sales | 4922.9 | 2626.8 | 5088.5 | (280.8) | 12357.4 |
| Gross margin | 1305.4 | 1057.5 | 842.7 | (5.3) | 3200.3 |
| Canadian resource taxes |  | 259.5 |  |  | 259.5 |
| Gross margin (excluding Canadian resource taxes) | 1305.4 | 1317.0 | 842.7 | (5.3) | 3459.8 |
| Impairment, restructuring and other expenses |  | 158.1 |  |  | 158.1 |
| Operating earnings | 1179.8 | 836.6 | 745.9 | (293.8) | 2468.5 |
| Capital expenditures | 649.9 | 410.1 | 216.1 | 12.5 | 1288.6 |
| Depreciation, depletion and amortization expense | 428.7 | 267.8 | 101.2 | 15.2 | 812.9 |
| Equity in net earnings of nonconsolidated companies | 5.4 |  |  | 2.4 | 7.8 |
| **Year Ended December 31, 2020** |  |  |  |  |  |
| Net sales to external customers | $2543.5 | $1988.6 | $3481.6 | $668.0 | $8681.7 |
| Intersegment net sales | 572.9 | 30.7 |  | (603.6) |  |
| Net sales | 3116.4 | 2019.3 | 3481.6 | 64.4 | 8681.7 |
| Gross margin | 125.5 | 468.3 | 419.6 | 51.5 | 1064.9 |
| Canadian resource taxes |  | 146.1 |  |  | 146.1 |
| Gross margin (excluding Canadian resource taxes) | 125.5 | 614.4 | 419.6 | 51.5 | 1211.0 |
| Operating earnings | (147.1) | 401.5 | 346.5 | (188.0) | 412.9 |
| Capital expenditures | 538.1 | 478.2 | 144.9 | 9.4 | 1170.6 |
| Depreciation, depletion and amortization expense | 443.4 | 282.4 | 105.7 | 16.1 | 847.6 |
| Equity in net (loss) earnings of nonconsolidated companies | (94.1) |  |  | 0.3 | (93.8) |
| Total assets as of December 31, 2022 | $9570.5 | $9582.2 | $5562.7 | $(1329.4) | $23386.0 |
| Total assets as of December 31, 2021 | 8776.4 | 8312.8 | 4908.2 | 39.0 | 22036.4 |
| Total assets as of December 31, 2020 | 7022.1 | 7614.8 | 4127.7 | 1025.2 | 19789.8 |

---

**______________________________**

(a)The "Corporate, Eliminations and Other" category includes the results of our ancillary distribution operations in India and China. For the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, distribution operations in India and China had revenues of $1.1 billion, $730.1 million, and $639.4 million, respectively and gross margins of $130.9 million, $141.6 million, and $58.7 million, respectively.

------

Financial information relating to our operations by geographic area is as follows:

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** |
| *(in millions)* | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** |
| *Net sales*<sup>(a)</sup>*:* |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Brazil | $8045.5 | $5002.2 | $3377.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Canpotex<sup>(b)</sup> | 2961.6 | 1089.6 | 795.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Canada | 966.0 | 794.9 | 547.5 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;China | 648.2 | 396.0 | 334.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;India | 512.5 | 340.3 | 318.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Paraguay | 227.1 | 113.8 | 94.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Argentina | 224.6 | 101.3 | 121.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Mexico | 165.5 | 93.6 | 77.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Japan | 162.0 | 112.4 | 58.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Colombia | 125.9 | 135.1 | 93.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Australia | 101.6 | 64.8 | 85.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Peru | 70.2 | 40.0 | 62.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Dominican Republic | 34.1 | 29.8 | 17.1 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Honduras | 31.2 | 22.3 | 31.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Thailand | 6.3 | 18.1 | 21.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Other | 100.8 | 73.9 | 75.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Total international countries | 14383.1 | 8428.1 | 6108.4 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;United States | 4742.1 | 3929.3 | 2573.3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Consolidated | $19125.2 | $12357.4 | $8681.7 |

---

**______________________________**

(a)Revenues are attributed to countries based on location of customer.

(b)Canpotex is the export association of two Saskatchewan potash producers. The net sales of potash from Mosaic to Canpotex included in our consolidated financial statements in the Net Sales line represent Mosaic's sales of potash to Canpotex, and are recognized upon delivery to the unrelated third-party customer. Canpotex sales to the ultimate third-party customers are approximately: 28% to customers based in Brazil, 14% to customers based in China, 12% to customers based in Indonesia, 8% to customers based in India, and 38% to customers based in the rest of the world.

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| | **December 31,** | **December 31,** |
|<br>*(in millions)* | **2022** | **2021** |
| *Long-lived assets:* |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Canada | $4716.2 | $5012.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Brazil | 2153.5 | 2011.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Other | 1432.5 | 1285.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Total international countries | 8302.2 | 8308.2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;United States | 6658.6 | 6233.6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Consolidated | $14960.8 | $14541.8 |

---

Excluded from the table above as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, are goodwill of $1,116.3 million and $1,172.2 million and deferred income tax assets of $752.3 million and $997.1 million, respectively.

------

Net sales by product type for the years 2022, 2021 and 2020 are as follows:

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** | **Years Ended December 31,** |
| *(in millions)* | **2022** | **2021** | **2020** |
| *Sales by product type:* |  |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Phosphate Crop Nutrients | $4465.0 | $3552.7 | $2477.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Potash Crop Nutrients | 6484.1 | 3367.9 | 2566.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Crop Nutrient Blends | 2970.0 | 1800.0 | 1232.7 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Performance Products<sup>(a)</sup> | 3025.8 | 1973.6 | 1370.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Phosphate Rock | 125.9 | 75.5 | 42.0 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Other<sup>(b)</sup>  | 2054.4 | 1587.7 | 992.5 |
|  | $19125.2 | $12357.4 | $8681.7 |

---

**______________________________**

(a)Includes sales of MicroEssentials<sup>®</sup>, K-Mag<sup>®</sup>, Aspire<sup>®</sup> and Sus-Terra™

(b)Includes sales of industrial potash, feed products, nitrogen and other products.

------

**26. MINE CLOSURE COSTS**

Due to increased brine inflows, on June 4, 2021, the Company made the decision to accelerate the timing of the shutdown of our K1 and K2 mine shafts at our Esterhazy, Saskatchewan potash mine. Closing the K1 and K2 shafts are key pieces of the transition to the K3 shaft, but the timeline for the closure was accelerated by approximately nine months. In 2021, we had pre-tax costs of $158.1 million related to the permanent closure of these facilities. These costs consisted of $109.9 million related to the write-off of fixed assets, $37.1 million related to AROs, and $11.1 million related to inventory and other reserves. In the third quarter of 2021, we resumed production at our previously idled Colonsay potash mine to offset a portion of the production lost by the early closure of the K1 and K2 shafts at Esterhazy.

**27. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS**

On January 12, 2023, we completed the sale of the Streamsong Resort<sup>®</sup> (the "***Resort***") and approximately 7,000 acres of land on which it sits to Lone Windmill LLC, a subsidiary of Kemper Sports Management LLC, for a purchase price of $160 million. The Resort is a destination resort and conference center, which we developed in an area of previously mined land as part of our long-term business strategy to maximize the value and utility of our extensive land holdings in Florida. In addition to a hotel and conference center, the Resort includes multiple golf courses, a clubhouse and ancillary facilities.

Subsequent to year end, our Board of Directors approved an ASR of $300 million which is expected to be initiated in the first quarter of 2023. Also, in February 2023, the Board of Directors approved a special dividend of $0.25 per share to be distributed in March, 2023 to our stockholders of record as of March 15, 2023.

------

**Management's Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting**

The Company's management is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Company's internal control system is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance to our management, Board of Directors and stockholders regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation and fair presentation of our consolidated financial statements for external reporting purposes in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles ("***U.S. GAAP***"), and includes those policies and procedures that:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of our assets;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP, and that receipts and expenditures are being made only in accordance with authorizations from our management and Board of Directors; and

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of our assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

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

Management assessed the effectiveness of the Company's internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2022. In assessing the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2022 management used the control criteria framework of the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations (COSO) of the Treadway Commission published in its report entitled *Internal Control—Integrated Framework (2013).* Based on their evaluation, management concluded that the Company's internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2022. KPMG LLP, the independent registered public accounting firm that audited the financial statements included in this Form 10-K, has issued an auditors' report on the Company's internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2022.

## Ex-10.Iiib

**Exhibit 10.iii.b**

**DESCRIPTION OF MOSAIC MANAGEMENT INCENTIVE PROGRAM**

Pursuant to the Management Incentive Plan ("MIP") of The Mosaic Company (the "Company"), key managers of the Company and its subsidiaries, including executive officers, are eligible for annual cash incentive compensation based upon the level of attainment of business performance goals that are pre-established by the Board of Directors of the Company, upon the recommendation of the Compensation Committee.

The incentive measures and their respective weightings for executive officers for 2022 are described below:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Adjusted Operating Earnings: this measure is based on the profitability of the business. It creates messaging around revenue growth, margin expansion, and control over overhead costs. This measure has a weighting of 25% for executive officers.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Period Free Cash Flow: this measure is based on consolidated net cash provided by operating activities before specified items and has a 20% weighting for executive officers.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Cost Control: this measure is based on controllable production costs per tonne of the Company's Phosphates, Potash and Mosaic Fertilizantes business segments. This measure has a 10% weighting for executive officers, as defined in the program.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Performance Product Sales: this measure is based on the metric tonnes of performance products for which the Company recognizes revenue, on a consolidated basis. This measure has a weighting of 10% for executive officers.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ESG Scorecard Progress: this measure is based our achievement on select portions of our 13 sustainability goals. The metric is divided equally between the safety and sustainability (risk reduction) measure and a measure of diversity and inclusion progress. This measure has a weighting of 15% for executive officers.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;◦ Safety & Sustainability - Risk Reduction: the safety and sustainability measure is based on the effectiveness of the Company's Environmental, Health and Safety management system for the Phosphates and Potash business units, and has a weighting of 50% of the ESG Scorecard for executive officers.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;◦ Diversity & Inclusion: this measure is based upon completion of diversity and inclusion self-education hours and training of our workforce below the senior leadership level including our hourly employees, and has a weighting of 50% of the ESG Scorecard for executive officers.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Strategic Goals: this measure focuses on achieving key milestones of our six global strategic priorities. Each executive officer has two to four specific individual goals which link directly to our six global strategic priorities. These goals are intended to be leading indicators of future financial and operational success of the company. This measure has a weighting of 20% for executive officers.

Threshold, target and maximum payout levels are set by the Compensation Committee based upon the extent to which the specified performance goals are attained.

## Ex-21

**Exhibit 21** 

**Subsidiary Information for The Mosaic Company** 

Certain subsidiaries of the Mosaic Company are listed below. Unnamed subsidiaries, considered in the aggregate as a single subsidiary, would not constitute a "significant subsidiary" as defined in Regulation S-X promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **Subsidiary Name** | **Jurisdiction of Incorporation** |
| Mosaic Global Holdings Inc. | Delaware |
| The Vigoro Corporation | Delaware |
| Mosaic USA Holdings Inc. | Delaware |
| Mosaic Crop Nutrition, LLC | Delaware |
| Mosaic Potash Esterhazy Limited Partnership | Saskatchewan |
| Mosaic Fertilizer, LLC | Delaware |
| Mosaic Esterhazy B.V . | Netherlands |
| Mosaic Global Dutch Holdings B.V. | Netherlands |
| Mosaic Esterhazy Holdings ULC | Alberta |
| Mosaic Global Netherlands B.V. | Netherlands |
| Mosaic Canada ULC | Nova Scotia |
| Mosaic Potash B.V. | Netherlands |
| Mosaic Fertilizantes P&K Ltda | Brazil |
| Mosaic Fertilizantes do Brasil Ltda | Brazil |
| Mosaic Canada Crop Nutrition, LP | Manitoba |
| Mosaic Global Sales, LLC | Delaware |
| Phosphate Acquisition Partners L.P. | Delaware |
| PRP-GP LLC | Delaware |
| Mosaic Potash Carlsbad Inc | Delaware |
| Mosaic Potash Colonsay ULC | Nova Scotia |
| Mosaic Global Operations Inc. | Delaware |
| Compañia Minera Miski Mayo S.R.L. | Peru |
| MVM Resources International B.V. | Netherlands |
| Mosaic Phosphates B.V. | Netherlands |
| Bayovar Holdings | Luxembourg |
| Tampa Port Services, LLC | Delaware |
| Mosaic Brazil Fertilizantes B.V. | Netherlands |
| Mosaic Fertilizantes Limited | Bahamas |
| Mosaic Fertilizantes Bahamas Limited | Bahamas |
| South Ft. Meade Land Management, Inc. | Delaware |
| Mosaic Fertilizers (Beijing) Co. Ltd. | China |
| Mosaic India Private Limited | India |
| Mosaic Fertilizantes Netherlands C.V. | Netherlands |

---

## Exhibit 23.1

**Exhibit 23**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No. 333-175087, 333-177251, 333-216133, and 333-260777) on Form S-3 and registration statements (No. 333-120501, 333-120503, 333-120878, 333-142268, and 333-198332) on Form S-8 of our reports dated February 23, 2023, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of The Mosaic Company and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting.

/s/ KPMG LLP

Tampa, Florida <br>February 23, 2023

## Exhibit 23.2

![](exhibit232-floridaconsen001.jpg)

Brian D. Ball, Professional Engineer The Mosaic Company 101 East Kennedy BLVD, Suite 2500 Tampa FL 33602 CONSENT OF QUALIFIED PERSON I, Brian D. Ball, state that I am responsible for preparing or supervising the preparation of part(s) of the technical report summary titled Florida Phosphate Mining Technical Report Summary with an effective date of December 31, 2022, as signed and certified by me (the "Technical Report Summary"). Furthermore, I state that: (a) I consent to the public filing of the Technical Report Summary by The Mosaic Company; (b) the document that the Technical Report Summary supports is the annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022 (the "Document"); (c) I consent to the use of my name, or any quotation from or summarization in the Document of the parts of the Technical Report Summary for which I am responsible, to the filing of the Technical Report Summary as an exhibit to the Document, and to the incorporation of such information into the following registration statements: Nos. 333-260777, 333-175087, 333-177251, and 333-216133 on Form S-3 and registration statements Nos. 333-120501, 333-120503, 333-120878, 333-142268, and 333-198332 on Form S-8; (d) I confirm that I have read the Document, and that the Document fairly and accurately reflects, in the form and context in which it appears, the information in the Technical Report Summary or in the part(s) thereof for which I am responsible. Dated at Lithia, Florida this _15__ day of February, 2023. /s/ Brian D. Ball Brian D. Ball, Professional Engineer Florida Board of Professional Engineers, License #75165 Exhibit 23.2

------

![](exhibit232-floridaconsen002.jpg)

Gonglun Chen, Ph.D., Professional Engineer The Mosaic Company 101 East Kennedy BLVD, Suite 2500 Tampa FL 33602 CONSENT OF QUALIFIED PERSON I, Gonglun Chen, state that I am responsible for preparing or supervising the preparation of part(s) of the technical report summary titled Florida Phosphate Mining Technical Report Summary with an effective date of December 31, 2022, as signed and certified by me (the "Technical Report Summary"). Furthermore, I state that: (a) I consent to the public filing of the Technical Report Summary by The Mosaic Company; (b) the document that the Technical Report Summary supports is the annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022 (the "Document"); (c) I consent to the use of my name, or any quotation from or summarization in the Document of the parts of the Technical Report Summary for which I am responsible, to the filing of the Technical Report Summary as an exhibit to the Document, and to the incorporation of such information into the following registration statements: Nos. 333-260777, 333-175087, 333-177251, and 333-216133 on Form S-3 and registration statements Nos. 333-120501, 333-120503, 333-120878, 333-142268, and 333-198332 on Form S-8; (d) I confirm that I have read the Document, and that the Document fairly and accurately reflects, in the form and context in which it appears, the information in the Technical Report Summary or in the part(s) thereof for which I am responsible. Dated at South Bradley, Florida this __17__ day of February, 2023. /s/ Gonglun Chen Gonglun Chen, Ph.D. Professional Engineer, Florida Mining License #73937

------

![](exhibit232-floridaconsen003.jpg)

Kevin D. Farmer, Professional Geologist The Mosaic Company 101 East Kennedy BLVD, Suite 2500 Tampa FL 33602 CONSENT OF QUALIFIED PERSON I, Kevin D. Farmer, state that I am responsible for preparing or supervising the preparation of part(s) of the technical report summary titled Florida Phosphate Mining Technical Report Summary with an effective date of December 31, 2022, as signed and certified by me (the "Technical Report Summary"). Furthermore, I state that: (a) I consent to the public filing of the Technical Report Summary by The Mosaic Company; (b) the document that the Technical Report Summary supports is the annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022 (the "Document"); (c) I consent to the use of my name, or any quotation from or summarization in the Document of the parts of the Technical Report Summary for which I am responsible, to the filing of the Technical Report Summary as an exhibit to the Document, and to the incorporation of such information into the following registration statements: Nos. 333-260777, 333-175087, 333-177251, and 333-216133 on Form S-3 and registration statements Nos. 333-120501, 333-120503, 333-120878, 333-142268, and 333-198332 on Form S-8; (d) I confirm that I have read the Document, and that the Document fairly and accurately reflects, in the form and context in which it appears, the information in the Technical Report Summary or in the part(s) thereof for which I am responsible. Dated at Lithia, Florida this _16__ day of February, 2023. /s/ Kevin D. Farmer Kevin D. Farmer Professional Geologist, State of Florida (PG-2735) Registered Member of the Society for Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration (Member #4207068)

------

![](exhibit232-floridaconsen004.jpg)

Bethany Niec, Professional Engineer The Mosaic Company 101 East Kennedy BLVD, Suite 2500 Tampa FL 33602 CONSENT OF QUALIFIED PERSON I, Bethany Niec, state that I am responsible for preparing or supervising the preparation of part(s) of the technical report summary titled Florida Phosphate Mining Technical Report Summary with an effective date of December 31, 2022, as signed and certified by me (the "Technical Report Summary"). Furthermore, I state that: (a) I consent to the public filing of the Technical Report Summary by The Mosaic Company; (b) the document that the Technical Report Summary supports is the annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022 (the "Document"); (c) I consent to the use of my name, or any quotation from or summarization in the Document of the parts of the Technical Report Summary for which I am responsible, to the filing of the Technical Report Summary as an exhibit to the Document, and to the incorporation of such information into the following registration statements: Nos. 333-260777, 333-175087, 333-177251, and 333-216133 on Form S-3 and registration statements Nos. 333-120501, 333-120503, 333-120878, 333-142268, and 333-198332 on Form S-8; (d) I confirm that I have read the Document, and that the Document fairly and accurately reflects, in the form and context in which it appears, the information in the Technical Report Summary or in the part(s) thereof for which I am responsible. Dated at Lithia, Florida this _14__ day of February, 2023. /s/ Bethany Niec Bethany Niec Professional Engineer, Florida Board of Professional Engineers, License #68437

------

![](exhibit232-floridaconsen005.jpg)

Robert Wright, Professional Engineer The Mosaic Company 101 East Kennedy BLVD, Suite 2500 Tampa FL 33602 CONSENT OF QUALIFIED PERSON I, Tyler Wright, state that I am responsible for preparing or supervising the preparation of part(s) of the technical report summary titled Florida Phosphate Mining Technical Report Summary with an effective date of December 31, 2022, as signed and certified by me (the "Technical Report Summary"). Furthermore, I state that: (a) I consent to the public filing of the Technical Report Summary by The Mosaic Company; (b) the document that the Technical Report Summary supports is the annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022 (the "Document"); (c) I consent to the use of my name, or any quotation from or summarization in the Document of the parts of the Technical Report Summary for which I am responsible, to the filing of the Technical Report Summary as an exhibit to the Document, and to the incorporation of such information into the following registration statements: Nos. 333-260777, 333-175087, 333-177251, and 333-216133 on Form S-3 and registration statements Nos. 333-120501, 333-120503, 333-120878, 333-142268, and 333-198332 on Form S-8; (d) I confirm that I have read the Document, and that the Document fairly and accurately reflects, in the form and context in which it appears, the information in the Technical Report Summary or in the part(s) thereof for which I am responsible. Dated at Fort Meade, Florida this _20_ day of February, 2023. /s/ Robert Wright Robert Wright Professional Engineer, State of Florida, License #78507

------

![](exhibit232-floridaconsen006.jpg)

Scott Wuitschick, Professional Engineer The Mosaic Company 101 East Kennedy BLVD, Suite 2500 Tampa FL 33602 CONSENT OF QUALIFIED PERSON I, Scott Wuitschick, state that I am responsible for preparing or supervising the preparation of part(s) of the technical report summary titled Florida Phosphate Mining Technical Report Summary with an effective date of December 31, 2022, as signed and certified by me (the "Technical Report Summary"). Furthermore, I state that: (a) I consent to the public filing of the Technical Report Summary by The Mosaic Company; (b) the document that the Technical Report Summary supports is the annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022 (the "Document"); (c) I consent to the use of my name, or any quotation from or summarization in the Document of the parts of the Technical Report Summary for which I am responsible, to the filing of the Technical Report Summary as an exhibit to the Document, and to the incorporation of such information into the following registration statements: Nos. 333-260777, 333-175087, 333-177251, and 333-216133 on Form S-3 and registration statements Nos. 333-120501, 333-120503, 333-120878, 333-142268, and 333-198332 on Form S-8; (d) I confirm that I have read the Document, and that the Document fairly and accurately reflects, in the form and context in which it appears, the information in the Technical Report Summary or in the part(s) thereof for which I am responsible. Dated at Lithia, Florida this _20_ day of February, 2023. /s/ Scott Wuitschick Scott Wuitschick Professional Engineer, State of Florida, License #54648

------

## Ex-24

**Exhibit 24**

POWER OF ATTORNEY

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The undersigned, being a Director and/or Officer of The Mosaic Company, a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), hereby constitutes and appoints James ("Joc") C. O'Rourke, Clint C. Freeland and Philip E. Bauer his/her true and lawful attorneys and agents, each with full power and authority (acting alone and without the others) to execute and deliver in the name and on behalf of the undersigned as such Director and/or Officer, the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K for the calendar year ended December 31, 2022 (the "Annual Report") under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and to execute and deliver any and all amendments to the Annual Report for filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission; and in connection with the foregoing, to do any and all acts and things and execute any and all instruments which such attorneys and agents may deem necessary or advisable to enable the Company to comply with the securities laws of the United States and of any state or other political subdivision thereof. The undersigned hereby grants unto such attorney and agents, and each of them, full power of substitution and revocation in the premises and hereby ratifies and confirms all that such attorneys and agents may do or cause to be done by virtue of these presents.

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| /s/ Cheryl K. Beebe |  |  |  |
| Cheryl K. Beebe | February 18, 2023 | James ("Joc") C. O'Rourke |  |
| /s/ Gregory L. Ebel |  | /s/ David T. Seaton |  |
| Gregory L. Ebel | February 21, 2023 | David T. Seaton | February 20, 2023 |
| /s/ Timothy S. Gitzel |  | /s/ Steven M. Seibert |  |
| Timothy S. Gitzel | February 20, 2023 | Steven M. Seibert | February 21, 2023 |
|  |  | /s/ João Roberto Gonçalves Teixeira | /s/ João Roberto Gonçalves Teixeira |
| Denise C. Johnson |  | João Roberto Gonçalves Teixeira | February 21, 2023 |
| /s/ Emery N. Koenig |  | /s/ Gretchen H. Watkins |  |
| Emery N. Koenig | February 20, 2023 | Gretchen H. Watkins | February 19, 2023 |
|  |  | /s/ Kelvin R. Westbrook |  |
|  |  | Kelvin R. Westbrook | February 19, 2023 |

---

## Exhibit 31.1

**Exhibit 31.1**

**<u>Certification Required by Rule 13a-14(a)</u>**

**I, James "Joc" C. O'Rourke,** certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of The Mosaic Company;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

 b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

---

| |
|:---|
| Date: February 23, 2023 |
| /s/ James "Joc" C. O'Rourke |
| **James "Joc" C. O'Rourke** |
| **Chief Executive Officer and President** |
| The Mosaic Company |

---

## Exhibit 31.2

**Exhibit 31.2**

**<u>Certification Required by Rule 13a-14(a)</u>**

**I, Clint C. Freeland,** certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of The Mosaic Company;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

 b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

---

| |
|:---|
| Date: February 23, 2023 |
| /s/ Clint C. Freeland |
| **Clint C. Freeland** |
| **Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer** |
| The Mosaic Company |

---

## Exhibit 32.1

**Exhibit 32.1**

**<u>Certification of Chief Executive Officer Required by Rule 13a-14(b)</u>**

**<u>and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code</u>**

**I, James "Joc" C. O'Rourke, the Chief Executive Officer and President** of The Mosaic Company, certify that (i) the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022 of The Mosaic Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of The Mosaic Company.

---

| |
|:---|
| February 23, 2023 |
| /s/ James "Joc" C. O'Rourke |
| **James "Joc" C. O'Rourke** |
| **Chief Executive Officer and President** |
| The Mosaic Company |

---

## Exhibit 32.2

**Exhibit 32.2**

**<u>Certification of Chief Financial Officer Required by Rule 13a-14(b)</u>**

**<u>and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code</u>**

**I, Clint C. Freeland, the Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer** of The Mosaic Company, certify that (i) the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022 of The Mosaic Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of The Mosaic Company.

---

| |
|:---|
| February 23, 2023 |
| /s/ Clint C. Freeland |
| **Clint C. Freeland** |
| **Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer** |
| The Mosaic Company |

---

## Ex-95

**Exhibit 95**

**MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES**

The following table shows, for each of our U.S. mines that is subject to the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 ("***MSHA***"), the information required by Section 1503(a) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and Item 104 of Regulation S-K. Section references are to sections of MSHA.

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| | **Potash Mine** | **Florida Phosphate Rock Mines** | **Florida Phosphate Rock Mines** | **Florida Phosphate Rock Mines** | **Florida Phosphate Rock Mines** |
| **<u>Year Ended December 31, 2022</u>** | **Carlsbad,**<br> **New Mexico** | **Four Corners** | **South Fort Meade** | **Wingate** | **South Pasture** |
| Section 104 citations for violations of mandatory health or safety standards that could significantly and substantially contribute to the cause and effect of a mine safety or health hazard (#) | 29 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Section 104(b) orders (#) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Section 104(d) citations and orders (#) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Section 110(b)(2) violations (#) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Section 107(a) orders (#) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Proposed assessments under MSHA (whole dollars) | $76209 | $4491 | $849 | $133 | $144 |
| Mining-related fatalities (#) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Section 104(e) notice | No | No | No | No | No |
| Notice of the potential for a pattern of violations under Section 104(e) | No | No | No | No | No |
| Legal actions before the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission ("FMSHRC") initiated (#) | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Legal actions before the FMSHRC resolved (#) | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Legal actions pending before the FMSHRC, end of period: |  |  |  |  |  |
| Contests of citations and orders referenced in Subpart B of 29 CFR Part 2700 (#) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Contests of proposed penalties referenced in Subpart C of 29 CFR Part 2700 (#) | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Complaints for compensation referenced in Subpart D of 29 CFR Part 2700 (#) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Complaints of discharge, discrimination or interference referenced in Subpart E of 29 CFR Part 2700 (#) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Applications for temporary relief referenced in Subpart F of 29 CFR Part 2700 (#) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Appeals of judges' decisions or orders referenced in Subpart H of 29 CFR Part 2700 (#) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total pending legal actions (#) | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |

---

## Exhibit 96.1

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1001.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Florida Phosphate Mining Florida, USA Technical Report Summary Florida Phosphate Mining Technical Report Summary Effective December 31, 2022 Florida Phosphate Mining Florida, USA Technical Report Summary Date: December 31, 2022 ii CONTENTS 1.0 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 Property Locations ................................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.3 Ownership and Status ............................................................................................................................... 1-3 1.4 Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights and Royalties.................................................................. 1-3 1.5 Geology and Mineralization ..................................................................................................................... 1-3 1.6 Mineral Resource Estimates ..................................................................................................................... 1-4 1.7 Mineral Reserve Estimates ....................................................................................................................... 1-6 1.8 Mining Methods ..................................................................................................................................... 1-14 1.9 Recovery Methods ................................................................................................................................. 1-14 1.10 Infrastructure .......................................................................................................................................... 1-14 1.11 Markets and Contracts ............................................................................................................................ 1-15 1.12 Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations ........................................................................... 1-15 1.13 Capital Cost and Operating Cost Estimates............................................................................................ 1-15 1.14 Economic Analysis................................................................................................................................. 1-15 1.15 Interpretations and Conclusions ............................................................................................................. 1-16 1.16 Recommendations .................................................................................................................................. 1-16 2.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 2-1 2.1 Registrant ................................................................................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Purpose and Terms of Reference ............................................................................................................. 2-1 2.3 Abbreviations and Units ........................................................................................................................... 2-1 Table 2-1: List of Units and Abbreviations ............................................................................................................... 2-1 2.4 Qualified Persons (QP) ............................................................................................................................ 2-2 2.5 Effective Dates ......................................................................................................................................... 2-2 2.6 Information Sources and References ........................................................................................................ 2-3 2.7 Previous Technical Report Summaries .................................................................................................... 2-4 3.0 Property Description ................................................................................................................................ 3-1 3.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 3-1 3.2 Properties and Title .................................................................................................................................. 3-3 3.2.1 Mineral Title ........................................................................................................................................ 3-3 3.2.2 Surface Rights .................................................................................................................................... 3-11 3.2.3 Water Rights ...................................................................................................................................... 3-11 3.2.4 Royalties ............................................................................................................................................ 3-11 3.3 Encumbrances ........................................................................................................................................ 3-11 3.4 Significant Factors and Risks That May Affect Access, Title or Work Programs ................................. 3-11 4.0 Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography ............................................. 4-1 4.1 Physiography ............................................................................................................................................ 4-1 4.1.1 Topography, Elevation and Vegetation ............................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Accessibility ............................................................................................................................................. 4-1 4.2.1 South Fort Meade Facility ................................................................................................................... 4-1 4.2.2 Four Corners Facility ........................................................................................................................... 4-3 4.2.3 Wingate Facility ................................................................................................................................... 4-5 4.2.4 DeSoto Property ................................................................................................................................... 4-7 4.2.5 Pioneer Property .................................................................................................................................. 4-9 4.2.6 South Pasture Property....................................................................................................................... 4-11 4.3 Climate and Length of Operating Season ............................................................................................... 4-13 4.4 Infrastructure/Local Resources .............................................................................................................. 4-13 Florida Phosphate Mining Florida, USA Technical Report Summary Date: December 31, 2022 iii 4.4.1 Water ................................................................................................................................................. 4-13 4.4.2 Power and Electricity ......................................................................................................................... 4-13 4.4.3 Roads and Logistics ........................................................................................................................... 4-14 4.4.4 Personnel ........................................................................................................................................... 4-15 4.4.5 Supplies ............................................................................................................................................. 4-16 5.0 History ...................................................................................................................................................... 5-1 6.0 Geological Setting, Mineralization and Deposit ...................................................................................... 6-1 6.1 Deposit Type ............................................................................................................................................ 6-1 6.2 Regional Geology..................................................................................................................................... 6-1 6.3 Local Geology .......................................................................................................................................... 6-3 6.4 Property Geology ..................................................................................................................................... 6-4 6.4.1 General Deposit Description ................................................................................................................ 6-4 6.4.2 South Fort Meade Deposit ................................................................................................................... 6-5 6.4.3 Four Corners Deposit ........................................................................................................................... 6-6 6.4.4 Wingate Deposit ................................................................................................................................ 6-10 6.4.5 DeSoto Deposit .................................................................................................................................. 6-11 6.4.6 Pioneer Deposit .................................................................................................................................. 6-12 6.4.7 South Pasture Deposit ........................................................................................................................ 6-14 7.0 Exploration ............................................................................................................................................... 7-1 7.1 Exploration ............................................................................................................................................... 7-1 7.1.1 Grids and Surveys ................................................................................................................................ 7-1 7.1.2 Geological Mapping, Geochemistry and Geophysics .......................................................................... 7-1 7.1.3 Petrology, Mineralogy, and Research Studies ..................................................................................... 7-1 7.1.4 Exploration Potential ........................................................................................................................... 7-1 7.2 Drilling ..................................................................................................................................................... 7-1 7.2.1 Overview ............................................................................................................................................. 7-1 7.2.2 Property Drilling .................................................................................................................................. 7-2 7.2.2.1 South Fort Meade Facility ............................................................................................................... 7-2 7.2.2.2 Four Corners Facility ....................................................................................................................... 7-4 7.2.2.3 Wingate Facility .............................................................................................................................. 7-6 7.2.2.4 DeSoto Property .............................................................................................................................. 7-8 7.2.2.5 Pioneer Property ............................................................................................................................ 7-10 7.2.2.6 South Pasture Property .................................................................................................................. 7-12 7.2.3 Drill Methods ..................................................................................................................................... 7-14 7.2.4 Geological Logging ........................................................................................................................... 7-14 7.2.5 Recovery ............................................................................................................................................ 7-15 7.2.6 Collar Surveys and Down Hole Surveys............................................................................................ 7-15 7.3 Hydrogeology ......................................................................................................................................... 7-15 7.4 Geotechnical ........................................................................................................................................... 7-15 7.5 QP Interpretation of the Exploration and Drilling Information .............................................................. 7-15 8.0 Sample Preparation, Analyses and Security ............................................................................................. 8-1 8.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 8-1 8.2 Sampling Methods ................................................................................................................................... 8-1 8.2.1 Procedures ........................................................................................................................................... 8-1 8.2.2 Quality Control .................................................................................................................................... 8-1 8.3 Sample Preparation .................................................................................................................................. 8-2 8.3.1 Process ................................................................................................................................................. 8-2 8.3.2 Quality Control .................................................................................................................................... 8-4 8.4 Assaying and Analytical Procedures ........................................................................................................ 8-4 Florida Phosphate Mining Florida, USA Technical Report Summary Date: December 31, 2022 iv 8.4.1 Procedures ........................................................................................................................................... 8-4 8.4.2 Density Determinations ....................................................................................................................... 8-4 8.4.3 Moisture Estimation ............................................................................................................................. 8-5 8.4.4 Quality Assurance and Quality Control ............................................................................................... 8-5 8.5 Sample Security ....................................................................................................................................... 8-5 8.6 Database ................................................................................................................................................... 8-6 8.7 QP Opinion on Sample Preparation, Security, and Analytical Procedures .............................................. 8-6 9.0 Data Verification ...................................................................................................................................... 9-1 9.1 QP and Internal Data Verification ............................................................................................................ 9-1 9.2 External Data Verification ....................................................................................................................... 9-1 9.3 QP Opinion on Data Adequacy ................................................................................................................ 9-1 10.0 Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing ....................................................................................... 10-1 10.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 10-1 10.2 Procedures .............................................................................................................................................. 10-1 10.3 Quality Control ...................................................................................................................................... 10-1 10.4 Database and Records ............................................................................................................................ 10-2 10.5 Metallurgical Testing ............................................................................................................................. 10-2 10.6 Recovery Estimates ................................................................................................................................ 10-2 10.7 Metallurgical Variability ........................................................................................................................ 10-3 10.8 Deleterious Elements ............................................................................................................................. 10-6 10.9 Qualified Person's Opinion on Data Adequacy ..................................................................................... 10-7 11.0 Mineral Resource Estimates ................................................................................................................... 11-1 11.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 11-1 11.2 Key Assumptions ................................................................................................................................... 11-1 11.3 Estimation Methodology ........................................................................................................................ 11-2 11.4 Exploratory Data Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 11-3 11.5 Validation ............................................................................................................................................... 11-3 11.6 Confidence Classification of Mineral Resource Estimates .................................................................... 11-3 11.7 Reasonable Prospects of Economic Extraction ...................................................................................... 11-4 11.8 Mineral Resource Statement .................................................................................................................. 11-7 11.9 Uncertainties (Factors) That May Affect the Mineral Resource Estimates .......................................... 11-12 12.0 Mineral Reserve Estimates ..................................................................................................................... 12-1 12.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 12-1 12.2 Key Assumptions ................................................................................................................................... 12-1 12.3 Estimation Methodology ........................................................................................................................ 12-2 12.4 Mineral Reserve Statement .................................................................................................................... 12-3 12.5 Uncertainties (Factors) That May Affect the Mineral Reserve Estimate ............................................... 12-8 13.0 Mining Methods ..................................................................................................................................... 13-1 13.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 13-1 13.2 Mining Methods ..................................................................................................................................... 13-1 13.2.1 Surface Dragline Mining ................................................................................................................... 13-1 13.2.2 Surface Dredge Mining ...................................................................................................................... 13-3 13.2.3 Dragline and Dredge Mining Geotechnical Considerations .............................................................. 13-5 13.2.4 Hydrogeological Considerations ........................................................................................................ 13-6 13.3 Mine Design and Operations .................................................................................................................. 13-7 13.3.1 Production Plan/Life of Mine Plan .................................................................................................... 13-7 13.3.2 Planning Assumptions/Design Criteria .............................................................................................. 13-9 13.3.3 Mining Sequence ............................................................................................................................... 13-9 13.3.4 Mine Production Monitoring ........................................................................................................... 13-13

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1002.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Florida Phosphate Mining Florida, USA Technical Report Summary Date: December 31, 2022 v 13.3.5 Equipment ........................................................................................................................................ 13-13 13.3.6 Personnel ......................................................................................................................................... 13-14 14.0 Recovery Methods ................................................................................................................................. 14-1 14.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 14-1 14.2 Beneficiation Process ............................................................................................................................. 14-1 14.3 Plant Design ........................................................................................................................................... 14-2 14.4 Process Flowsheet .................................................................................................................................. 14-2 14.5 Equipment Characteristics and Specifications ....................................................................................... 14-6 14.6 Water Requirements ............................................................................................................................... 14-7 14.7 Power and Consumables ........................................................................................................................ 14-7 14.8 Key Metrics ............................................................................................................................................ 14-8 15.0 Infrastructure .......................................................................................................................................... 15-1 15.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 15-1 15.2 Roads, Rail and Logistics ....................................................................................................................... 15-1 15.2.1 South Fort Meade Facility ................................................................................................................. 15-1 15.2.2 Four Corners Facility ......................................................................................................................... 15-3 15.2.3 Wingate Facility ................................................................................................................................. 15-5 15.3 Stockpiles ............................................................................................................................................... 15-7 15.3.1 South Fort Meade Facility ................................................................................................................. 15-7 15.3.2 Four Corners Facility ......................................................................................................................... 15-9 15.3.3 Wingate Facility ............................................................................................................................... 15-11 15.4 Clay and Tailings Storage .................................................................................................................... 15-13 15.5 Pumping Systems ................................................................................................................................. 15-19 15.5.1 South Fort Meade Facility ............................................................................................................... 15-19 15.5.2 Four Corners Facility ....................................................................................................................... 15-20 15.5.3 Wingate Facility ............................................................................................................................... 15-21 15.6 Water Management Structures ............................................................................................................. 15-21 15.7 Built Infrastructure ............................................................................................................................... 15-22 15.8 Power and Electrical ............................................................................................................................ 15-22 15.8.1 South Fort Meade Facility ............................................................................................................... 15-22 15.8.2 Four Corners Facility ....................................................................................................................... 15-22 15.8.3 Wingate Facility ............................................................................................................................... 15-22 15.9 Water Supply ........................................................................................................................................ 15-23 16.0 Market Studies and Contracts ................................................................................................................ 16-1 16.1 Markets .................................................................................................................................................. 16-1 16.2 Commodity Price Forecasts ................................................................................................................... 16-1 16.3 Contracts ................................................................................................................................................ 16-2 17.0 Environmental Studies, Permitting and Plans, Negotiations or Agreements with Local Individuals or Groups ................................................................................................................................................................ 17-1 17.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 17-1 17.2 Baseline and Supporting Studies ............................................................................................................ 17-1 17.3 Environmental Considerations and Monitoring Programs ..................................................................... 17-3 17.3.1 Performance Standards, Monitoring and Reporting ........................................................................... 17-3 17.3.2 Management Plans ............................................................................................................................. 17-4 17.3.3 Resource Protection and Conservation Easements ............................................................................ 17-4 17.3.4 Non-Regulatory Programs ................................................................................................................. 17-4 17.4 Product and Rock Stockpiles.................................................................................................................. 17-4 17.5 Tailings Storage Facilities ...................................................................................................................... 17-5 17.5.1 Flotation Tailings ............................................................................................................................... 17-5 Florida Phosphate Mining Florida, USA Technical Report Summary Date: December 31, 2022 vi 17.5.2 Clay-Sized Residuals ......................................................................................................................... 17-5 17.6 Water Management ................................................................................................................................ 17-6 17.6.1 Sources and Uses of Water ................................................................................................................ 17-6 17.6.2 Water Recycling ................................................................................................................................ 17-7 17.6.3 Effects of Water Withdrawals ............................................................................................................ 17-7 17.6.4 Volumes and Characteristics of Water Discharges ............................................................................ 17-7 17.7 Reclamation, Mitigation and Closure ..................................................................................................... 17-8 17.7.1 Reclamation ....................................................................................................................................... 17-9 17.7.2 Mitigation ........................................................................................................................................ 17-10 17.7.3 Closure Requirements ...................................................................................................................... 17-10 17.7.4 Obligations Upon Asset Retirement ................................................................................................ 17-10 17.8 Permits and Registrations ..................................................................................................................... 17-11 17.8.1 Development Approvals .................................................................................................................. 17-11 17.8.2 Operating Permits ............................................................................................................................ 17-12 17.8.3 Registrations and Licenses ............................................................................................................... 17-12 17.8.4 Bureau of Land Management Leases ............................................................................................... 17-12 17.9 Social Considerations, Plans, Negotiations and Agreements ............................................................... 17-12 17.9.1 Consideration of the Human Environment ...................................................................................... 17-13 17.9.2 Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Program ................................................................. 17-13 17.9.3 Investment in the Environment ........................................................................................................ 17-13 17.9.4 Citizen Advisory Panels................................................................................................................... 17-13 17.9.5 Sierra Club Settlement Agreement .................................................................................................. 17-14 17.9.6 Peace River Monitoring Plan (PRMP) ............................................................................................. 17-14 17.9.7 Horse Creek Stewardship Plan (HCSP) ........................................................................................... 17-14 17.9.8 Southwest Florida Water Management District Agreement ............................................................ 17-14 17.9.9 United States Geological Survey (USGS) Agreement ..................................................................... 17-14 17.9.10 Hardee County Economic Development.......................................................................................... 17-14 17.9.11 Manatee County ............................................................................................................................... 17-15 17.10 Qualified Person's Opinion on Adequacy of Current Plans to Address Issues .................................... 17-15 18.0 Capital and Operating Costs ................................................................................................................... 18-1 18.1 Capital Cost Estimates ........................................................................................................................... 18-1 18.1.1 Basis of Estimate ............................................................................................................................... 18-1 18.1.2 Exclusions for the Capital Cost Estimate ........................................................................................... 18-1 18.1.3 Capital Cost Estimate......................................................................................................................... 18-2 18.2 Operating Cost Estimates ....................................................................................................................... 18-2 18.2.1 Basis of Estimate ............................................................................................................................... 18-2 18.2.2 Mine Operating Costs ........................................................................................................................ 18-3 19.0 Economic Analysis ................................................................................................................................. 19-1 19.1 Methodology Used ................................................................................................................................. 19-1 19.2 Financial Model Inputs, Parameters and Assumptions .......................................................................... 19-1 19.3 Economic Analysis................................................................................................................................. 19-2 19.4 Sensitivity Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 19-4 20.0 Adjacent Properties ................................................................................................................................ 20-1 21.0 Other Relevant Data and Information .................................................................................................... 21-1 22.0 Interpretation and Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 22-1 22.1 Mineral Resources .................................................................................................................................. 22-1 22.2 Mineral Reserves .................................................................................................................................... 22-2 23.0 Recommendations .................................................................................................................................. 23-1 24.0 References .............................................................................................................................................. 24-1 Florida Phosphate Mining Florida, USA Technical Report Summary Date: December 31, 2022 vii 25.0 Reliance on Information Provided by the Registrant ............................................................................. 25-1 TABLES Table 1-1: 2022 Mineral Resources ........................................................................................................................... 1-5 Table 1-2: 2022 Mineral Reserves ............................................................................................................................. 1-7 Table 2-1: List of Units and Abbreviations ............................................................................................................... 2-1 Table 2-2: Qualified Persons ..................................................................................................................................... 2-2 Table 2-3: Reliance on Other Experts ........................................................................................................................ 2-4 Table 3-1: Florida Phosphate Properties Status and Acreages................................................................................... 3-4 Table 3-2: Land Ownership ....................................................................................................................................... 3-4 Table 3-3: Property Surface Rights ......................................................................................................................... 3-11 Table 5-1: Florida Phosphate Mining History ........................................................................................................... 5-1 Table 5-2: Production History ................................................................................................................................... 5-2 Table 7-1: South Fort Meade Facility Exploration and Definition Drilling Summary .............................................. 7-2 Table 7-2: Four Corners Facility Exploration and Definition Drilling Summary ...................................................... 7-4 Table 7-3: Wingate Facility Exploration and Definition Drilling Summary ............................................................. 7-6 Table 7-4: DeSoto Property Exploration and Definition Drilling Summary ............................................................. 7-8 Table 7-5: Pioneer Property Exploration and Definition Drilling Summary ........................................................... 7-10 Table 7-6: South Pasture Property Exploration and Definition Drilling Summary ................................................. 7-12 Table 10-1: Notable Frequency of Samples............................................................................................................. 10-1 Table 10-2: South Fort Meade Mine Recovery and Product Quality ...................................................................... 10-2 Table 10-3: Four Corners Mine Recovery and Product Quality .............................................................................. 10-2 Table 10-4: Wingate Mine Recovery and Product Quality ...................................................................................... 10-3 Table 11-1: BPL in Concentrate and Pebble Cut-Offs ............................................................................................ 11-1 Table 11-2: Clay Percent Cut-Offs .......................................................................................................................... 11-1 Table 11-3: Productivity Cut-off Factors ................................................................................................................. 11-5 Table 11-4: Beneficiation Plant Recoveries ............................................................................................................ 11-5 Table 11-5: Mining Dilution .................................................................................................................................... 11-5 Table 11-6: Impurity Recoveries in Pebbles ............................................................................................................ 11-5 Table 11-7: Impurity Recoveries in Intermediate Pebbles ....................................................................................... 11-5 Table 11-8: Impurity Recoveries in Concentrate ..................................................................................................... 11-6 Table 11-9: 2022 Mineral Resources ....................................................................................................................... 11-8 Table 12-1: Productivity Cut-off Factors ................................................................................................................. 12-1 Table 12-2: Beneficiation Plant Applied Recoveries ............................................................................................... 12-1 Table 12-3: Mining Dilution .................................................................................................................................... 12-1 Table 12-4: Impurity Recoveries in Pebbles ............................................................................................................ 12-2 Table 12-5: Impurity Recoveries in Concentrate ..................................................................................................... 12-2 Table 12-6: 2022 Mineral Reserves ......................................................................................................................... 12-4 Table 13-1: 2022 Life of Mine Plans ....................................................................................................................... 13-8 Table 13-2: Major Mining Equipment ................................................................................................................... 13-14 Table 13-3: Primary Support Equipment ............................................................................................................... 13-14 Table 13-4: Mining and Beneficiation Plant Personnel Requirements (Hourly and Salary) ................................. 13-15 Table 14-1: Rougher Circuits Design Rate (tons/hour) ........................................................................................... 14-6 Table 14-2: Equipment Summary ............................................................................................................................ 14-6 Table 14-3: Plant Production and Deep Well Water Usage 2021 ............................................................................ 14-7 Table 14-4: 2021 Power Consumption .................................................................................................................... 14-8 Table 14-5: Four Corners Key Beneficiation Plant Metrics .................................................................................... 14-9 Florida Phosphate Mining Florida, USA Technical Report Summary Date: December 31, 2022 viii Table 14-6: South Fort Meade Key Beneficiation Plant Metrics ........................................................................... 14-11 Table 14-7: Wingate Key Beneficiation Plant Metrics .......................................................................................... 14-12 Table 15-1: Infrastructure Maintained by Third Parties .......................................................................................... 15-1 Table 15-2: Current Clay Setting Areas Summary ................................................................................................ 15-13 Table 15-3: South Fort Meade Ore and Waste Stream Pumping Systems............................................................. 15-20 Table 15-4: Four Corners Ore and Waste Stream Pumping Systems .................................................................... 15-20 Table 15-5: Wingate Ore and Waste Stream Pumping Systems ............................................................................ 15-21 Table 15-6: Four Corners Facility Permitted Outfalls ........................................................................................... 15-21 Table 17-1: Baseline Monitoring and Impact Analyses ........................................................................................... 17-2 Table 17-2: Monitoring and Reporting Requirements ............................................................................................. 17-3 Table 17-3: Permit Required Management Plans .................................................................................................... 17-4 Table 17-4: Conservation Easement Summary ........................................................................................................ 17-4 Table 17-5: Bureau of Land Management Lease Summary .................................................................................. 17-12 Table 17-6: Human Environment Elements Considered ....................................................................................... 17-13 Table 18-1: Historical and LOM Plan Capital (M US$) .......................................................................................... 18-2 Table 18-2: Historical and LOM Plan Cash Costs ................................................................................................... 18-3 Table 19-1: Cash Flow Analysis .............................................................................................................................. 19-3 Table 20-1: Order of Magnitude Exploration Potential Estimate on Adjacent Properties ....................................... 20-1 Table 25-1: Information Provided by the Registrant ............................................................................................... 25-1 FIGURES Figure 1-1: Florida Phosphate Mining Facility and Property Locations .................................................................... 1-2 Figure 1-2: South Fort Meade Facility Mineral Reserves .......................................................................................... 1-8 Figure 1-3: Four Corners Facility Mineral Reserves ................................................................................................. 1-9 Figure 1-4: Wingate Facility Mineral Reserves ....................................................................................................... 1-10 Figure 1-5: DeSoto Property Mineral Resources ..................................................................................................... 1-11 Figure 1-6: Pioneer Property Mineral Resources ..................................................................................................... 1-12 Figure 1-7: South Pasture Property Mineral Resources ........................................................................................... 1-13 Figure 3-1: Florida Phosphate Property Locations .................................................................................................... 3-2 Figure 3-2: South Fort Meade Facility Property Status and Location ....................................................................... 3-5 Figure 3-3: Four Corners Facility Property Status and Location ............................................................................... 3-6 Figure 3-4: Wingate Facility Property Status and Location ...................................................................................... 3-7 Figure 3-5: DeSoto Property Status and Location ..................................................................................................... 3-8 Figure 3-6: Pioneer Property Status and Location ..................................................................................................... 3-9 Figure 3-7: South Pasture Property Status and Location ......................................................................................... 3-10 Figure 4-1: South Fort Meade Facility Location and Accessibility ........................................................................... 4-2 Figure 4-2: Four Corners Facility Location and Accessibility ................................................................................... 4-4 Figure 4-3: Wingate Facility Location and Accessibility .......................................................................................... 4-6 Figure 4-4: DeSoto Property Location and Accessibility .......................................................................................... 4-8 Figure 4-5: Pioneer Property Location and Accessibility ........................................................................................ 4-10 Figure 4-6: South Pasture Facility Location and Accessibility ................................................................................ 4-12 Figure 6-1: Regional Geology ................................................................................................................................... 6-2 Figure 6-2: Local Stratigraphic Column .................................................................................................................... 6-3 Figure 6-3: South Fort Meade Geology Section ........................................................................................................ 6-5 Figure 6-4: Four Corners Bone Valley Geology Section ........................................................................................... 6-7 Figure 6-5: Four Corners Southern Extension Geology Section ............................................................................... 6-9 Figure 6-6: Wingate Geology Section ..................................................................................................................... 6-10 Figure 6-7: DeSoto Geology Section ....................................................................................................................... 6-12

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1003.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Florida Phosphate Mining Florida, USA Technical Report Summary Date: December 31, 2022 ix Figure 6-8: Pioneer Geology Section ....................................................................................................................... 6-13 Figure 6-9: South Pasture Geology Section ............................................................................................................. 6-15 Figure 7-1: South Fort Meade Facility Drill Collar Location Plan ............................................................................ 7-3 Figure 7-2: Four Corners Facility Drill Collar Location Plan.................................................................................... 7-5 Figure 7-3: Wingate Facility Drill Collar Location Plan ........................................................................................... 7-7 Figure 7-4: DeSoto Property Drill Collar Location Plan ........................................................................................... 7-9 Figure 7-5: Pioneer Property Drill Collar Location Plan ......................................................................................... 7-11 Figure 7-6: South Pasture Property Drill Collar Location Plan ............................................................................... 7-13 Figure 8-1: Core Sample Preparation Flow Sheet ..................................................................................................... 8-3 Figure 10-1: South Fort Meade Feed P2O5 Grade vs. Recovery% .......................................................................... 10-3 Figure 10-2: Four Corners Feed P2O5 Grade vs. Recovery% .................................................................................. 10-4 Figure 10-3: Wingate Feed P2O5 Grade vs. Recovery% .......................................................................................... 10-4 Figure 10-4: South Fort Meade Plant Recovery Control Chart ............................................................................... 10-5 Figure 10-5: Four Corners Plant Recovery Control Chart ....................................................................................... 10-5 Figure 10-6: Wingate Plant Recovery Control Chart ............................................................................................... 10-6 Figure 11-1: DeSoto Property Mineral Resources ................................................................................................... 11-9 Figure 11-2: Pioneer Property Mineral Resources ................................................................................................. 11-10 Figure 11-3: South Pasture Property Mineral Resources ....................................................................................... 11-11 Figure 12-1: South Fort Meade Facility Mineral Reserves ...................................................................................... 12-5 Figure 12-2: Four Corners Facility Mineral Reserves ............................................................................................. 12-6 Figure 12-3: Wingate Facility Mineral Reserves ..................................................................................................... 12-7 Figure 13-1: Dragline Mining Process ..................................................................................................................... 13-1 Figure 13-2: Dragline Operation ............................................................................................................................. 13-2 Figure 13-3: Dragline Dumping in Well .................................................................................................................. 13-3 Figure 13-4: Dredge Mining Process ....................................................................................................................... 13-4 Figure 13-5: Overburden Dredge ............................................................................................................................. 13-4 Figure 13-6: Matrix Dredge ..................................................................................................................................... 13-5 Figure 13-7: Dragline Walk Path Soil Penetration Testing and Piezometers .......................................................... 13-6 Figure 13-8: Pre-mining Dewatering ....................................................................................................................... 13-7 Figure 13-9: South Fort Meade Facility LOM Plan Sequence .............................................................................. 13-10 Figure 13-10: Four Corners Facility LOM Plan Sequence .................................................................................... 13-11 Figure 13-11: Wingate Facility LOM Plan Sequence ............................................................................................ 13-12 Figure 14-1: Phosphate Beneficiation Process Flowsheet ....................................................................................... 14-3 Figure 14-2: Matrix Clay Content vs. Maximum Feed ............................................................................................ 14-4 Figure 15-1: South Fort Meade Facility Major Roads and Logistics Infrastructure ................................................ 15-2 Figure 15-2: Four Corners Facility Major Roads and Logistics Infrastructure ........................................................ 15-4 Figure 15-3: Wingate Facility Major Roads and Logistics Infrastructure ............................................................... 15-6 Figure 15-4: South Fort Meade Facility Beneficiation Plant and Related Infrastructure......................................... 15-8 Figure 15-5: Four Corners Facility Beneficiation Plant and Related Infrastructure .............................................. 15-10 Figure 15-6: Wingate Facility Beneficiation Plant and Related Infrastructure ...................................................... 15-12 Figure 15-7: South Fort Meade Facility Clay Settling and Sand Tailings Locations ............................................ 15-14 Figure 15-8: Four Corners Facility Clay Settling and Sand Tailings Locations .................................................... 15-16 Figure 15-9: Wingate Facility Clay Settling and Sand Tailings Locations ............................................................ 15-18 Figure 17-1: Mine Process Flow Diagram ............................................................................................................... 17-6 Figure 19-1: Sensitivity Results on ITP vs GMA .................................................................................................... 19-4 Florida Phosphate Mining Florida, USA Technical Report Summary Date: December 31, 2022 x FORWARD LOOKING INFORMATION CAUTION All statements, other than statements of historical fact, appearing in this report constitute "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Statements regarding results depend on inputs that are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those presented in this Technical Summary Report (Report). Forward-looking statements may include words such as "anticipate", "believe", "could", "estimate", "expect", "intend", "may", "potential", "project" or "should", Information that is forward-looking includes, but is not limited to, the following:  Mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates.  Assumed commodity prices and exchange rates.  Proposed and scheduled mine production plan.  Projected mining and processing recovery rates.  Capital cost estimates and schedule.  Operating cost estimates.  Closure costs estimates and closure requirements assumptions.  Environmental, permitting and social risk assumptions. Additional risks to the forward-looking information include:  Changes to costs of production from what is assumed.  Unrecognized environmental risks.  Unanticipated reclamation expenses.  Unexpected variations in production tonnage, grade or recovery rates.  Adverse weather conditions and climate change.  Failure of plant, equipment or processes to operate as anticipated.  Accidents, labor disputes and other risks of the mining industry.  Changes to tax rates.  Other material risks and uncertainties reported from time to time in the Company's reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Date: December 31, 2022 1-1 1.0 Executive Summary 1.1 Introduction Florida phosphate mining consists of three active phosphate facilities (South Fort Meade, Four Corners and Wingate) and three exploration properties as defined by SEC Regulation S-K, Subpart 1300 (DeSoto, Pioneer and South Pasture), located in central Florida. Mining in central Florida started more than 130 years ago. The majority of mining currently takes place in Hardee County. Of the active mines, Four Corners and South Fort Meade are dragline mines and Wingate is a dredge mine. All of the exploration properties are planned to be dragline operations at the commencement of mining. A facility consists of an active mining area, mine office, an operating beneficiation plant and ancillary support facilities (e.g., pipelines, electric infrastructure, clay settling areas, etc.). The facilities are staffed with Mosaic personnel and contractor employees. Mining areas include areas of progressive reclamation and active mining. The 2022 Florida Phosphate Mining Technical Report Summary has been prepared by the Florida phosphate Qualified Persons and supports the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates for the year ending December 31, 2022. Mineral resources and mineral reserves are reported as a beneficiation plant product (phosphate rock) tonnage and P2O5 grade including a total primary impurities ratio (MER). The mineral resources and mineral reserves are reported in accordance with SEC Regulation S-K, Subpart 1300. 1.2 Property Locations The Florida phosphate facilities and three exploration properties are located in central Florida (Figure 1-1), in DeSoto, Hardee, Hillsborough, Manatee and Polk counties. Date: December 31, 2022 1-2 Figure 1-1: Florida Phosphate Mining Facility and Property Locations

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1004.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 1-3 1.3 Ownership and Status The Florida phosphate mining facilities and properties are owned by or have controlling interest granted to Mosaic Fertilizer, LLC (Mosaic Fertilizer), South Ft. Meade Land Management, Inc. (SFMLM) or South Ft. Meade Land Partnership, L.P. (SFMLP) each a direct or indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of The Mosaic Company. For the purposes of this Report, unless otherwise noted, The Mosaic Company, Mosaic Fertilizer, SFMLM and the SFMLP will each be referred to interchangeably as Mosaic, as the context requires. 1.4 Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights and Royalties Mosaic, through subsidiaries, owns or controls approximately 212,965 acres (86,184 hectares) of land in central Florida. A total of 167,823 acres (67,916 hectares) is owned fee simple and 19,035 acres (7,703 hectares) of mineral rights are owned. Mosaic owns approximately 192,027 acres (77,711 hectares) of surface rights in central Florida. All infrastructure including the beneficiation plant and Clay Settling Areas (CSA) are located on Mosaic-owned or controlled land. Mosaic-owned land not used for operations or operational support is either leased out for agricultural or commercial use or otherwise used by Mosaic for its own agricultural use. 1.5 Geology and Mineralization Phosphorite exists throughout the state of Florida with mineralization being nearly ubiquitous. There are, broadly speaking, two types of deposits within the state, hard rock and sedimentary. The entirety of Mosaic's mineral reserves and resources exist within sedimentary deposits. Economic phosphorite exists in a matrix of gravels, sands, silts and clays that are readily extractible. These economic deposits overlay a carbonate platform where phosphorite is absent. The bedrock and economic matrix are overlain by sands, clays and silts that are easily removed. Limitations of extraction are the ease of excavation, the capacity of the matrix to slurry, the grade of the phosphorite, gangue minerals, the depth of the matrix, and the overburden to be removed. Deposition of phosphorite occurred in the Miocene and Pliocene epochs. The depositional environment was shallow marine with sea levels of 300 ft. (100 m) or less. Cold phosphate rich waters were upwelled and mixed with warm surface waters creating vigorous biologic activity. Biological remains settled on the sea floor in regional anoxic zones. Phosphate subsequently substituted into calcium carbonate in the form of the mineral francolite. Accessory mineralization does occur, but it is of little economic consequence. The deposit underwent transport and rework through marine winnowing. Post-depositional rework is extensive and site factors such as hydrology and groundwater geochemistry influence grade and gangue mineralization. Gangue minerals are generally limestone, dolomitic limestone, iron concretions of varying sizes and competent clays that resist disaggregation by washing. Limestone, dolomite and iron concretions exist as distinct particles that are inseparable through conventional sizing. There is limited intracrystalline substitution of metals within francolite. Most of the gangue minerals are distinct particles. Mosaic's Florida phosphate mining currently consists of three producing facilities and three exploration properties. The geology across all the sites is a consistent sequence of sub-aerial and marine sediments. The upper most sediments are lacking in phosphates. The marine sediments and carbonate system that follow contains an economic concentration phosphate. The lower carbonate system is devoid of phosphate. At a site level, the geology is unique enough to warrant different ore management practices based on gangue clast size, composition and concentration. The Four Corners property geology consists of 21 to 41 ft. (6.4 to 12.5 m) of gray to white poorly graded quartz sand with varying abundance of reworked phosphate grains as waste overburden. The first economic zone is 13 to 26 ft. (4.0 to 7.9 m) of tan-gray to gray quartz sands, clays and silts with phosphate nodules and pellets present with phosphate grains and clasts predominate. There is an interbedded waste zone of 0 to 10 ft. (0.0 to 3.0 m) in thickness comprised of beds of blue to green barren sandy clays. Occasionally, there are beds of marine limestone and dolostones or marginally phosphatic sandy beds of dolomitic clasts and grains. The second economic zone is 0 to 15 ft. (0.0 to 4.6 m) of dark gray to dark gray-blue-green clays, silts with quartz sands with phosphate nodules and pellets present with phosphate grains Date: December 31, 2022 1-4 and clasts predominate. The phosphate grade ranges from 27 to 30% P2O5. The basal units are dark gray to black clays to phosphatic limestone rubble to beds of phosphatic limestone. The South Fort Meade property geology consists of 5 to 50 ft. (1.5 to 15.2 m) of gray to white poorly graded quartz sand with varying abundance of reworked phosphate grains. The economic zone is 0 to 50 ft. (0.0 to 15.2 m) thick, ranging in grade from 30 to 40% P2O5 and comprised gray to gray-blue clayey sands with lineation of red, brown and white. Phosphate nodules and pellets are the dominant constituent to gray to gray-blue quartz sands, clays, and phosphate grains and some nodules. The basal units are gray to gray-blue barren clays to phosphatic limestone rubble to beds of phosphatic limestone. The Wingate property geology consists of 35 to 49 ft. (10.7 to 14.9 m) of white to tan-gray poorly graded quartz sand to brown-gray to orange iron-cemented clayey sand hardpan to tan-gray to gray clayey sands with varying abundance of reworked phosphate grains. The economic zone is 19 to 37 ft. (5.8 to 11.3 m) thick, ranging in grade from 28 to 31% P2O5 and comprised of tan-gray to gray clayey sands with phosphate pellets and grains to gray to gray-blue quartz sands, clays, and phosphate grains and some nodules. The basal units are gray to gray-blue barren clays to phosphatic limestone rubble to beds of phosphatic limestone. The South Pasture property geology consists of 17 to 37 ft. (5.2 to 11.3 m) of mostly tan-gray to gray poorly graded quartz sand with varying abundance of reworked phosphate grains. The first economic zone is 13 to 27 ft. (4.0 to 8.2 m) of tan-gray to gray-blue quartz sands, clays and silts with phosphate nodules and pellets are present with phosphate grains and clasts predominate. There is an interbedded waste zone of 0 to 13 ft. (0 to 4.0 m) in thickness comprised of beds of blue to green barren sandy clays. Occasionally beds of marine limestone and dolostones or marginally phosphatic sandy beds of dolomitic clasts and grains. The second economic zone is 0 to 14 ft. (0.0 to 4.3 m) of dark gray to dark gray-blue-green clays, silts with quartz sands with phosphate nodules and pellets present with phosphate grains and clasts predominate. The phosphate grade ranges from 29 to 33% P2O5. The basal units are dark gray to black clays to phosphatic limestone rubble to beds of phosphatic limestone. The DeSoto property geology consists of 18 to 32 ft. (5.5 to 9.8 m) of gray to white poorly graded quartz sand with varying abundance of reworked phosphate grains. The economic zone is 11 to 28 ft. (3.4 to 8.5 m) thick, ranging in grade from 29 to 35% P2O5 and comprised of tan-gray to gray clay-rich sands with phosphate pellets and grains. The basal units are gray to gray-blue barren clays to phosphatic limestone rubble to beds of phosphatic limestone. The Pioneer property geology consists of 21 to 45 ft. (6.4 to 13.7 m) of gray to tan poorly graded quartz sand with varying abundance of reworked phosphate grains. The economic zone is 14 to 38 ft. (4.3 to 11.6 m) thick, ranging in grade from 26 to 33% P2O5 and comprised of tan-gray to gray to gray-blue quartz sands, silts and clays with phosphate pellets and grains. The basal units are gray-green to dark gray barren clays to phosphatic limestone rubble to beds of phosphatic limestone. 1.6 Mineral Resource Estimates The mineral resource estimates for Mosaic's holdings are listed in Table 1-1. Mineral resources are reported exclusive of the mineral reserves. Figures 1-2 to 1-7 show the distribution of the mineral resources and mineral reserves for the Florida phosphate mining facilities and exploration properties. Date: December 31, 2022 1-5 Table 1-1: 2022 Mineral Resources Location Measured Mineral Resources Indicated Mineral Resources Measured + Indicated Mineral Resources Inferred Mineral Resources Tons (M) Tonnes (M) %P2O5 MER Tons (M) Tonnes (M) %P2O5 MER Tons (M) Tonnes (M) %P2O5 MER Tons (M) Tonnes (M) %P2O5 MER DeSoto Property 0 0 0.0 0.0 156 142 30.5 10.7 156 142 30.5 10.7 67 61 30 10 Pioneer Property 19 17 31.1 9.3 136 123 30.4 10.4 154 140 30.5 10.3 21 19 30 10 South Pasture Property 94 85 29.7 10.4 165 150 29.4 10.9 259 235 29.5 10.7 4 3 30 10 Total 113 102 30.0 10.2 457 415 30.1 10.7 569 517 30.0 10.6 92 83 30 10 Notes to accompany mineral resource table: 1. Mineral resource estimates were prepared by QP Kevin Farmer, a Mosaic employee. 2. Mineral resources are reported as a beneficiation plant product (phosphate rock) tonnage and P2O5 grade including a total primary impurities ratio (MER). 3. Mineral resources have an effective date of December 31, 2022. 4. Mineral resources are reported exclusive of those mineral resources that have been converted to mineral reserves. 5. Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. 6. Mineral resources are not mineral reserves and do not meet the threshold for mineral reserve modifying factors, such as estimated economic viability, that would allow for conversion to mineral reserves. There is no certainty that any part of the mineral resources estimated will be converted into mineral reserves. 7. Mineral resources assume dragline mining at all sites except Wingate Mine where dredging is assumed. 8. Mineral resources amenable to a dragline mining method are contained within a conceptual mine pit design using the same technical parameters as used for mineral reserves. 9. The cut-offs used to estimate mineral resources by site include, the minimum beneficiation plant concentrate BPL (%P2O5), minimum pebble BPL (%P2O5), maximum pebble magnesium oxide concentration and a maximum clay content cut-off for a logged matrix layer and the composite matrix volume (Section 11.2). 10. Impurities are reported as MER ((Fe + Al + Mg)/P2O5 x 100). 11. Tonnage estimates are in US Customary and metric units and are rounded to the nearest million tonnes. 12. Rounding as required by reporting guidelines may result in apparent summation differences. 13. A commodity price of US$102.72/tonne of phosphate rock was used to assess prospects for economic extraction but is not used for cut-off purposes. Date: December 31, 2022 1-6 1.7 Mineral Reserve Estimates The mineral reserve estimates for Mosaic's holdings are listed in Table 1-2. Figures 1-2 to 1-7 show the distribution of the mineral resources and mineral reserves for the mining facilities and properties. Mineral reserves are sub-divided into two confidence categories in Regulation S-K 1300, proven and probable.

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1005.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 1-7 Table 1-2: 2022 Mineral Reserves Location Proven Mineral Reserves Probable Mineral Reserves Total Mineral Reserves Tons (M) Tonnes (M) %P2O5 MER Tons (M) Tonnes (M) % P2O5 MER Tons (M) Tonnes (M) % P2O5 MER South Fort Meade Facility 8 7 27.0 10.9 34 31 26.4 7.3 42 38 26.5 8.04 Four Corners Facility 41 37 28.1 10.0 34 30 27.6 10.7 74 67 27.9 10.3 Wingate Facility 13 11 28.3 8.6 9 8 27.8 10.2 22 20 28.1 9.3 Total 61 56 28.0 9.8 77 70 27.1 9.4 138 126 27.5 9.6 Notes to accompany mineral reserves table: 1. Mineral reserve estimates were prepared by QP Kevin Farmer, a Mosaic employee. 2. Mineral reserves have an effective date of December 31, 2022. 3. Mineral reserves are based on measured and indicated mineral resources only. 4. Mineral reserves are reported as a beneficiation plant product (phosphate rock) tonnage and P2O5 grade including a total primary impurities ratio (MER). 5. South Fort Meade and Four Corners mineral reserves are mined by a dragline mining method. The Wingate mineral reserves are mined by dredge mining. 6. Cut-off based on productivity factors per site have been applied to estimate mineral reserves (Section 12.2). 7. Impurities are reported as MER ((Fe + Al + Mg)/P2O5 x 100). 8. Mine designs are used to constrain mineral reserves within mineable pit shapes. 9. Only after a positive economic test and inclusion in the Life of Mine Plan are the mineral reserve estimates considered and disclosed as mineral reserves. 10. Tonnage estimates are in US Customary and metric units and are rounded to the nearest million tonnes. 11. Rounding as required by reporting guidelines may result in apparent summation differences. 12. A commodity price of US$102.72/tonne of phosphate rock was used to assess the economic viability of the mineral reserves in the LOM. Date: December 31, 2022 1-8 Figure 1-2: South Fort Meade Facility Mineral Reserves Date: December 31, 2022 1-9 Figure 1-3: Four Corners Facility Mineral Reserves Date: December 31, 2022 1-10 Figure 1-4: Wingate Facility Mineral Reserves

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1006.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 1-11 Figure 1-5: DeSoto Property Mineral Resources Date: December 31, 2022 1-12 Figure 1-6: Pioneer Property Mineral Resources Date: December 31, 2022 1-13 Figure 1-7: South Pasture Property Mineral Resources Date: December 31, 2022 1-14 1.8 Mining Methods Mosaic's mining operations in central Florida extract phosphate using surface mining techniques. The active mines utilize either electric walking draglines or dredges to remove the overburden and mine the phosphate ore (matrix). The matrix is hydraulically transported via multiple series, centrifugal pumping systems to the beneficiation plant. Pre-mining development follows the issuance of regulatory permits. This involves ditch and berms for stormwater control, groundwater draw down mitigation where applicable, land clearing, installation of infrastructure and pre-mining dewatering (only for dragline mining). Development of the mine plan is based on several factors, including geological data, equipment, property boundaries, geotechnical considerations, clay impoundment, reclamation schedule, production (volume and quality) demands, permits (local, state and federal) and agreements. Production is monitored through dragline/dredge monitoring systems, mass-flow instrumentation on slurry pumping systems and pit surveys. In addition to draglines and dredges, heavy mobile equipment is used to support mining activities. While each mine is staffed with Mosaic personnel to handle production and maintenance, contractors are used on an as needed-basis. 1.9 Recovery Methods Phosphate matrix mined at the three active facilities is processed through onsite beneficiation plants. The principal production components of Florida beneficiation plants consist of a washer, sizing and flotation plant. The washer separates >1.0 mm phosphate product and the <1.0 mm slurry of liberated clay, sand and phosphate particles. The clay is removed with hydrocyclones and pumped to clay settling areas while the >0.1 mm sand and phosphate move on to the Sizing section. The >0.1 mm sand and phosphate is separated into different size fractions using hydrosizers. An upward flow of water is injected into the hydrosizer that force the fine particles to rise and overflow the sizer, while the coarse particles gently fall and flow out the sizer's underflow. The segregated fine and coarse particles are then sent to the Flotation Plant so the phosphate can be separated from the sand. The two-step Crago flotation process (rougher flotation and cleaning flotation) is next utilized to separate phosphate from the sand. In the rougher flotation process, the phosphate mineral is recovered using flotation machines by adding fatty acid, oil, soda ash and sodium silicate. To increase the recovered rougher phosphate grade, a second cleaning flotation process is used to remove the residual sand using amine. 1.10 Infrastructure The three Florida phosphate mining facilities are situated in rural central Florida, and in close proximity to populated areas. They are located southeast of Tampa in Hillsborough, Polk, Hardee and Manatee Counties. The sites are located in agricultural zones with associated population centers and easy access to multiple transportation hubs in central Florida. The phosphate facilities have the infrastructure in place to meet the current production plans and long-range production goals. The current infrastructure includes major roads and highway access, railway support from CSX and supplied electricity by Duke Energy, Tampa Electric Company (TECO), Peace River Electric Cooperative, Inc. (PRECO), Florida Power and Mosaic cogeneration in associated distribution areas. Water supply is from Mosaic-owned deep wells and recycle sources. Current clay and tailings management areas footprint is expected to meet current demands with additional capacity planned to meet the maximum volume and deposition rates in the Life of Mine (LOM) plan, which covers the period between 2023 and 2035. Additional infrastructure may be added to increase reliability of the existing product lines or add some additional production flexibility. The assets currently in place are maintained through a robust workflow process that focuses on proactive inspections and preventative maintenance while trying to minimize reactive maintenance.

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1007.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 1-15 The sites are expected to continue to operate effectively while continuing to maintain the built infrastructure and renewing the long-term agreements in place for the sites' water, electricity and logistics needs. The long-term clay and sand tailings management area plan is in place to support the production at the levels indicated in the LOM plan. A focus on reliability centered maintenance will extend the life of the majority of assets to align with the LOM plan. It is expected that some infrastructure will need to be replaced as it reaches end of life. This has been factored into the capital cost requirements. 1.11 Markets and Contracts The open pit mining and beneficiation practices at the Florida mines result in a phosphate rock product with a grade of ~62% BPL (~28.5% P2O5) and is amendable as feedstock for phosphoric acid (and downstream high-analysis phosphate end-products). The phosphate rock concentrate is consumed internally at downstream phosphate production facilities to make finished products including phosphate fertilizers and animal feed phosphates. There is no quoted benchmark for phosphate rock in Florida (nor elsewhere in the United States). The CRU International Limited (CRU) forecast finished product price was utilized as the basis to calculate a gross margin available to fund the upstream mining and processing of phosphate rock. The gross margin available for Florida Phosphate mining was calculated as $135 per tonne. The global market for phosphate rock is estimated to be approximately 205 M tonnes in 2022 and has grown at a compound annual growth rate of around 2% over the past two decades, though growth has slowed to circa 1% per annum over the past several years. Going forward, global phosphate rock demand growth is expected to continue to grow, with Mosaic and independent analysts typically projecting a growth rate of 1-2% per annum. This growth ensures sufficient market demand for continued production at Mosaic's Florida phosphate mines. 1.12 Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations All Florida phosphate mining facilities and exploration properties operate or will operate pursuant to federal, state and local environmental regulations. Accordingly, permits, licenses and approvals are obtained specific to each site, based on project specific requirements. Mosaic also has routine interactions with government officials and agencies related to agency inspections, permitting and other environmental matters. The information as supplied regarding the management of all environmental aspects, permitting and social considerations at Mosaic facilities is guided by Mosaic's Environmental, Health and Safety Policy, management system of programs and procedures, and current permit, legal and regulatory requirements. 1.13 Capital Cost and Operating Cost Estimates Capital for the Four Corners, South Fort Meade and Wingate facilities' 2023 LOM plan (2023 to 2035) and 2022 mineral reserves is estimated at US$1.62 B. The capital cost estimate includes mine, beneficiation plant, loading, maintenance, mobile equipment, land management and regulatory capital. Operating costs for the Four Corners, South Fort Meade and Wingate facilities 2023 LOM plan (2023 to 2035) and 2022 mineral reserves is estimated at US$5.29 B. This includes mining cash costs (mining, beneficiation plant, maintenance and direct overhead costs), other operating costs (central and functional overhead allocated costs) and royalties and other government levies or interests including severance taxes, royalties, and excluding income taxes. The operating cost forecasts are based on a combination of historical performance and calculations from first principles to take account variation in production rates and expected process improvements. 1.14 Economic Analysis The financial models that support the mineral reserve and mineral resource declarations are standalone models that calculate annual cash flows based on scheduled ore production, assumed processing recoveries, commodity sale prices, projected operating and capital costs and estimated taxes along with anticipated closure and reclamation costs. Date: December 31, 2022 1-16 The net present value analysis of the 2023 LOM plan mineral reserves indicates that there is significant economic value associated with mining the mineral reserves at the Four Corners, South Fort Meade and Wingate facilities, given the economic assumptions and operating parameters considered. By setting up the after-tax net present value to US$0, utilizing a discount rate of 9.0%, the required internal transfer price of rock is $68/tonne, which is the minimum price needed to achieve a return equal to cost of capital (discount rate). The price calculated is well below the gross margin available for rock of $135/tonne. A sensitivity analysis of the financial model by varying commodity price, total operating cost and total capital cost indicates that the financial results for the Four Corners, South Fort Meade and Wingate facilities are robust and considered low risk. The economic analysis of the DeSoto, Pioneer and South Pasture properties mineral resources indicates that there is positive economic value associated with the possible mining of the mineral resources based on the reasonable economic and operating assumptions considered. The economic assessments reflect a solid margin between LOM forecast gross margin available and internal transfer price and support reasonable prospects of economic extraction and the reporting of the mineral resources. 1.15 Interpretations and Conclusions Under the assumptions and technical data outlined in this Technical Report Summary, the Florida phosphate mining 2023 LOM plan utilizing South Fort Meade, Four Corners and Wingate facilities mineral reserves only, shows that the minimum price needed inferred by setting to USD$0 the net present value of after-tax cash flow discounted to cost of capital, is well below the current margin available for rock. The economic assessment of the DeSoto, Pioneer and South Pasture properties' mineral resources supports reasonable prospects of economic extraction and the reporting of the mineral resources. These economic assessments support the 2022 SEC Regulation S-K, Subpart 1300 disclosure of the Florida phosphate mining mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates. 1.16 Recommendations The following recommendations for additional work are focused on improving and maintaining important mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation processes.  Mosaic will continue to investigate and consider new innovations in phosphate mining and processing technology.  A thorough production reconciliation process will be considered to further improve and support the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates. Sample and measuring points will be revisited and assessed.  The current exploration plan will be further refined to better define future opportunities for mineral resource and mineral reserve expansion.  Mosaic will consider increasing the drilling density in the indicated and inferred mineral resource areas.  Investigate new technology to improve the efficiency of core sample processing and sample tracking.  A more robust modeling software for mineral resource estimates will be considered.  Investigate the use of optimization processes for improving mineral resource limits.  The process of acquiring additional land adjacent to the operating mines should continue as this adds mineral resources and mineral reserves to the LOM plan.  More samplers at the beneficiation plants would help monitor the flotation performance for each circuit.  Completion of plant step tests are recommended to evaluate changes in the minerology or verify correct setpoints when draglines have moved to a new area. Date: December 31, 2022 2-1 2.0 Introduction 2.1 Registrant The 2022 Florida Phosphate Mining Technical Report Summary has been prepared by the phosphate Qualified Persons for The Mosaic Company headquartered in Tampa, Florida, USA. 2.2 Purpose and Terms of Reference The Report was prepared to support the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates for the year ending December 31, 2022. The mineral resources and mineral reserves are reported in accordance with SEC Regulation S-K, Subpart 1300. For the purposes of this Report, unless otherwise noted, The Mosaic Company will be referred to as Mosaic. Florida phosphate mining includes and refers to three active facilities (South Fort Meade, Four Corners and Wingate) and their respective beneficiation plants, and three exploration properties (DeSoto, Pioneer and South Pasture). Where practicable, measurement units used are US Customary units with metric unit conversions included. US Customary units are used in this Report when discussing the mining and processing facilities, including equipment capacities, pumping rates and equipment capacities. Some analytical results are also reported using US Customary units. 2.3 Abbreviations and Units Table 2-1: List of Units and Abbreviations B billion(s) BPL Bone Phosphate of Lime °C degree Celsius cm centimeter CSA clay settling areas CSX CSX Corporation EA Environmental Assessment E/I Electrical & Instrumentation EIS Environmental Impact Statement EMP Environmental Management Plan EPA Environmental Protection Agency °F degree Fahrenheit Fcast. forecast ft. foot, feet FOB Freight On Board gal US gallon GIS Geographical Information System GMA Gross Margin Available US gpm US gallon per minute hp Horsepower HDPE High-density polyethylene IP Intermediate pebble ISA Initial Settling Area ITP Internal Transfer Price IWUP Integrated water use permit km kilometer(s) kV kilovolt kW kilowatt lbs. pound(s) LiDAR Light Detection and Ranging LOM Life of Mine m meters M million(s) MER Minor Element Ratio NPV net present value P2O5 Phosphorus pentoxide P. Eng. Professional Engineer P. Geo. Professional Geoscientist PLS Product Loading System psi pounds per square inch QA Quality assurance QC Quality control QP Qualified Person(s) SAP Enterprise software to manage business operations and customer relations SEC United States Securities and Exchange Commission SGS Inspection, verification, testing and certification company SWFWMD Southwest Florida Water Management District SPTs Soil penetration tests Date: December 31, 2022 2-2 tonnes metric tonnes (2,204 lbs.) tons US Customary short tons (2,000 lbs.) tons/hour short tons per hour (US) tons/year tons per year (US) US$ United States dollar(s) USGS United States Geological Survey V volt(s) 2.4 Qualified Persons (QP) Table 2-2 outlines the people that served as Qualified Persons (QPs) for the Florida Phosphate Mining Technical Report Summary as defined in SEC Reg. S-K, Subpart 1300. Table 2-2: Qualified Persons QP Name Company Qualification Position/Title Site Visit / Inspection Dates Section of Responsibility Kevin Farmer Mosaic Company SME Registered Member #4207068 Superintendent Mine Planning Full time Florida Phosphate employee 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12 Gonglun Chen Mosaic Company Ph.D., Professional Engineer Florida #73937 Engineer Advisor Full time Florida Phosphate employee 10, 14 Tyler Wright Mosaic Company Professional Engineer Florida #78507 Superintendent of Production Full time Florida Phosphate employee 15 Brian Ball Mosaic Company Professional Engineer Florida License #75165 Director, Mine Strategy Full time Florida Phosphate employee 13, 16, 18, 19 Bethany Niec Mosaic Company Professional Engineer Florida License #68437 Senior Manager, Environmental Full time Florida Phosphate employee 17.1, 17.2, 17.3, 17.8, 17.9 Scott Wuitschick Mosaic Company Professional Engineer Florida License #54648 Director Geotech Ops, Water Management, Idle Plants Full time Florida Phosphate employee 17.4, 17.5, 17.6, 17.7 2.5 Effective Dates There are a number of effective dates:  Date of the mineral resource estimates: December 31, 2022.  Date of the mineral reserve estimates: December 31, 2022.  Date of supply of the most recent information on mineral tenure and permitting: December 2022.  Date of capital estimation: September 2022.  Date of operating cost estimation: September 2022.  Date of reclamation cost estimate: September 2022.  Date of economic analysis: December 31, 2022. The overall effective date of the Report is taken to be the date of the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates and is December 31, 2022.

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1008.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 2-3 2.6 Information Sources and References The report listed in Table 2-3 and Section 24.0 (References) of this Report was used to support the preparation of this Report. Date: December 31, 2022 2-4 Table 2-3: Reliance on Other Experts Expert Title Topic Supporting Section Date Received Burns & McDonnell Engineering Co. Site Closure Plan South Fort Meade Facility Site Closure Plan 17 August 8, 2021 2.7 Previous Technical Report Summaries A previous Technical Report Summary for Florida phosphate mining was submitted effective December 31, 2021. Date: December 31, 2022 3-1 3.0 Property Description 3.1 Introduction Mosaic's three phosphate facilities and three exploration properties are located in central Florida (Figure 3-1) in DeSoto, Hardee, Hillsborough, Manatee and Polk counties. Even though property acquisition is an ongoing activity, most of the property currently being mined or planned for future mining has been in industry ownership for over 50 years. The South Fort Meade Facility is located in Polk and Hardee counties. Most of the 41,524 acres (16,804 hectares) of property associated with this mine straddle the county line along County Line Road beginning 1.3 miles (2 km) east of the City of Bowling Green and continuing another 5 miles (8 km). This facility has been in operation since 1995 (Figure 3-2). The Four Corners Facility, as the name implies, is in and around the intersection of four counties (Hardee, Hillsborough, Manatee and Polk). The 54,671 acres (22,124 hectares) of property associated with this mine exist in southeast Hillsborough County, northeast Manatee County, northwest Hardee County and southwest Polk County (Figure 3-3). The Wingate Facility is wholly-located in eastern Manatee County. Most of the 8,761 acres (3,545 hectares) of property associated with this mine are west of Duette Road and north of State Road 64. There is a portion of this property that exists on the east side of Duette Road that begins approximately 3 miles (4.8 km) north of State Road 64 (Figure 3-4). This facility has been in operation off and on since 1981. The South Pasture property is wholly-located in northwest Hardee County. The 38,273 acres (15,671 hectares) of property associated with this mine, occur along a 10 mile (16 km) stretch of State Road 64 and a seven mile stretch along Country Road 663. All parcels are bisected by County Road 663, State Road 62, State Road 64 and several local roads (Figure 3-7). The mining and beneficiation activities at this location have been idled. The DeSoto property is located in northwest DeSoto County and southeast Manatee County. The 43,064 acres (17,427 hectares) of property associated with this future mine site is bisected by State Road 70 and State Road 72 running east and west and the county line running north and south. A portion of the DeSoto property is owned fee simple and the mining interests on the remaining portion are secured by mineral rights (Figure 3-5). The Pioneer property is located wholly in northwest Hardee County south of State Road 64. The 26,017 acres (10,529 hectares) of property associated with this future mine site is bisected by County Road 663 running north and south. Several local roads (Murphy, Bridges, Bennett and Post Plant) criss-cross this parcel (Figure 3-6). Date: December 31, 2022 3-2 Figure 3-1: Florida Phosphate Property Locations

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1009.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 3-3 3.2 Properties and Title 3.2.1 Mineral Title The Florida phosphate mining facilities and properties are owned by or have controlling interest granted to Mosaic Fertilizer, LLC (Mosaic Fertilizer), South Ft. Meade Land Management, Inc. (SFMLM) or the South Fort Meade Land Partnership (SFMLP) all of which are wholly owned subsidiaries of The Mosaic Company. In Florida, the Public Land Survey System is the method used to divide Florida into one-square-mile sections for land grid purposes. Township lines are established six miles apart from south to north and range lines are established 6 miles (9.6 km) apart east to west starting at the Tallahassee Meridian located in Leon County, Florida. This frames a 6 mile (9.6 km) by 6 mile (9.6 km) township grid, containing 36 one square mile (approximately 640 acre) sections. Sections can be further subdivided into fractions (i.e., half and quarter) of parcels and land described as such are called fractional descriptions. A parcel of land may also be described by metes and bounds but this description is tied to a certified section corner recorded in the Florida Division of State Lands. In Florida, each land parcel is assigned a parcel ID number used for appraisal and taxing. Each county in Florida adopts its own numerical system for these parcel IDs. Each parcel boundary is based on the legal description (metes and bounds and/or fractional) in the property deed that is recorded in county's Clerk of Courts official records. Any title encumbrances, amendments, and/or conveyances are to be recorded in said Clerk's office under this parcel number. This information is accessible in digital or hard copy form from each respective County Clerk's office to anyone that is interested. Requests for title examination are made to a private title company or attorney that researches these records and issues a report on their findings. For many parcels, the subsurface mineral rights are not severed from surface rights. Mosaic either owns or has controlling interest in the mineral rights to the current and future facilities. Table 3-1 summarizes the Florida phosphate mining property status and acreages. Table 3-2 summarizes the land owned by Mosaic comprising Mosaic Florida phosphate mining. Figures 3-2, 3-3, 3-4, 3-5, 3-6 and 3-7 show the location and distribution of the property status for the three facilities and three exploration properties. Within the total acreage owned by Mosaic, SFMLM or SFMLP are parcels of land with less than 100% of the mineral interest. These entities own the necessary mineral interests to mine the area shown. Date: December 31, 2022 3-4 Table 3-1: Florida Phosphate Properties Status and Acreages Location Status (Acres) Status (Hectares) Fee Simple Mineral Rights Mining Agreement Lease Total Fee Simple Mineral Rights Mining Agreement Lease Total South Fort Meade Facility 15,333 92 25,528 571 41,524 6,205 37 10,331 231 16,804 Four Corners Facility 54,671 54,671 22,125 22,125 Wingate Facility 8,761 8,761 3,545 3,545 DeSoto Property 24,113 18,943 8 43,064 9,758 7,666 3 17,427 Pioneer Property 26,017 26,017 10,529 10,529 South Pasture Property 38,928 38,928 15,754 15,754 Total 167,823 19,035 25,536 571 212,965 67,916 7,703 10,334 231 86,184 Table 3-2: Land Ownership Property Acreage Acres Hectares South Fort Meade Facility 40,953 16,573 Four Corners Facility 54,671 22,125 Wingate Facility 8,761 3,545 DeSoto Property 43,064 17,427 Pioneer Property 26,017 10,529 South Pasture Property 38,928 15,754 Total 212,394 85,953 Date: December 31, 2022 3-5 Figure 3-2: South Fort Meade Facility Property Status and Location Date: December 31, 2022 3-6 Figure 3-3: Four Corners Facility Property Status and Location

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1010.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 3-7 Figure 3-4: Wingate Facility Property Status and Location Date: December 31, 2022 3-8 Figure 3-5: DeSoto Property Status and Location Date: December 31, 2022 3-9 Figure 3-6: Pioneer Property Status and Location Date: December 31, 2022 3-10 Figure 3-7: South Pasture Property Status and Location

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1011.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 3-11 3.2.2 Surface Rights In Florida, surface rights are the same ownership and title as subsurface mineral rights unless they are severed. In other words, the mineral interest must be severed from the surface rights for there to be a difference. The severance must be documented in the public records as discussed in Section 3.2.1. In cases where Mosaic owns the surface rights, it is generally an indication that surface and mineral rights have not been severed. There are instances on Mosaic-controlled holdings where Mosaic does not own the surface rights but does own the mineral rights. Mineral and surface rights are joined at the Four Corners, Wingate, Pioneer and South Pasture Properties. Portions of the DeSoto Property and South Fort Meade Facility have the surface and mineral interests severed. Table 3-3 outlines the surface rights ownership by Mosaic. Table 3-3: Property Surface Rights Property Surface Rights Acreage Acres Hectares South Fort Meade Facility 39,537 16,000 Four Corners Facility 54,671 22,125 Wingate Facility 8,761 3,545 DeSoto Property 24,113 9,758 Pioneer Property 26,017 10,529 South Pasture Property 38,928 15,754 Total 192,027 77,711 3.2.3 Water Rights The integrated water use permit (IWUP) issued by the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) in 2012 authorizes the withdrawal of groundwater from underground aquifers through permitted wells to provide potable and production-water supplies in support of mining and other operations. The IWUP addresses all of Mosaic's active mining operations. A separate water use permit (WUP) was issued by SWFWMD for the South Pasture property in 2017. The IWUP and the South Pasture WUP also regulate mine dewatering to avoid adverse impacts to wetlands and offsite properties. Both the IWUP and the WUP are 20-year permits expiring in 2032 and 2037, respectively. 3.2.4 Royalties There are no current royalty obligations for Florida phosphate mining. 3.3 Encumbrances There are no significant environmental permitting encumbrances (existing or anticipated in the future) associated with the Florida phosphate mining facilities and exploration properties. Mosaic does not anticipate any future encumbrances based on current known regulations and existing permitting processes. There are no material outstanding violations and fines. 3.4 Significant Factors and Risks That May Affect Access, Title or Work Programs As discussed, mineral rights or surface rights are necessary to conduct mining in Florida. Once Mosaic owns or controls the mineral or surface rights, the risks related to title and access are mitigated. The risk that does exist is if there is an encumbrance or interest in the property that was not made a part of the public records and Mosaic is not aware of it. To mitigate that risk, title insurance is obtained for parcels that are acquired. However, there may be some legacy properties that have not gone through a title examination. Date: December 31, 2022 4-1 4.0 Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography 4.1 Physiography 4.1.1 Topography, Elevation and Vegetation Much of the state of Florida is low-lying and fairly level, however there are some places that feature vistas that rise 50 to 100 ft. (15 to 30 m) above sea level. Central and North Florida, 25 miles (40 km) or more away from the coastline, feature rolling hills with elevations ranging from 100 to 250 ft. (30 to 76 m). Much of Florida has an elevation of less than 12 ft. (3.7 m). Due to the vast amounts of limestone bedrock that Florida sits above, water is allowed to move relatively freely beneath dry land and to rise up to the surface. 4.2 Accessibility 4.2.1 South Fort Meade Facility Primary access to the South Fort Meade Facility is through the main entrance road off County Line Road (Figure 4-1). The mining areas are accessed by County Line Rd, CR 657, CR 664A, and CR 664B. The South Fort Meade entrance is a paved road directly off County Line Road 664 and is the primary entrance to the beneficiation plant area including offices, maintenance shops and warehouse. Due to the large footprint, the mining areas have multiple access points. A system of unpaved dirt roads extends from these access points and are maintained regularly with a fleet of motor graders. South Fort Meade is serviced by 4.4 miles (6.4 km) of internal railroad track that connects into the CSX rail network. Date: December 31, 2022 4-2 Figure 4-1: South Fort Meade Facility Location and Accessibility Date: December 31, 2022 4-3 4.2.2 Four Corners Facility Primary access to the Four Corners Plant is through the Four Corners Mine Road entrance road off SR37 in Hillsborough County (Figure 4-2). The mining areas are accessed by SR37, SR39, SR62, Taylor-Gill Rd. and SR674. Four Corners Mine Road is a paved road directly off Florida State Road 37 and is the primary entrance to the beneficiation plant area including offices, maintenance shops and warehouse. This access point is monitored with a security guard gate and manned 24/7. Due to the large footprint, the mining areas have multiple access points. A system of unpaved dirt roads extends from these access points through infrastructure corridors allow personnel to access production equipment, water storage areas and waste disposal areas. Higher volume main corridor roads are capped in rock and maintained regularly with motor graders.

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1012.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 4-4 Figure 4-2: Four Corners Facility Location and Accessibility Date: December 31, 2022 4-5 4.2.3 Wingate Facility Primary access to the Wingate Plant is through the Nu-Gulf Mine Road entrance off Duette Road in Manatee County (Figure 4-3). The mining areas are accessed from the main entrance road. Nu-Gulf Mine Road is a paved road directly off Duette Road and is the primary entrance to the beneficiation plant area including offices, maintenance shops and warehouse. This access point is monitored with a security guard gate and manned during day shift hours on weekdays, Monday through Friday. Mine areas are accessed from the entrance road and a system of unpaved dirt roads extending from these access points through infrastructure corridors allow personnel to access production equipment, water storage areas and waste disposal areas. Higher volume main corridor roads are capped in rock and maintained regularly with motor graders. Date: December 31, 2022 4-6 Figure 4-3: Wingate Facility Location and Accessibility Date: December 31, 2022 4-7 4.2.4 DeSoto Property The DeSoto property is located just west of Arcadia, Florida with primary access via NW Pine Level Street and/or SR 70 and SR 72 in DeSoto County (Figure 4-4).

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1013.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 4-8 Figure 4-4: DeSoto Property Location and Accessibility Date: December 31, 2022 4-9 4.2.5 Pioneer Property Primary access to the Pioneer property is expected to be from the South Pasture property corridors (Figure 4-5). The area can also be accessed from SR64 in Hardee County. Date: December 31, 2022 4-10 Figure 4-5: Pioneer Property Location and Accessibility Date: December 31, 2022 4-11 4.2.6 South Pasture Property The South Pasture Mine View Road off SR 62 is the main entrance road to the beneficiation plant, including offices, maintenance shops and warehouse (Figure 4-6).

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1014.jpg)

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1015.jpg)

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1016.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 6-2 Figure 6-1: Regional Geology Date: December 31, 2022 6-3 On a regional basis, deposits consist of four zones: overburden generally 5 to 50 ft. (1.5 to 15.2 m) thick, matrix generally 3 to 30 ft. (1.0 to 9.1 m) thick, bed clay and the basal bedrock. The overburden is comprised predominantly of soil, clay and sand, and while it may contain minor amounts of phosphate- bearing material, this cannot be economically recovered. The matrix (that is, the ore) consists primarily of the mineral fluorapatite, silica sand and clay minerals. The +1 mm size fraction, after washing to remove clay, is termed "washer rock" or "pebble". The 150 mesh x 1 mm size fraction is processed by cyclones and froth flotation, with the resulting concentrates being the "concentrate". The -150 mesh fraction is a phosphatic clay and can contain as much as one-third of the total phosphate present in the matrix. This material cannot be recovered by beneficiation and is discarded as waste. The bed clay that lies beneath the matrix is visibly different from the matrix. It may contain insignificant phosphate values and limestone boulders. The bedrock that lies beneath the bed clay is limestone or dolomitic limestone. 6.3 Local Geology The Central Florida Phosphate District (Central District), in which the Mosaic phosphate operations and projects are located is subdivided into two portions, the Land Pebble District on the north and the South Florida Extension on the south. Most of the original phosphate in Florida was deposited in rocks of the Hawthorn Group of Middle Miocene epoch. These rocks were subsequently reworked, concentrated and enriched, and the contained phosphate ultimately redeposited in the Bone Valley Member of the Peace River Formation in the upper part of the Hawthorn Group. The local stratigraphic relationship of these units is shown in Figure 6-2. The potentially mineable portion of the Central District encompasses an area approximately 80 miles (129 km) in length in a north-south direction and approximately 40 miles (64 km) in width. Q ua te rn ar y P er io d Recent Epoch Stream terraces and bars Mostly gray to white poorly graded quartz sand with varying abundance of reworked phosphate grains. Thickness 0 to 50 ft. (0.0 to 15.2 m). W as te Pleistocene Epoch Pleistocene Epoch Deposits Brown to gray quartz sands with scattered thin lenses of blue-gray to green-gray clay and occasional lentils of freshwater limestone. Thickness 0 to 20 ft. (0.0 to 6.1 m). Pliocene Epoch Bone Valley Member Peace River Formation Gray-blue with lineation of red, brown and white. Phosphate nodules and pellets are the dominant constituent. Quartz sands and clays may be abundant in places. Fossiliferous with terrestrial and marine vertebrates. Thickness 18 to 30 ft. (5.5 to 9.1 m). Ph os ph at ic T er ti ar y P er io d Miocene Epoch upper lower Undifferentiated Peace River Formation Gray to gray-blue quartz sands, clays and phosphate grains and some nodules. Weathered residuum exists frequently near contact with Bone Valley Formation. P ho sp ha tic to B ed Figure 6-2: Local Stratigraphic Column Date: December 31, 2022 6-4 The Central District has been the source of more than 70% of the phosphate rock produced in the United States during most of this century and as much as 30% of the world's total production. Mining began in the late 1800s and has continued to the present. During the early years, mining was principally from "river pebble" deposits (that is, deposits of phosphate concentrated by rivers and streams reworking older sediments), with the mining of "land pebble" deposits increasing as these deposits were depleted. Phosphate deposits in the Central District are composed of phosphate particles ranging from clay to pebble size (-16 mesh), quartz grains, carbonate grains, and clay minerals. Only material with a particle size greater than 150 mesh can be recovered economically with current technology. The higher the pebble content of phosphate ore, the less beneficiation that is required since most of the pebble material is an economic product after simple screening, that results in lower overall production costs. The Bone Valley Member of the Peace River Formation is the ore-bearing unit in those properties lying in the Land Pebble District, primarily in Hillsborough and Polk Counties. Mineralization in this unit generally ranges between 15 to 25 ft. (4.6 to 7.6 m) thick, with grades in the range of 31 to 33% P205. This unit is noted for the relatively high pebble content of the matrix, ranging between 20 and 60%. Overburden ranges from 18 to 30 ft. (5.5 to 9.1 m) thick. The Bone Valley Member is late Miocene and early Pliocene epochs and consists of a lower phosphorite unit and an upper clayey sand unit that contains only minor phosphate (Altschuler and others, 1964). The phosphate in the Bone Valley Member was derived from the underlying Peace River Formation and is enriched in P2O5 and concentrated. The lower phosphorite unit consists of gray-green, gray-brown, and gray sand and clay that contain abundant phosphate particles ranging from about 0.1 mm to several centimeters in diameter. The phosphate particles contain from 30 to 40% P2O5, and the phosphate mineral is carbonate fluorapatite, also known as francolite, but with only small amounts of CO3 substituting for PO4. Weathering after deposition formed aluminum phosphate minerals from the original apatite and altered the clay minerals to kaolinite. The lower phosphorite unit of the Bone Valley Member ranges in thickness from 0 to 50 ft. (0 to 15.2 m). Thin beds of dolomite, doloclay, or dolosilt are present. The Bone Valley Member undergoes facies change to the south into the South Florida Extension, where it contains little or no phosphate values. The potentially mineable unit in this district is the Undifferentiated Peace River Formation, in which the potential ore zones are stratigraphically lower than those of the Bone Valley Member. Potential ore zones in this unit range from 15 to 20 ft. (4.5 to 6.1 m) thick, with grades in the range of 30 to 31% P2O5. The pebble content of the matrix in this unit is considerably lower than in the Bone Valley Member to the north, generally in the range of 10 to 25%. The overburden ranges from 18 to 36 ft. (5.5 to 11.0 m) thick. One of the major differences between deposits in the Land Pebble District and those in the South Florida Extension is the amount of magnesium in the product. Magnesium-rich limestone increases sulfuric acid consumption during phosphate rock digestion and can degrade the quality of the final fertilizer prill. The maximum acceptable level of magnesium, reported as MgO, is approximately 1.25% MgO. Phosphate in the Hawthorn Formation was deposited when cold, phosphorous-enriched marine water welled up onto a shallow warm-water plateau, or when cold, along-shore currents were turbulently mixed with warmer waters and phosphorous precipitated. Structural features on the coastal plain partially controlled the deposition. The deposits are located in basins on the flanks of the anticlines that were rising at the time, with deposition occurring mainly in these basins. Within the Central District a small structural feature known as the Hillsborough High controls phosphate deposition along its flank. 6.4 Property Geology 6.4.1 General Deposit Description All active mine deposits are in the Central Florida Phosphate District. The general description of the phosphatic deposits in Central Florida active mines consist of two general geological facies. The phosphate bearing units are within the Bone Valley Member of the Peace River Formation and the Undifferentiated Member of the Peace River Formation within the South Florida Extension region of the Central District. The deposit characteristics transition from northeast to the southwest. The major phosphate bearing units in the northeast consist of a productive Bone Valley Member with limited production in the Date: December 31, 2022 6-5 Undifferentiated Member. The phosphate bearing units in the southwest exhibit limited production in the Bone Valley Member and a productive Undifferentiated Member of the Peace River Formation. 6.4.2 South Fort Meade Deposit The site geology of South Fort Meade consists of 5 to 50 ft. (1.5 to 15.2 m) of tan to brown sand to sandy clay material overlaying the Bone Valley Member. The Bone Valley is late Miocene and early Pliocene epoch in age and consists of a lower phosphorite unit and an upper clayey sand unit that contains only minor phosphate (Altschuler and others, 1964). The phosphate in the Bone Valley Member was derived from the underlying Peace River Formation within the Hawthorn Group and is enriched in P2O5 and concentrated. The lower phosphorite unit consists of gray-green, gray-brown and gray sand and clay that contain abundant phosphate particles ranging from about 0.1 mm to several centimeters in diameter. The lower phosphorite unit of the Bone Valley Member ranges in thickness from 0 to 50 ft. (0 to 15.2 m). Thin beds of dolomite, doloclay or dolosilt are present. The bed material is green to dark gray barren sandy clay to limestone or dolostone. Phosphate pebbles and nodules predominant product grain size with pebbles and nodules making up approximately 60% of the recoverable phosphate. The phosphate grains and clasts contain from 30 to 34% P2O5. The phosphate pebbles and nodules contain from 24 to 30% P2O5. Deposit Dimensions The South Fort Meade deposit prior to mining extended under the entire limits of the property for a total 40,953 acres (16,573 hectares). The average extents of the deposit are 9.5 miles (15.3 km) north to south and 5.7 miles (9.2 km) east to west. The mineral reserves extend from 1174525N to 1193581N and 731317E to 796915E. Lithologies The geology of the South Fort Meade deposit consists of bed clay and limestone overlain by matrix and an upper overburden horizon (Figure 6-3). O ve rb ur de n Mostly gray to white poorly graded quartz sand with varying abundance of reworked phosphate grains. Thickness 5 to 50 ft. (1.5 to 15.2 m). W as te M at ri x Gray to gray-blue with lineation of red, brown and white. Phosphate nodules and pellets are the dominant constituent to gray to gray-blue quartz sands, clays and phosphate grains and some nodules. Thickness 0 to 50 ft. (0.0 to 15.2 m) Ph os ph at ic B ed C la y an d L im es to ne Gray to gray-blue barren clays to phosphatic limestone rubble to beds of phosphatic limestone. Thickness is unknown by company exploration. B ot to m Figure 6-3: South Fort Meade Geology Section The South Fort Meade phosphate deposit occurs in the Bone Valley Member and consists of soils ranging from sand to sandy clay in mineable thicknesses of 4 to 50 ft. (1.2 to 15.2 m). The deposit often appears as gray to blue-green sandy clay but can also appears as tan to gray sands. Within the deposit there are interbeds of stiff cream-yellow dolomitic clays and barren blue-green clay layers with high impurities and/or low phosphatic content. These beds pinch out laterally and are often limited in scope. The contacts between layers are mostly distinct but can be gradual where leaching occurs.

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1017.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 6-6 The overburden waste material consists of quartz sands and occasional lenses of freshwater limestone and residuum. There are grains of reworked phosphate throughout but are dispersed and in low abundance. There may be marine beds of clayey sand and sandy clay that are uneconomic beds that are devoid of phosphate. Mineable concentrations of phosphate grains, nodules and pellets exist in clayey sand to sandy clay beds of sediments. The bed contact with the overlying waste material is predominantly distinct with a thin bed of phosphate pellets or nodules clearly visible. The reworking of this material by hydrologic processes can occasionally leach the phosphate leaving either enriched grains and nodules or residuum. In small areas this distinct bed pinches out and beds of clayey sand with predominantly phosphate grains appear and grade in normal and reverse bedding. The minable beds are near shore marine and fluvial in nature and present in consistent transgressive and regressive package that dips gently away from the paleo shoreline to the southwest direction. These beds and phosphate clasts are ubiquitous within the site. The beds economic viability is determined by phosphatic grade dilution in the form of insoluble clasts and/or degraded quality in the form magnesium. Interbeds of waste are preset in small amounts in the form of poorly indurated dolomitic limestone beds, dolomitic marl and beds devoid of phosphate clasts. These interbeds may or may not have viable phosphatic beds below them. They are amorphous, lenticular and trend with the paleo-coastline and limited to a few hundred to a few thousand square feet in area. Basal phosphatic beds are present from time to time and are recovered when magnesium is within acceptable ranges. These basal beds and the economic beds sit atop phosphatic limestone or dolostone that can vary in degree of induration. Unrecoverable beds of phosphate occur in dolomitic marl. These beds indicate the bottom of the mineable mineralization. Structure No major structures have been identified on the property from drilling and observations made during the mining process. Alteration Post-depositional dissolution of francolite occurs in areas throughout the deposit. Metals dissociate from the lattice structure upgrading or degrading the remaining mineral. The mineral can be upgraded by the removal of metals, namely calcium, in the natural leaching process. Dissolution of dolomitic clasts removing magnesium can also serve to upgrade the rock. The dissolution of aluminosilicates in the waste beds can provide aluminum to substitute into the mineral and can degrade the quality of finished product. Humates present in sufficient quantities within the subsurface provide iron that can substitute into the mineral and can also degrade quality. Mineralization Waste material consists of quartz sand and is predominantly rounded subaerial clasts ranging in size from 0.1 to 1 mm. There are occasional beds of freshwater limestone and beds of poorly indurated floatstone or packstone. The primary phosphate mineral in the South Fort Meade deposit is francolite. Francolite mineralization occurs by substitution of phosphorus into the carbonate minerals. These are in the form of sub-rounded to rounded clasts present as nodules, pellets, grains, bioclasts, and clays ranging in size from 0.1 to 3.0 mm. Limestone and dolostone are present as clasts and as interbeds of waste. These are usually found as rounded clasts of micritic limestone or dolostone, bioclasts, beds of poorly indurated micrite or dismicrite and beds of poorly indurated floatstone or packstone. 6.4.3 Four Corners Deposit The site geology of Four Corners is varied due to the size of the property. Mining currently takes place in two distinct deposit facies. The mine historically has operated exclusively within the Bone Valley Member. The mine now produces predominantly within the South Florida Extension with limited production in the Bone Valley Member and predominant production within the Hawthorn Group. Date: December 31, 2022 6-7 In general, the Bone Valley Member is a series of continuous marine basins that exist north of Florida State Road 62. These basins generally trend north to south. Most of this deposit has been mined. There is a minority of production ongoing in the remaining area. The economic zone in the South Florida Extension portion of the Central District exists generally south of Florida State Road 62. The Bone Valley Member of the deposit thins, is relatively discontinuous and pinches out southwards. The majority of Four Corners mining is currently within the Hawthorn Group and is a series of thick and continuous marine beds that dip gently towards the southwest. Phosphate grains and clasts are the predominant grain size with pebbles and nodules making up approximately 29% of the recoverable phosphate. The phosphate grains and clasts contain from 30 to 33% P2O5. The phosphate pebbles and nodules contain from 25 to 29% P2O5. The bed material is green to dark gray barren sandy clay to limestone or dolostone. Deposit Dimensions Prior to mining, the Four Corners deposit extended under the entire limits of the property, for a total 54,671 acres (22,124 hectares). The average extents of the deposit are 19 miles (30.6 km) north to south and 15 miles (24.1 km) east to west. The mineral resources and mineral reserves extend from 1141896N to 1237582N and 607735E to 669923E. Lithologies The geology of the Four Corners deposit consists of bed clay and limestone overlain by matrix and an upper overburden horizon (Figure 6-4). O ve rb ur de n Mostly gray to white poorly graded quartz sand with varying abundance of reworked phosphate grains. Thickness 26 to 48 ft. (7.9 to 14.6 m). W as te M at ri x Phosphate nodules and pellets are the dominant constituent to tan-gray to gray to gray-blue quartz sands, clays and phosphate grains and some nodules. Thickness 5 to 15 ft. (1.5 to 4.6 m). Ph os ph at ic B ed C la y an d L im es to ne Gray to dark gray barren clays to phosphatic limestone rubble to beds of phosphatic limestone. Thickness is unknown by company exploration. B ot to m Figure 6-4: Four Corners Bone Valley Geology Section The overburden consists of waste sand and clayey sand that are devoid of phosphate. The wastes are generally between 26 to 48 ft. (7.9 to 14.6 m) thick. The waste is poorly graded clean rounded or sub-rounded fine sands. The waste sands near the ore body generally increase in phosphate and clay content. The waste deposit of the Bone Valley in this area is relatively thick, and the economic zone is relatively thin. The beds of ore are in clayey and silty sands and occasionally sandy clays and silts and are tan-gray to gray-green-blue in color. The contact between waste and ore is generally distinct with an increase in clay and the presence of gray to brown to black concentrated beds of phosphatic gravels present at the contact. The beds are generally between 5 to 15 ft. (1.5 to 4.6 m) in thickness. The unconsolidated sediments contain phosphatic nodules and pellets and some phosphatic gravels. The Bone Valley consists of predominantly phosphatic pebbles and nodules and to a lesser extent grains and weathered clasts. Date: December 31, 2022 6-8 The basal beds are moderately consolidated gray to dark gray barren clays. There are interbeds of limestone and dolostone rubble that transitions to moderately indurated limestone and dolostone rock with phosphatic nodules and grains in the limey matrix. A section of the Four Corners Southern Extension geology and a description of each lithology is summarized in Figure 6-5. The waste consists of sands, clayey sands and clays that are devoid of phosphate. The overburden is poorly graded clean rounded to sub-rounded sands that increase in clay content adjacent to the ore body. The waste bed is mostly what in color. The waste bed is generally between 21 to 41 ft. (6.4 to 12.5 m) thick. There are occasionally beds of barren clay above the ore. By comparison, the overburden is relatively thin and the economic zone relatively thick. The Undifferentiated Peace River Formation in this area of the deposit is predominantly grains and clasts with nodules and pebbles present. The first ore zone consists of tan-gray to gray-blue beds of clayey sands. The beds are generally between 13 and 26 ft. (4 to 8 m) in thickness. The contact of the overburden is usually distinct with increase in clay content and a thin bed of brown to gray phosphatic gravel but occasionally the lithology can be continuous and become devoid of phosphate. The ore zone is occasionally disrupted by beds of waste clays and silts that are not economical to mine. The waste interbeds are more abundant in the Southern Extension. They consist of moderately consolidated green-gray or blue-gray clays and silts. They are devoid of economic phosphates. Occasionally there are marine beds of sub-rounded to sub-angular quartz sands with clasts of limestone or dolostone and are devoid of phosphate. Finally, there are isolated beds of marine limestone and dolostone. They consist of bioclasts and poorly indurated floatstone and packstone. They vary in thickness from 0 to 10 ft. (0 to 3.0 m). Local hydrogeology can cause thick beds of dolomite to spoil the underlain ore through mineral alteration. The second ore zone consists of sandy clays and silts. These beds are green-gray to blue-gray to dark gray. They are generally between 0 to 15 ft. (0 to 4.6 m) in thickness. They have slightly elevated concentrations of limestone and dolostone clasts and gravels. Gangue minerals exist in a higher concentration and P2O5 in a lower concentration when compared to the Bone Valley deposit. The basal beds are phosphatic clays sand to phosphatic sands directly overlaying limestones and dolostone gravels. These sand and gravel beds grade into beds of moderately indurated limestone and dolostone rock with phosphatic nodules and grains in the limey matrix. Date: December 31, 2022 6-9 O ve rb ur de n Mostly gray to white poorly graded quartz sand with varying abundance of reworked phosphate grains. Thickness 21 to 41 ft. (6.4 to 12.5 m). W as te M at ri x Phosphate nodules and pellets are present with phosphate grains and clasts predominate in tan-gray to gray quartz sands, clays and silts. Thickness 13 to 26 ft. (4.0 to 7.9 m). Ph os ph at ic In te rb ed de d W as te Beds of blue to green barren sandy clays. Occasionally beds of marine limestone and dolostones or marginally phosphatic sandy beds of dolomitic clasts and grains. Thickness 0 to 10 ft. (0.0 to 3.1 m). W as te M at ri x Phosphate nodules and pellets are present with phosphate grains and clasts predominate in dark gray to dark gray-blue-green clays, silts with quartz sands. Thickness 0 to 15 ft. (0.0 to 4.6 m). Ph os ph at ic B ed C la y an d L im es to ne Dark gray to black clays to phosphatic limestone rubble to beds of phosphatic limestone. Thickness is unknown by company exploration. B ot to m Figure 6-5: Four Corners Southern Extension Geology Section Structure No major structures have been identified on the property from drilling and observations made during the mining process. Alteration Post-depositional dissolution of francolite occurs in areas throughout the deposit. Metals dissociate from the lattice structure upgrading or degrading the remaining mineral. The mineral can be upgraded by the removal of metals, namely calcium, in the natural leaching process. Dissolution of dolomitic clasts removing magnesium can also serve to upgrade the rock. The dissolution of aluminosilicates in the waste beds can provide aluminum to substitute into the mineral and can degrade the quality of finished product. Humates present in sufficient quantities within the subsurface provide iron that can substitute into the mineral and can also degrade quality. Mineralization Waste material consists of quartz sand and is predominantly rounded subaerial clasts ranging in size from 0.1 to 1 mm. The primary phosphate mineral in the Four Corners deposit is francolite. Francolite mineralization occurs by substitution of phosphorus into the carbonate minerals. These are in the form of sub-rounded to rounded clasts present as nodules, pellets, grains, bioclasts and clays ranging in size from 0.1 to 3.0 mm. Limestone and dolostone are present as clasts and as interbeds of waste. These are usually found as rounded clasts of micritic limestone or dolostone, bioclasts, beds of poorly indurated micrite or dismicrite and beds of poorly indurated floatstone or packstone.

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1018.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 6-10 6.4.4 Wingate Deposit The site geology of Wingate consists of a local basin of phosphatic ore trending north and south in the Bone Valley underlain by a broad and continuous deposit in the Hawthorn Group. The Bone Valley consistent of predominantly phosphatic pebbles and nodules and to a lesser extent grains and weathered clasts. The Hawthorn Group in this location is predominantly grains and clasts while nodules and pebbles are present. The economic mining zone thins from west to east. Near the eastern extent of the deposit there is a very narrow, north to south trending, ridge that is nearly devoid of phosphate of acceptable grade and the economic zone pinches out. Immediately east of the ridge, the deposit deepens and continues to thicken eastward. Mining began in the southwest of the deposit and has progressed towards the northeast. Phosphate grains and clasts are the predominant grain size with pebbles and nodules making up approximately 41% of the recoverable phosphate. The phosphate grains and clasts contain from 31 to 33% P2O5. The phosphate pebbles and nodules contain from 24 to 29% P2O5. Deposit Dimensions The Wingate deposit prior to mining, extended under the entire limits of the property, for a total 8,761 acres (3,545 hectares). The average extents of the deposit are 3 miles (4.8 km) north to south and 4 miles (6.4 km) east to west. The mineral resources and mineral reserves extend from 1141641N to 1155888N and 612046E to 632902E. Lithologies The geology of the Wingate deposit consists of bed clay and limestone overlain by matrix and an upper overburden horizon (Figure 6-6). O ve rb ur de n White to tan-gray poorly graded quartz sand to brown-gray to orange iron-cemented clayey sand hardpan to tan-gray to gray clayey sands with varying abundance of reworked phosphate grains. Thickness 35 to 49 ft. (10.7 to 14.9 m). W as te M at ri x Tan-gray to gray clayey sands with phosphate pellets and grains to gray to gray-blue quartz sands, clays, and phosphate grains and some nodules. Thickness 19 to 37 ft. (5.8 to 11.3 m). Ph os ph at ic B ed C la y an d L im es to ne Gray to gray-blue barren clays to phosphatic limestone rubble to beds of phosphatic limestone. Thickness is unknown by company exploration. B ot to m Figure 6-6: Wingate Geology Section The local overburden geology is unique at Wingate and frequently consists of cemented sediments. These hardpan sediments are the result of humates that act as a mining challenge related to the removal of overburden and serve to increase the local iron content in the underlining phosphatic ore. Drilling campaigns using SPT and reporting from core drilling are used to define and mitigate the risk. Pre-stripping plans are developed if the waste material is deemed to be problematic. This hardpan is localized in the contemporary soil horizon and can be stripped easily by excavator from natural grade. The overburden below the zone of cementation consists of well sorted quartz sand with some silts and clays. There are beds of sandy clays and silts. The economic zone is predominantly phosphatic grains and clasts with nodules and pebbles present. The zone consists of tan-gray to gray beds of clayey sands. The beds are generally between 19 and 37 feet in thickness. The economic contact is gradational and indistinct. The ore zone is occasionally disrupted by beds of waste clays and silts that are not economical to mine. These beds are mined if it is necessary for efficient and effective mining. Date: December 31, 2022 6-11 The basal beds are phosphatic clays sand to phosphatic sands directly overlaying limestones and dolostone gravels. These sand and gravel beds grade to beds of moderately indurated limestone and dolostone rock with phosphatic nodules and grains in the limey matrix. Structure No major structures have been identified on the property from drilling and observations made during the mining process. Alteration Post-depositional dissolution of francolite occurs in areas throughout the deposit. Metals dissociate from the lattice structure upgrading or degrading the remaining mineral. The mineral can be upgraded by the removal of metals, namely calcium, in the natural leaching process. Dissolution of dolomitic clasts removing magnesium can also serve to upgrade the rock. The dissolution of aluminosilicates in the waste beds can provide aluminum to substitute into the mineral and can degrade the quality of finished product. Humates present in sufficient quantities within the subsurface provide iron that can substitute into the mineral and can also degrade quality. Mineralization Waste material consists of quartz sand and is predominantly rounded subaerial clasts ranging in size from 0.1 to 1 mm. The primary phosphate mineral in the Four Corners deposit is francolite. Francolite mineralization occurs by substitution of phosphorus into the carbonate minerals. These are in the form of sub-rounded to rounded clasts present as nodules, pellets, grains, bioclasts and clays ranging in size from 0.1 to 3.0 mm. Limestone and dolostone are present as clasts and as interbeds of waste. These are usually found as rounded clasts of micritic limestone or dolostone, bioclasts, beds of poorly indurated micrite or dismicrite and beds of poorly indurated floatstone or packstone. 6.4.5 DeSoto Deposit The DeSoto deposit consists of 48 to 60 ft. (3.4 to 12.8 m) of tan to tan-gray sand to clayey material overlaying the Hawthorn Group. The deposit is a broad basin of phosphatic material and is bowl-like in character. Beds containing ore are generally stable in thickness. The ore is hosted in the Hawthorn Group and consists of 10 to 26 ft. (3.3 to 7.9 m) of tan-gray to gray clayey quartz sands. Phosphate grains and clasts are the predominant grain size with pebbles and nodules making up approximately 10% of the recoverable phosphate. The phosphate grains and clasts contain from 30 to 35% P2O5. The phosphate pebbles and nodules contain from 23 to 31% P2O5. The bed material is green to dark gray barren sandy clay to limestone or dolostone. Deposit Dimensions The DeSoto deposit extends the entirety of the property with an area of 43,064 acres (17,427 hectares). The average extents of the deposit are 11 miles (17.7 km) north to south and 14 miles (22.5 km) east to west. The mineral reserves extend from 1034128N to 1091901N and 609470E to 685858E. Lithologies The geology of the DeSoto deposit consists of bed clay and limestone overlain by matrix and an upper overburden horizon (Figure 6-7). Date: December 31, 2022 6-12 O ve rb ur de n Mostly gray to white poorly graded quartz sand with varying abundance of reworked phosphate grains. Thickness 18 to 32 ft. (5.5 to 9.8 m). W as te M at ri x Phosphate grains dominant constituent with some nodules and pellets to tan-gray to gray quartz sands, clays. Thickness 11 to 28 ft. (3.4 to 8.5 m). Ph os ph at ic B ed C la y an d L im es to ne Gray to green-blue-dark gray barren clays to phosphatic limestone rubble to beds of phosphatic limestone. Thickness is unknown by company exploration. B ot to m Figure 6-7: DeSoto Geology Section Structure No major structures have been identified on the property from drilling and observations made during the mining process. Alteration Post-depositional dissolution of francolite occurs in areas throughout the deposit. Metals dissociate from the lattice structure upgrading or degrading the remaining mineral. The mineral can be upgraded by the removal of metals, namely calcium, in the natural leaching process. Dissolution of dolomitic clasts removing magnesium can also serve to upgrade the rock. The dissolution of aluminosilicates in the waste beds can provide aluminum to substitute into the mineral and can degrade the quality of finished product. Humates present in sufficient quantities within the subsurface provide iron that can substitute into the mineral and can also degrade quality. Mineralization Waste material consists of quartz sand and is predominantly rounded subaerial clasts ranging in size from 0.1 to 1 mm. The primary phosphate mineral in the DeSoto deposit is francolite. Francolite mineralization occurs by substitution of phosphorus into the carbonate minerals. These are in the form of sub-rounded to rounded clasts present as nodules, pellets, grains, bioclasts and clays ranging in size from 0.1 to 3.0 mm. Limestone and dolostone are present as clasts and as interbeds of waste. These are usually found as rounded clasts of micritic limestone or dolostone, bioclasts, beds of poorly indurated micrite or dismicrite and beds of poorly indurated floatstone or packstone. 6.4.6 Pioneer Deposit The Pioneer deposit consists of 21 to 45 ft. (6.4 to 13.7 m) of tan to tan-gray sand to clayey material overlaying the Hawthorn Formation. The deposit is a series of marine beds that dip gently to the west. The beds of waste thicken from east to west. The ore is hosted in Hawthorn Formation and consists of 14 to 38 ft. (4.3 to 11.6 m) of tan-gray to gray clayey quartz sands. Phosphate grains and clasts are the predominant grain size with pebbles and nodules making up approximately 43% of the recoverable phosphate. The phosphate grains and clasts contain from 28 to 36% P2O5. The phosphate pebbles and nodules contain from 24 to 29% P2O5. The bed material is green to dark gray barren sandy clay to limestone or dolostone. Date: December 31, 2022 6-13 Deposit Dimensions The Pioneer deposit extends under the entirety of the property with an area of 26,017 acres (10,529 hectares). The average extents of the deposit are 6 miles (9.7 km) north to south and 11 miles (17.7 km) east to west. The mineral reserves extend from 1111958N to 1144215N and 643188E to 701797E. Lithologies The geology of the Pioneer deposit consists of bed clay and limestone overlain by matrix and an upper overburden horizon (Figure 6-8). O ve rb ur de n Mostly gray to tan poorly graded quartz sand with varying abundance of reworked phosphate grains. Thickness 21 to 45 ft. (7.6 to 13.7 m). W as te M at ri x Phosphate nodules and pellets phosphate grains and clasts are roughly equal in proportions in tan-gray to gray to gray-blue quartz sands, silts and clays. Thickness 14 to 38 ft. (4.3 to 11.6 m). Ph os ph at ic B ed C la y an d L im es to ne Gray-green to dark gray barren clays to phosphatic limestone rubble to beds of phosphatic limestone. Thickness is unknown by company exploration. B ot to m Figure 6-8: Pioneer Geology Section Structure No major structures have been identified on the property from drilling and observations made during the mining process. Alteration Post-depositional dissolution of francolite occurs in areas throughout the deposit. Metals dissociate from the lattice structure upgrading or degrading the remaining mineral. The mineral can be upgraded by the removal of metals, namely calcium, in the natural leaching process. Dissolution of dolomitic clasts removing magnesium can also serve to upgrade the rock. The dissolution of aluminosilicates in the waste beds can provide aluminum to substitute into the mineral and can degrade the quality of finished product. Humates present in sufficient quantities within the subsurface provide iron that can substitute into the mineral and can also degrade quality. Mineralization Waste material consists of quartz sand and is predominantly rounded subaerial clasts ranging in size from 0.1 to 1 mm. The primary phosphate mineral in the Pioneer deposit is francolite. Francolite mineralization occurs by substitution of phosphorus into the carbonate minerals. These are in the form of sub-rounded to rounded clasts present as nodules, pellets, grains, bioclasts and clays ranging in size from 0.1 to 3.0 mm. Limestone and dolostone are present as clasts and as interbeds of waste. These are usually found as rounded clasts of micritic limestone or dolostone, bioclasts, beds of poorly indurated micrite or dismicrite and beds of poorly indurated floatstone or packstone.

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1019.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 6-14 6.4.7 South Pasture Deposit The South Pasture deposit consists of 17 to 37 ft. (5.2 to 11.3 m) of tan to tan-gray sand to clayey material overlaying the Hawthorn Formation. The deposit is a series of marine beds that dip gently to the west. The ore is hosted in the Hawthorn Formation and consists of two distinct phosphate bearing zones interrupted by a zone of interburden. The upper economic zone is 13 to 27 ft. (4.0 to 8.2 m) of tan-gray to gray-blue clayey quartz sands. The interbedded waste is 0 to 13 ft. (0.0 to 4.0 m) of blue to green smectite clays that are devoid of phosphate. The interbeds often include, and are occasionally completely comprised of, beds of poorly indurated clastic limestone and diagenetic residuum and/or various clastic lime mud clays with or without phosphates. The lower economic zone is 0 to 14 ft. (0 to 4.3 m) of dark gray to gray-blue-green clayey quartz sands. The lower beds' lithology is continual but due to increased magnesium and decreased grade the beds are routinely not economical. Phosphate grains and clasts are the predominant grain size with pebbles and nodules making up approximately 30% of the recoverable phosphate. The phosphate grains and clasts contain from 31 to 34% P2O5. The phosphate pebbles and nodules contain from 27 to 31% P2O5. The bed material is green to dark gray barren sandy clay to limestone or dolostone. Deposit Dimensions The South Pasture mineralization extends under the entirety of the property with an area of 38,723 acres (15,671 hectares). The average extents of the deposit are 12 miles (19.3 km) north to south and 8 miles (12.9 km) east to west. The mineral resources extend from 1134609N to 1200386N and 665102E to 706884E. Lithologies The geology of the South Pasture deposit consists of bed clay and limestone overlain by matrix and an upper overburden horizon (Figure 6-9). Date: December 31, 2022 6-15 O ve rb ur de n Mostly tan-gray to gray poorly graded quartz sand with varying abundance of reworked phosphate grains. Thickness 17 to 37 ft. (5.2 to 11.3 m). W as te M at ri x Phosphate nodules and pellets are present with phosphate grains and clasts predominate in tan-gray to gray-blue quartz sands, clays and silts. Thickness 13 to 27 ft. (4.0 to 8.2 m). Ph os ph at ic In te rb ed de d W as te Beds of blue to green barren sandy clays. Occasionally beds of marine limestone and dolostones or marginally phosphatic sandy beds of dolomitic clasts and grains. Thickness 0 to 13 ft. (0.0 to 4.0 m). W as te M at ri x Phosphate nodules and pellets are present with phosphate grains and clasts predominate in dark gray to dark gray-blue- green clays and silts with quartz sands. Thickness 0 to 14 ft. (0.0 to 4.3 m). Ph os ph at ic B ed C la y an d L im es to ne Dark gray to black clays to phosphatic limestone rubble to beds of phosphatic limestone. Thickness is unknown by company exploration. B ot to m Figure 6-9: South Pasture Geology Section At South Pasture, the waste consists of sands, clayey sands and clays that are devoid of phosphate. The overburden is poorly graded clean rounded to sub-rounded sands that increase in clay content adjacent to the ore body. The beds are generally between 17 to 37 ft. (5.2 to 11.3 m) thick. The wastes are tan-gray to gray in color. There are occasionally beds of barren clay above the ore. The Hawthorn Formation in this portion of the deposit is predominantly grains and clasts with nodules and pebbles present. The first ore zone consists of tan-gray to gray-blue beds of clayey sands. The beds range from 13 to 27 ft. (4.0 to 8.2 m) in thickness. The contact of the overburden is usually distinct with increase in clay content and a thin bed of brown to gray phosphatic gravel but occasionally the lithology can be continuous and become devoid of phosphate. The mineralization is occasionally disrupted by beds of waste clays and silts that are not economical to mine. The waste interbeds are more abundant in the Southern Extension. They consist of moderately consolidated green-gray or blue-gray clays and silts. They are devoid of economic phosphates. Occasionally there are marine beds of sub-rounded to sub-angular quartz sands with clasts of limestone or dolostone and are devoid of phosphate. Finally, there are isolated beds of marine limestone and dolostone. They consist of bioclasts and poorly indurated floatstone and packstone. The isolated beds vary in thickness from 0 to 13 ft. (0.0 to 4.0 m). Local hydrogeology can cause thick beds of dolomite to spoil the underlain ore through mineral alteration. The second ore zone consists of sandy clays and silts. These beds are green-gray to blue-gray to dark gray. They are generally between 0 to 14 ft. (0.0 to 4.3 m) in thickness. They have slightly elevated concentrations of limestone and dolostone clasts and gravels. Date: December 31, 2022 6-16 The basal beds are phosphatic clays sand to phosphatic sands directly overlaying limestones and dolostone gravels. These sand and gravel beds grade to beds of moderately indurated limestone and dolostone rock with phosphatic nodules and grains in the limey matrix. Structure No major structures have been identified on the property from drilling and observations made during the mining process. Alteration Post-depositional dissolution of francolite occurs in areas throughout the deposit. Metals dissociate from the lattice structure upgrading or degrading the remaining mineral. The mineral can be upgraded by the removal of metals, namely calcium, in the natural leaching process. Dissolution of dolomitic clasts removing magnesium can also serve to upgrade the rock. The dissolution of aluminosilicates in the waste beds can provide aluminum to substitute into the mineral and can degrade the quality of finished product. Humates present in sufficient quantities within the subsurface provide iron that can substitute into the mineral and can also degrade quality. Mineralization Waste material consists of quartz sand and is predominantly rounded subaerial clasts ranging in size from 0.1 to 1 mm. The primary phosphate mineral in the South Pasture deposit is francolite. Francolite mineralization occurs by substitution of phosphorus into the carbonate minerals. These are in the form of sub-rounded to rounded clasts present as nodules, pellets, grains, bioclasts, and clays ranging in size from 0.1 to 3.0 mm. Limestone and dolostone are present as clasts and as interbeds of waste. These are usually found as rounded clasts of micritic limestone or dolostone, bioclasts, beds of poorly indurated micrite or dismicrite and beds of poorly indurated floatstone or packstone. Date: December 31, 2022 7-1 7.0 Exploration 7.1 Exploration 7.1.1 Grids and Surveys Mine grids have been established at each of the three mines and three exploration properties based on local UTM coordinates. 7.1.2 Geological Mapping, Geochemistry and Geophysics Geologic contour maps of depths, grades, impurities and concentration are produced using core data to increase understanding of the deposit as well as identify areas of inconsistency that would require additional drilling to better define any variations. These maps are also used when developing plans for mining. Contour maps are updated annually (or as needed) to include new drilling. No geochemical and geophysical surveys have been completed at the active phosphate mining facilities and none are planned for the exploration properties. 7.1.3 Petrology, Mineralogy, and Research Studies Throughout the history of mining in the Central Florida Phosphate District, many studies have taken place on various geologic topics. The scopes have ranged from general in "The Phosphate Deposits of Florida" in 1915, to more refined topics as in "Mineralogy and Alteration of the Phosphate Deposits of Florida" in 1990, and to specific locations such as "The Mineral Characteristics and Geochemistry of the Florida Phosphate of Four Corners and Hardee County Mines" in 2016. 7.1.4 Exploration Potential There is no exploration potential within current properties. Additional mineral resources are usually obtained by acquisition of adjacent properties. These adjacent properties (Section 24) are usually drilled to confirm the viability of any mineral resource prior to acquisition. 7.2 Drilling 7.2.1 Overview Exploration drilling commenced in earnest at varying times across the different properties. Overall exploration drilling began in the middle of the twentieth century at each property using mud rotary core drilling and has continued through as late as 1995 at the active sites and exploration properties. Exploration drilling is still underway at the future mining properties. Drilling has been performed by in-house and contract drill crews and geologists. Definition drilling is commonly undertaken in a phased process of increasing hole density until a "full" pattern of one hole per 2.5 acres. Additional drilling is done on an as-needed basis. In addition to routine drilling certain holes are selected for "expanded" processing that includes additional metals and size fraction analysis. These holes are used to explore for the existence of heavy metals and other impurities in the ore body that can cause processing difficulties. The additional size fractions allow us to better understand the physical makeup of the ore body. Drilling completed after the exploration phase at each facility and property is classified as definition drilling. This drilling is completed to improve the confidence classification of the mineral resource estimates through increased drill hole density.

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1020.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 7-2 7.2.2 Property Drilling 7.2.2.1 South Fort Meade Facility A total of 9,240 holes have been drilled at South Fort Meade yielding a total of 346,447 ft. (105,840 m) of drilling (Table 7- 1). Figure 7-1 shows the collar locations of the drill holes considered for current geological interpretations, modeling and mineral resource estimation. Drill holes not included in the modeling for mineral resource estimation are holes that do not have useable locations, or have data that has not been verified and is considered unreliable. These hole locations are placed on a redrill pattern and drilled again when time permits. The total number of holes that have been redrilled is 171 representing a total footage of 7,735 ft. (2,358 m). This is approximately 2.4% of the total property drilled footage. Table 7-1: South Fort Meade Facility Exploration and Definition Drilling Summary Year Drilled Purpose Total Holes Total Depth (ft.) Total Depth (m) Pre 1995 Exploration 2,624 87,975 26,815 1995 to 1999 Definition 2,161 86,789 26,453 2000 to 2004 Definition 1,439 53,486 16,303 2005 to 2009 Definition 313 11,788 3,593 2010 to 2014 Definition 1,114 40,779 12,429 2015 Definition 47 1,663 507 2016 Definition 153 6,726 2,050 2017 Definition 481 12,697 3,870 2018 Definition 56 2,864 873 2019 Definition 285 12,035 3,668 2020 Definition 49 1,912 583 2021 Definition 362 19,215 5,857 2022 Definition 156 8,518 2,839 Total 9,240 346,447 105,840 Date: December 31, 2022 7-3 Figure 7-1: South Fort Meade Facility Drill Collar Location Plan Date: December 31, 2022 7-4 The drill holes shown in Figure 7-1 were used in the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation process. Data that is not considered in the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation process includes data that cannot be mapped, data that has missing densities and data that has come from unverified sources through acquisition or other means. These concerns have been addressed and the data has been identified in the database. The total number of holes that have been excluded from the 2022 mineral resource estimate is 20 representing a total footage of 892 ft. (272 m). This is approximately 0.9% of the total drilled footage supporting the 2022 estimates. 7.2.2.2 Four Corners Facility A total of 38,231 holes have been drilled at Four Corners yielding a total of 2,032,939 ft. (619,796 m) of drilling (Table 7- 2). Figure 7-2 shows the collar locations of the drill holes considered for current geological interpretations, modeling and mineral resource estimation. Drill holes not included in the modeling for mineral resource estimation are holes that do not have useable locations, or have data that has not been verified and is considered unreliable. These hole locations are placed on a redrill pattern and drilled again when time permits. The total number of holes that have been redrilled is 157 representing a total footage of 14,819 ft. (4,517 m). This is approximately 0.7% of the total property drilled footage. Table 7-2: Four Corners Facility Exploration and Definition Drilling Summary Year Drilled Purpose Total Holes Total Depth (ft.) Total Depth (m) Pre 1985 Exploration 19,097 949,983 289,555 1985 to 1989 Definition 2,701 117,734 35,885 1990 to 1994 Definition 3,256 181,829 55,421 1995 to 1999 Definition 4,121 207,522 63,253 2000 to 2004 Definition 2,975 165,315 50,388 2005 to 2009 Definition 2,744 169,796 51,754 2010 to 2014 Definition 1,987 154,299 47,030 2015 Definition 351 22,629 6,897 2016 Definition 410 26,006 7,927 2017 Definition 76 5,528 1,685 2018 Definition 159 9,653 2,942 2019 Definition 28 2,217 676 2020 Definition 43 3,677 1,121 2021 Definition 130 11,298 3,444 2022 Definition 153 5,453 1,818 Total 38,231 2,032,939 619,796 Date: December 31, 2022 7-5 Figure 7-2: Four Corners Facility Drill Collar Location Plan

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1021.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 7-6 The drill holes shown in Figure 7-2 were used in the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation process. Data that is not considered in the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation process includes data that cannot be mapped, data that has missing densities and data that has come from unverified sources through acquisition or other means. These concerns have been addressed and the data has been identified in the database. The total number of holes that have been excluded from the 2022 mineral resource estimate is 139 representing a total footage of 12,989 ft. (3,959 m). This is approximately 1.5% of the total drilled footage supporting the 2022 estimates. 7.2.2.3 Wingate Facility A total of 1,671 holes have been drilled at Wingate yielding a total of 145,317 ft. (44,375m) of drilling (Table 7-3). Figure 7-3 shows the collar locations of the drill holes considered for current geological interpretations, modeling and mineral resource estimation. Drill holes not included in the modeling for mineral resource estimation are holes that do not have useable locations, or have data that has not been verified and is considered unreliable. These hole locations are placed on a redrill pattern and drilled again when time permits. The total number of holes that have been redrilled is 240 representing a total footage of 21,534 ft. (2,483 m). This is approximately 15.5% of the total property drilled footage. Table 7-3: Wingate Facility Exploration and Definition Drilling Summary Year Drilled Purpose Total Holes Total Depth (ft.) Total Depth (m) Pre 1980 Exploration 21 1,410 430 1980 to 1989 Definition 6 469 143 1990 to 1999 Definition 102 8,812 2,686 2000 to 2009 Definition 635 58,300 17,770 2010 to 2014 Definition 609 50,814 15,488 2015 Definition 49 4,419 1,347 2016 Definition 60 4,254 1,297 2017 Definition 19 1,400 427 2018 Definition 7 654 199 2019 Definition 64 5,394 1,644 2020 Definition 41 4,477 1,365 2021 Definition 24 2,048 624 2022 Definition 34 2,866 955 Total 1,671 145,317 44,375 Date: December 31, 2022 7-7 Figure 7-3: Wingate Facility Drill Collar Location Plan Date: December 31, 2022 7-8 The drill holes shown in Figure 7-3 were used in the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation process. Data that is not considered in the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation process includes data that cannot be mapped, data that has missing densities and data that has come from unverified sources through acquisition or other means. These concerns have been addressed and the data has been identified in the database. The total number of holes that have been excluded from the 2022 mineral resource estimate is 60 representing a total footage of 4,953 ft. (1,510 m). This is approximately 6.2% of the total drilled footage supporting the 2022 estimates. 7.2.2.4 DeSoto Property A total of 2,950 holes have been drilled at the DeSoto property yielding a total of 160,603 ft. (48,952 m) of drilling (Table 7-4). Figure 7-4 shows the collar locations of the drill holes considered for current geological interpretations, modeling and mineral resource estimation. Drill holes not included in the modeling for mineral resource estimation are holes that do not have useable locations, or have data that has not been verified and is considered unreliable. These hole locations are placed on a redrill pattern and drilled again when time permits. The total number of holes that have been redrilled is 7 representing a total footage of 378 ft. (115 m). This is approximately 0.2% of the total property drilled footage. Table 7-4: DeSoto Property Exploration and Definition Drilling Summary Year Drilled Purpose Total Holes Total Depth (ft.) Total Depth (m) Pre 1970 Exploration 274 21,995 6,704 1970 to 1979 Exploration 596 42,609 12,987 1980 to 1989 Exploration 0 0 0 1990 to 1999 Exploration 1,813 80,619 24,573 2000 to 2009 Exploration 14 590 180 2010 to 2014 Exploration 0 0 0 2015 Exploration 0 0 0 2016 Exploration 0 0 0 2017 Exploration 253 14,790 4,508 2018 Exploration 0 0 0 2019 Exploration 0 0 0 2020 Exploration 0 0 0 2021 Exploration 0 0 0 2022 Exploration 0 0 0 Total 2,950 160,603 48,952 Date: December 31, 2022 7-9 Figure 7-4: DeSoto Property Drill Collar Location Plan

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1022.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 7-10 The drill holes shown in Figure 7-4 were used in the mineral resource estimation process. Data that is not considered in the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation process includes data that cannot be mapped, data that has missing densities and data that has come from unverified sources through acquisition or other means. These concerns have been addressed and the data has been identified in the database. The total number of holes that have been excluded from the 2022 mineral resource estimate is 179 representing a total footage of 13,679 ft. (4,169 m). This is approximately 2.8% of the total drilled footage supporting the 2022 estimates. 7.2.2.5 Pioneer Property A total of 2,984 holes have been drilled at Pioneer yielding a total of 230,425 ft. (70,223 m) of drilling (Table 7-5). Figure 7-5 shows the collar locations of the drill holes considered for current geological interpretations, modeling and mineral resource estimation. Drill holes not included in the modeling for mineral resource estimation are holes that do not have useable locations, or have data that has not been verified and is considered unreliable. These hole locations are placed on a redrill pattern and drilled again when time permits. The total number of holes that have been redrilled is 35 representing a total footage of 2,797 ft. (853 m). This is approximately 1.2% of the total property drilled footage. Table 7-5: Pioneer Property Exploration and Definition Drilling Summary Year Drilled Purpose Total Holes Total Depth (ft.) Total Depth (m) Pre 1970 Exploration 536 24,142 7,358 1970 to 1979 Definition 1,414 121,024 36,888 1980 to 1989 Definition 466 32,427 9,884 1990 to 1999 Definition 160 15,926 4,854 2000 to 2009 Definition 406 36,812 11,220 2010 to 2014 Definition 2 94 29 2015 Definition 0 0 0 2016 Definition 0 0 0 2018 Definition 0 0 0 2019 Definition 0 0 0 2020 Definition 0 0 0 2021 Definition 0 0 0 2022 Definition 0 0 0 Total 2,984 230,425 70,233 Date: December 31, 2022 7-11 Figure 7-5: Pioneer Property Drill Collar Location Plan Date: December 31, 2022 7-12 The drill holes shown in Figure 7-5 were used in the mineral resource estimation process. Data that is not considered in the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation process includes data that cannot be mapped, data that has missing densities and data that has come from unverified sources through acquisition or other means. These concerns have been addressed and the data has been identified in the database. The total number of holes that have been excluded from the 2022 mineral resource estimate is 4 representing a total footage of 229 ft. (70 m). This is approximately 0.1% of the total drilled footage supporting the 2022 estimates. 7.2.2.6 South Pasture Property A total of 9,936 holes have been drilled at South Pasture yielding a total of 569,474 ft. (173,575 m) of drilling (Table 7-6). Figure 7-6 shows the collar locations of the drill holes considered for current geological interpretations, modeling and mineral resource estimation. Drill holes not included in the modeling for mineral resource estimation are holes that do not have useable locations, or have data that has not been verified and is considered unreliable. These hole locations are placed on a redrill pattern and drilled again when time permits. The total number of holes that have been redrilled is 1,938 representing a total footage of 8,507 ft. (2,593 m). This is approximately 1.5% of the total property drilled footage. Table 7-6: South Pasture Property Exploration and Definition Drilling Summary Year Drilled Purpose Total Holes Total Depth (ft.) Total Depth (m) Pre 1995 Exploration 4,258 238,915 72,821 1995 to 1999 Definition 1,760 92,805 28,287 2000 to 2004 Definition 882 52,062 15,868 2005 to 2009 Definition 1,038 58,893 17,951 2010 to 2014 Definition 643 44,385 13,529 2015 Definition 486 34,171 10,415 2016 Definition 357 20,267 6,177 2017 Definition 278 14,073 4,289 2018 Definition 115 6,943 2,116 2019 Definition 36 2,240 683 2020 Definition 83 4,720 1,439 2021 Definition 0 0 0 2022 Definition 0 0 0 Total 9,936 569,474 173,575 Date: December 31, 2022 7-13 Figure 7-6: South Pasture Property Drill Collar Location Plan

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1023.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 7-14 The drill holes shown in Figure 7-6 were used in the mineral resource estimation process. Data that is not considered in the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation process includes data that cannot be mapped, data that has missing densities and data that has come from unverified sources through acquisition or other means. These concerns have been addressed and the data has been identified in the database. The total number of holes that have been excluded from the 2022 mineral resource estimate is 133 representing a total footage of 10,661 ft. (3,249 m). This is approximately 5.1% of the total drilled footage supporting the 2022 estimates. 7.2.3 Drill Methods Drilling at all sites is completed using a Failings 1250 Mud Rotary unit that uses bentonite slurry and positive hydrologic head to maintain hole stability. A 10 ft. (3 m) long and four-inch diameter core barrel is used to collect in-situ samples in runs of 2 to 8 ft. (0.6 to 2.4 m). Negative pressure within the barrel occurs as the sample is retrieved and slurry is forced out the top of the drill stem. The vacuum that forms is employed to hold the core sample in the barrel as it is removed for the hole after each run. Once the barrel is safely removed from the hole a pump is used to fill the barrel with slurry to push the sample out of the bottom of the barrel. As the sample is removed it is placed in boxes in lengths of up to 5 ft. (1.5 m). 7.2.4 Geological Logging Each drill hole is logged in the field as it is drilled using a Mosaic customized logging sheet that feeds into the Mosaic master database. This is done by either a Mosaic or contract geologist that also accompanies and directs the drill crew. The logging geologist makes general notes on the overburden lithologies by viewing the cuttings and overburden core samples. During this process the depth and general firmness of any "hardpan" is noted as well as any remarkable observations. Core samples are collected of the overburden to ensure that the contact with the mineralization is accurately identified. Once the contact with the matrix is observed, the onsite geologist inspects each sample of matrix using a variety of methods. The samples are described based on external appearance initially. Characteristics such as color, stiffness, swell, depth and length are noted on the Mosaic customized logging sheet. The samples are then evaluated by hand using a hand lens or cutting tools to "open" the core to see the interior makeup. The visual appearance of the interior is then logged noting if the core is uniform or if there is differential layering of any kind, general abundance, size and color of phosphate product and where within the core the product lies, the type and general number of impurities. The geologist characterizes the texture of the core constituents to describe the core in further detail to note if the core is clayey, sandy, dolomitic or if it contains rubble. Also recorded is an opinion on pumping or digging difficulty. Specific features of each sample are noted and if there is a distinct transition between layers or if the deposit is uniform throughout. Samples are logged and separated by depth and specific geologic characteristics. Each separated sample within a hole is labeled with location and unit identifiers and bagged to be taken to the onsite metallurgical and analytical lab. Core logging is based on lithology and phosphatic abundance. It is not necessary to log lithological units and attempt to define seam conformity. The individual unit/beds generally exhibit lithological similarities across the property and region, but locally repeat in transgressive or regressive sequences. The interpretation is based on the total abundance of phosphatic material in the bed and the total phosphatic material within the borehole. Bed geometries that are sinusoidal or in some other way skewed towards variability in grain size or material density can impact the predictive quality of data. In areas where features of this type exist the drilling density may not be sufficient to be predictive. This is only the case in fluvial deposits with phosphatic sediment loads that vary in composition over geological time and is not common. Interbeds of limestone or dolostone can present losses of recovery when they cannot be readily cored. In some cases, well indurated interbeds need to have the cuttings flushed from cutting surface of the bit for drilling to proceed. Drilling fluid and cuttings are washed from the core barrel and pumped through the annular space of the borehole to the mud tub. It is possible that small portions of phosphatic bed above and below the interbed are poorly resolved due to material losses. Date: December 31, 2022 7-15 Beds of clays that are resistant to pumping are identified but the composition is poorly defined and can materially impact the mineability of the bed due to poor pumping exhibited by these materials. The geologist notes these beds and identifies and logs clays with material properties that indicate poor pumping performance. 7.2.5 Recovery A core recovery of 90% is required for each hole. If this recovery is not met, the hole is redrilled at that time. 7.2.6 Collar Surveys and Down Hole Surveys Prior to 2016, the collar coordinates for each hole were surveyed by Mosaic surveyors. Post 2016, LiDAR coordinates including elevations are obtained by annual flyovers done by a certified contractor. No downhole surveys are completed since all required geological information is obtained from the drill hole logging and core samples. 7.3 Hydrogeology There is no hydrogeological data collected at the exploration and drilling data acquisition stage. Most is collected during environmental permitting and studies. More detail is included in the environmental section. 7.4 Geotechnical No geotechnical data is collected at the drill data acquisition stage. Geotechnical considerations are taken into account during the mining of the phosphate. 7.5 QP Interpretation of the Exploration and Drilling Information In the opinion of the Section 7 QP, the quantity and quality of the lithological, collar and drilling data collected for all of the properties are sufficient to support mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation. The reasons for this are as follows:  The core logging meets industry standards for this type of deposit.  The collar surveys have been performed using industry-standard instrumentation.  Recovery data from core drilling programs is acceptable.  The drilling pattern and density are constant with industry standard.  The recorded data and classification of core constituents are in line with industry practice.  The drilling process and equipment are consistent with industry standards for this type of deposit.  The data that is determined to be defective is not used in the estimation process. Date: December 31, 2022 8-1 8.0 Sample Preparation, Analyses and Security 8.1 Introduction Mosaic owns and operates an analytical lab in Florida (A-Lab). The A-Lab is located at the Mosaic Four Corners Facility (11200 SR Hwy 37 South, Bradley, FL 33835). The A-Lab is led by a Senior Lab Supervisor and operates 24 hours/day, seven days/week in a rotating shift fashion. Each shift crew consists of a Senior Analytical Tech and two Analytical Lab Technicians. The A-Lab provides metallurgical and analytical services, including sample preparation to all Mosaic Florida minerals operations. Additionally, Mosaic's New Wales Quality Control Lab provides analytical services when the A-Lab has an extended backlog and for periodic detection of additional metals. Both labs are owned by Mosaic and are not externally certified. Mosaic is one of 14 member companies of the Association of Fertilizers and Phosphate Chemists (AFPC) which also includes two overseas and two associate members. The AFPC's main goal is to promote uniformity of sampling and analytical methods for the phosphate industry. The preparation and analysis of the A-Lab and New Wales Lab samples follow the protocol and the conventional methods of the industry. The following samples are collected for preparation and analysis:  Core samples collected from on-going drilling programs, including specific holes analyzed for additional metals and additional size fractions. The New Wales Quality Control Lab test for any additional metals.  QA/QC core sample.  Production samples collected after the beneficiation plant. 8.2 Sampling Methods 8.2.1 Procedures Core samples are grouped by depth and specific geologic characteristics as logged by the onsite geologist. Each sample is bagged by hand and each bag containing part of the sample is labeled with location and unit identifiers. A sample is made up of the entire core that is logged for that thickness and geologic characteristic. All the ore for each sample is taken to the lab. Samples are collected after logging. The ideal maximum length of an individual split is 10 ft. (3.0 m), the ideal minimum length of an individual split is 5 ft. (1.5 m) and the average split length is 6.1 ft. (1.9 m). Each sample is labeled in the field with identification information that is specific to only that sample. At the A-Lab that sample is given an "M-Number" that is used from that point on to track the data for that specific sample through the entire process. The M-Number is also stored in the database with the analytical data. 8.2.2 Quality Control Geologists receive onsite training for sample collection supervised by an experienced geologist. During training the geologist is provided instructions for the drilling, logging and sampling process. This supervised training occurs within comparable phosphate deposits within the Central Florida Phosphate District. The tenured geologist provides continual feedback and assesses the competencies of the geologist in training. The geologist in training is only released to work when the tenured geologist and the qualified person agree that they are proficient and capable to conduct work unsupervised. Boreholes are located by GPS and are drilled by a mud rotary coring method. The holes are drilled with a fish tail bit through the overburden. If phosphate is noticed at any time in the cuttings by the driller or the geologist, the driller stops and core Date: December 31, 2022 8-2 drilling begins. In most cases, coring begins prior to phosphatic beds. If there are an abundance of phosphatic cuttings in the mud tub, the hole may be re-drilled at the geologist's discretion. Samples are recovered from the borehole and are placed in core boxes for visual description and logging. The thicknesses and depths are recorded in the drilling log and characteristics of the sediments and the phosphates are noted in the logs. The core is assessed for recovery by comparing the recovered footage to the footage communicated by the driller. In the case of poor recovery, the drilling logs are notated and the hole is assessed for re-drilling. The core, in its entirety, is bagged and labeled on the bag and within the bag for sample processing at the lab. To ensure core samples are properly identified and labeled the lead lab tech matches the log data to sample data. If there is a discrepancy, the onsite geologist that drilled the borehole is asked to correct it as the core is received. All core is consumed in processing and analysis. 8.3 Sample Preparation 8.3.1 Process Sample preparation at the A-Lab follows the process outlined in Figure 8-1. There is a detailed written process manual that details each step and includes supporting photos and directions. This manual is reviewed with personnel regularly. In general, the sample preparation process consists of the sample being weighed and placed on a rubber mat where it is disaggregated into a homogenous mixture. Two 1,000-gram moisture samples are taken from this mixture. A portion of the sample is placed in a cylinder of known volume. That portion of the sample is sent through a pilot washer. On the first part of the washer, screens separate the pebble size material. The second screen separates the feed size material from the smaller waste material. The pebble and feed material are screened at specific sizes, each sized portion is weighed, dried, ground and analyzed for specific metals and grade. The feed goes through a two-step floatation process using chemicals to separate the sand from the concentrate. The concentrate is then weighed, dried, ground and analyzed for specific metals and grade. Additionally, a portion of the waste material that passes through the feed screen is collected to be weighed, dried, ground and analyzed for specific metals and grade.

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1024.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 8-3 Figure 8-1: Core Sample Preparation Flow Sheet Date: December 31, 2022 8-4 8.3.2 Quality Control The quality control process utilizes dual moisture samples to ensure the proper water content is used for the analysis of the samples. The weights of the samples are mass balanced to determine the volume of water in the core sample. Another process used to maintain quality is to split specific core samples into approximately equal portion and run them through the entire lab process to verify the results. The splitting of the core takes place in the field by the onsite geologist and is treated as a separate hole for production sampling. The geologist uses a cutting tool to divide the core in the field as close to evenly as possible. The split samples are bagged separately and labeled as a QA/QC sample. The A-Lab then treats both samples as a separate core and runs them through the process to ensure accurate a comparison is made of the sampling, processing and analyzing. The results can then be reviewed for outliers and variations to adjust any part of the process that needs updating. 8.4 Assaying and Analytical Procedures 8.4.1 Procedures The drill hole core samples are assayed for phosphorous as BPL (Bone Phosphate of Lime), acid insoluble material, metals reported in percent oxide and ground moisture to correct the BPL analysis due to sample moisture. The wet chemistry portion of the analytical lab is staffed with two lab technicians and one senior lab technician. This portion of the lab is in continuous operation and always staffed with at least two technicians. Samples are logged into a LIMS (Laboratory Information Management System) that is used by A-Lab. LIMS manages the samples from receipt to release. The system is integrated into the Company database and all results are recorded. When the analysis is completed, the sample results are released in duplicate to other tables in the database. Procedures for analysis of processed samples are identical for pebble, amine concentrate and clays. Each size fraction is dried and ground to a minimum of 0.25 mm. A one-gram sample of dried material is massed. The sample is digested in a solution of hydrochloric acid with heating. The samples are filtered. The insoluble particulate and filter paper are reserved. The aqueous solution undergoes analysis. The analysis uses an industry standard Scandium tracer to validate the instrument during analysis. The first and last samples of a ten-sample run are industry standard AFPC Check 22 to further validate the instrument during analysis. The insoluble material and filter paper are placed in a muffle furnace and the remaining insoluble material is massed in a controlled process to eliminate moisture fluctuations. Flotation feeds and flotation tails are ground, massed and digested in HCL as described above. The samples are processed using the molybdovanadate and perchloric acid colorimetric method. The samples are then analyzed by Shimadzu spectrophotometer and are analyzed only for phosphorus BPL. Additional metallurgical analysis is routinely conducted at the New Wales Analytical Lab. The samples are processed and ground by the A-Lab. The samples are transferred by contractor security personnel to the New Wales Analytical Lab and are processed using a mass spectrometer to identify additional metals. 8.4.2 Density Determinations The density of in-situ core samples is determined by the water density method. A sample of the disaggregated homogenized core is placed in a cylinder of known volume (sample mass and cylinder volume will vary depending on available sample size). After the sample is weighed, the cylinder is filled to capacity with water. The cylinder is then weighed again and the density is derived. The mass of the dry material in the sample is determined by multiplying the sample by the percent solids. The volume of the water in the used cylinder is determined by dividing the mass of water in the cylinder by the mass of one cubic foot of water. The volume occupied by the dry material is found by subtracting the volume of water from the cylinder size. The density of the dry material is calculated by dividing the mass of the dry material by the volume it occupies in the cylinder. Date: December 31, 2022 8-5 The measured density is compared to a calculated density. The calculated density is the fractional density based on the weight percent of the dry components of each sample. This density is determined by multiplying the fractional percent of each component by a standard density assuming no void. It is then factored by the amount of moisture found in the sample and a constant void factor. The new factored density is then adjusted to account for the infill of water and small particles in the interparticle space between larger particles. This adjustment is done using standard coefficients derived from statistical regression to arrive at the calculated density that is compared to the measured lab density using a range of +/- 15%. 8.4.3 Moisture Estimation The moisture estimation process begins by collecting two approximate 1,000-gram representative samples of disaggregated and homogenized core prior to the sample density estimation process. The samples are collected from varying parts of the core to not over represent any particular portion of the core. The weights of the samples are verified using calibrated digital scales and any excess sample is removed to maintain similar weights across the samples. The samples are placed in a Grieve Oven for eight to 12 hours to dry. The samples are reweighed after drying to determine moisture mass lost. The percent moisture of each sample is calculated and mass balanced to be used in the core properties calculations. Samples are used in the percent moisture and density determination process to limit sample basis and increase accuracy. Ground sample moisture is determined by selecting a single five-gram sample of each ground sample to be weighed and placed in an oven for one hour to dry. The samples are reweighed after drying to determine moisture mass lost. The moisture determination process and estimation are rechecked as part of the QA/QC process. Each portion of the core selected as a QA/QC hole goes through the same procedure thereby producing four moisture samples for a single layer. The average variation between moisture samples of the same core is ~1.2%. 8.4.4 Quality Assurance and Quality Control For QA, the A-Lab instruments are calibrated at the beginning of each BPL and metals run and when the samples are weighed for digestion, an AFPC Check 22 sample is also weighed, digested and analyzed along with the samples. Mosaic uses industry standard sample AFPC Phosphate Rock Check No. 22 as its QA/QC reference sample. If the check assay fails (its analysis results are outside the certified value being assayed), the run is scrapped and repeated. In addition, control charts are generated from LIMS generated data to monitor BPL and metals analysis results. The A-Lab also participates in a bimonthly round-robin check program in which 32 industry labs analyze an unknown rock sample supplied by the participating labs and report their results to AFPC. Results are tabulated and published when data analysis is completed by AFPC; each lab's results are expected to be within two standard deviations of the average of all the data. Three instruments are used to analyze the A-Lab samples for BPL and metals. They are covered with a service agreement with the manufacturer that includes two preventive maintenance visits per year. The lab instrument technicians do routine preventive maintenance weekly and the technicians and the chemist take care of minor to moderate instrument issues. Whenever there is an instrument problem that cannot be fixed in-house by the instrument technician or chemist, the manufacturer is called to repair the units under the service agreement. 8.5 Sample Security Core samples are logged and collected by Mosaic personnel or approved contractors. The samples are transported to the storage area at the Four Corners Facility by the same personnel. The sample storage area is located behind the mine security gate. Only Mosaic personnel can access the storage area. If samples are taken to an outside lab for processing, a chain of custody is established that verifies the samples are accessed only by approved personnel at specified locations throughout the core processing procedure. Date: December 31, 2022 8-6 8.6 Database Drill hole collar, survey, assay and lithological data are collected from the drilling campaign, analytical laboratory and LiDAR surveys. This data is uploaded into an Oracle SQI database and available to appropriate staff through a proprietary graphical user interface. Tabular data is available to users.  Drill hole collar elevations are measured from LiDAR data using surveyed collar locations provided by the geologist. Data is uploaded into the database from the GIS department.  Lithological data is collected by the geologist during drilling including color, sediment makeup, degree of consolidation, phosphatic abundance and drill hole information including depth to ore, thickness of ore split and total depth. The logs are released to the analytical lab and entered into the database.  Physical properties data is entered directly into the database. Important items are: mass of sized samples, density, percent moisture and percent clay.  Analytical data is collected by the A-Lab LIMS system and uploaded into the secure database. Important items are: BPL, Fe2O3, Al2O3, MgO, and CaO. 8.7 QP Opinion on Sample Preparation, Security, and Analytical Procedures It is the opinion of the Section 8 QP that the Florida phosphate mining sampling method, sample preparation and assaying and analytical procedures are suitable to support mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation. The rational for this is as follows:  The core sampling, sample preparation, security and analytical process are conducted using industry standard procedures.  Database maintenance and enhancements are ongoing to improve use and security and ensure the data is readily accessible for mineral resource and reserve estimation.  The core sampling, sample preparation, security and analytical process provide the grade, volume, and qualities needed to accurately estimate mineral resource and reserve estimates.  Quality Assurance and Quality Control processes are completed, ensuring the results are within industry standards.  It is assumed, based on a review of existing documents and compilation reporting, that the historical core sampling, sample preparation, security and assaying processes were appropriate for the time of data collection. The majority of the historic drilling areas have been mined and through production records, the QP has gained confidence that these estimations reconcile with realized mining expectations.  Internal sampling and laboratory procedures are standardized with the intention of providing accurate and representative samples of the material being mined.

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1025.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 9-1 9.0 Data Verification 9.1 QP and Internal Data Verification When geologic data is acquired, the Mosaic Senior Reserve Analyst (QP) and A-Lab staff perform the following regular internal data validations:  Ongoing assay data validation consisting of weight and assay checks is done using the QA/QC split core process.  Data verification is conducted on samples using numerical methods. Statistical analysis is conducted on a representative subsample of assays to determine expected elemental ratios. The comparison of the total of assay elements to a statistically representative total of expected elements is performed. If the ratio is outside of a prescribed passing range, the assay is repeated. If the new assay falls outside of the prescribed range the data are labeled as "bad data" and the drill hole is scheduled to be drilled again.  Each sample split with its representative series of assay values is verified by the QP or an employee working under the direction of the QP. There are "flags" that identify data that fall outside of predicted ranges during the verification process. Each split is determined to be fit for purpose and is validated manually by the qualified person or an employee working under the direction of the qualified person for use in reserve and resource estimation.  All new assay data being added to the database is verified upon acquisition by the internal validation software.  Prior to entry into the database to be used in mineral resource estimation, the data is reviewed for improbable entries and high values. Any errors are flagged and corrected.  Mosaic staff regularly conducts laboratory reviews and audits of the A-Lab.  The onsite mine geologists visit the mining areas to visually inspect the mining excavation to compare observations to the drilling data. When required, samples are collected to understand differences in grade and verify the exploration data.  The QP visits the core logging and sampling facilities bi-annually.  The QP has conducted discussion with past professionals and original site experts regarding historical data. 9.2 External Data Verification The following external checks are performed:  The equipment used for analytical purposes is calibrated on a regular basis to know standards.  The core properties analysis from the density procedure through the analyte analysis has been duplicated by an outside lab for repeatability.  External round-robin assay checks.  Quarterly mineral reserve audits and depletion reviews are done by KPMG as part of their financial reviews and audits. 9.3 QP Opinion on Data Adequacy It is the opinion of the QP that the data being used and relied upon in this Report is adequate to support mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation. The rational for this is as follows:  There is enough drill data to produce accurate mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates.  The data quality and quantity are aligned with industry standards. Date: December 31, 2022 9-2  The verification process is adequate to validate the data used as part of the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation process.  The historical assay information is adequately supported by the reconciliation to actual mining results and activity.  The exploration results have been reviewed and there is confidence in the interpretations.  The QP has reviewed select internal reports and memos prepared by Mosaic staff and note that those reports and memos have not identified any material deficiencies with the adequacy of the data at the time this Report was prepared. Date: December 31, 2022 10-1 10.0 Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing 10.1 Introduction Metallurgical testing and quality control are crucial to Mosaic mineral processing. Laboratory and plant tests are a necessity to support the mining and beneficiation process because of inherent limitations of online measurement of matrix quality. Draglines and dredges extract the mineralization, known as the matrix, that is approximately 1/3 clay, 1/3 sand, and 1/3 phosphate rock. If the draglines and dredges are not mining in the proper zone, the matrix quality will vary from time to time. As such, shift samples are collected from each stream and analyzed in the A-Lab to ensure operating targets are being met throughout the process and to confirm final product purity/quality. 10.2 Procedures To support production quality, automatic samplers are installed at the beneficiation plants to collect shift samples from all streams. At the end of each shift, samples are delivered to the A-Lab for analysis. Samples are collected by the operations group using the automatic samplers and brought to the A-Lab for analysis on a set routine. These routines have been established by each site's Engineering and Operations personnel, based on the criticality and variability of each specific stream noted over the site's decades of operation. Once the A-Lab receives the samples, the standard procedures are followed to process the samples. The frequency of sample analysis is listed in Table 10-1. Table 10-1: Notable Frequency of Samples Sample Name Frequency of Samples Analysis Type Pebble Once every 3 to 4 hours based on production rate. Automatically collected samples at 15 to 20 minute intervals Chemistry Sizer Rock (Intermediate Pebble) x 2 per day Chemistry Flotation Feed x 2 per day Chemistry Flotation Rougher Concentrate x 2 per day Chemistry Flotation Rougher Tail x 2 per day Chemistry Final Concentrate x 2 per day Chemistry Shipment x 2 per day Chemistry 10.3 Quality Control For the A-Lab sample analysis, lab technicians follow the lab standard procedures to split, dry, grind and analyze each sample. The A-Lab technicians put a standard sample in each batch sample to verify the equipment's accuracy. If the lab data is questionable, production engineers will ask the A-Lab to recheck the sample. The equipment used to analyze samples in the A-Lab has service agreements with the manufacturer that include two preventative maintenance visits per year as well as emergency visits to troubleshoot instrument issues. Routine instrument maintenance is carried out by the lab chemist and E/I team. Date: December 31, 2022 10-2 10.4 Database and Records Processing related lab results are imported into a LIMS (Lab Information Management System), that feeds the site's larger reporting-based database. Shipping related lab results are entered into a PLS (Product Loading System) system, that creates a history of the values and provides a certificate of analysis to customers through Mosaic's SAP billing system. Production data is saved into a database. Almost all data has been transferred to the Process Information (PI) database using tags. 10.5 Metallurgical Testing Metallurgical testing, processes and procedures are used to evaluate drilling data at the current active mines and the South Pasture, Pioneer and DeSoto Properties. As drilling continues at all properties, the metallurgical testing, processes and procedures outlined in Section 10 also continue. Metallurgical testing is an on-going activity associated with all completed drilling. 10.6 Recovery Estimates The process recovery at the beneficiation plants is mainly dependant on the feed grade, production-water clarity, equipment health and reagent quality. The process recoveries are calculated using the shift samples that are collected by the automatic samplers from the feed, concentrate and tails. Production engineers will conduct reagent quality checks on a monthly schedule. Historical process recovery and product quality at South Fort Meade, Four Corners and Wingate are listed in the Table 10- 2, Table 10-3, and Table 10-4, respectively. Table 10-2: South Fort Meade Mine Recovery and Product Quality Year Recovery % P2O5% Acid Insolubles % MER % 2018 88.5 28.9 12.0 8.9 2019 88.1 28.2 13.7 9.6 2020 86.8 28.5 12.8 9.7 2021 83.9 27.0 14.1 11.8 2022 Sept YTD 79.5 25.0 14.0 19.2 Table 10-3: Four Corners Mine Recovery and Product Quality Year Recovery % P2O5 % Acid Insolubles % MER % 2018 87.3 28.5 12.9 9.8 2019 88.9 28.7 12.6 9.86 2020 89.5 28.4 13.9 9.5 2021 89.0 28.4 13.4 9.4 2022 Sept YTD 84.2 28.1 13.6 9.4

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1026.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 10-3 Table 10-4: Wingate Mine Recovery and Product Quality Year Recovery % P2O5 % Acid Insolubles % MER % 2018 88.4 28.1 12.0 9.2 2019 85.9 29.1 10.3 8.5 2020 85.6 28.4 11.4 9.1 2021 84.5 28.4 10.9 9.4 2022 Sept YTD 83.8 29.5 10.4 7.7 Recovery is calculated as follows: Recovery% = (Concentrate P2O5) / (Feed P2O5) × (Feed P2O5-Tailing P2O5) / (Concentrate P2O5-Tailing P2O5) ×100%. 10.7 Metallurgical Variability The combination of drill core sampling and historically proven consistency of the P2O5 grade surrounding the facilities provides confidence to the metallurgical consistency. However, equipment health, production-water quality and reagent uality affect the flotation recovery. Figure 10-1, 10-2, 10-3 show the relationship between feed grade and plant recovery using plant performance data for each plant. It indicates that a higher feed grade will generate a higher flotation recovery if the other factors remain unchanged. Figure 10-1: South Fort Meade Feed P2O5 Grade vs. Recovery% Date: December 31, 2022 10-4 Figure 10-2: Four Corners Feed P2O5 Grade vs. Recovery% Figure 10-3: Wingate Feed P2O5 Grade vs. Recovery% Figures 10-4, 10-5, 10-6 show the recovery control chart for the beneficiation plant for South Fort Meade, Four Corners and Wingate, respectively. Date: December 31, 2022 10-5 Figure 10-4: South Fort Meade Plant Recovery Control Chart Figure 10-5: Four Corners Plant Recovery Control Chart Date: December 31, 2022 10-6 Figure 10-6: Wingate Plant Recovery Control Chart 10.8 Deleterious Elements Phosphate mineralization in central Florida contains some deleterious elements for all mines that have been tested and verified by lab and plant tests. The major elements include magnesium oxide (MgO), pyrite (FeS2) and aluminum oxide (Al2O3). MgO Sometimes the beneficiation plants process high MgO content feed. The high MgO content feed is mainly from dolomite, and the fatty acid can attach on dolomite and phosphate surfaces with calcium ions. If this happens, some high MgO content dolomite may go to the deoiling circuit which will affect deoiling and amine flotation recovery and final concentrate quality. Pyrite Pyrite is iron sulfide (FeS2). Most of the matrix is above 65 ft., but occasionally draglines still mine some matrix below 65 ft.deep. There is a high chance that pyrite exists in the rock below a depth of 65 ft. It has been verified that the pyrite is present in many of the lower matrix zones at southern Bone Valley, found as tiny inclusions in the phosphate crystal. If they are present on the surface, the fatty acid will adsorb on the pyrite very easily, causing more difficult deoiling. Normally, the deoiling pH must go below 2.0 to remove the fatty acid from the pyrite mineral, but too low deoiling pH (less than 2.8) will result in lower phosphate recovery, as it causes ortho-P (soluble phosphorus) to form. Ortho-P is a depressant for rougher flotation. The more ortho-P in the flotation production-water, the lower the phosphate recovery. Al2O3 The clay minerals in the phosphate deposits of central Florida are a mixture of common (smectite, illite and kaolinite) and less common (palygorskite and sepiolite) minerals. There are almost always some clay chips in the flotation feed. The clay mineral can be a source of Al2O3 in the phosphate product. In addition, aluminum phosphate (wavellite or crandallite) is common in Four Corners matrix. As a result, Four Corners phosphate rock has a higher Al2O3 content than South Fort Meade and Wingate phosphate rock.

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1027.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 10-7 Other Deleterious Elements Additional elements are noted in the mining and processing streams. These elements/compounds are in trace concentrations and have shown no notable accumulations within the process. These elements/compounds include calcium, aluminum and sulfate. 10.9 Qualified Person's Opinion on Data Adequacy It is the opinion of the QP that the mineral processing, metallurgical testing and analytical procedures used and relied upon in this Report is adequate to support mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation for Florida phosphate mining. The rational for this is as follows:  The analytical procedures used in the analysis are conventional and are aligned with industry practice.  The data quality and quantity are aligned with industry standards.  Collected samples are representative of the type and style of the mineralization and the mineral deposit as a whole.  The verification and QA/QC processes validating the data is adequate.  Test work programs, internal and external, continue to be performed to support current operations and potential improvements.  The metallurgical test work completed is appropriate for optimizing processing conditions and routes for proper process operation.  Tests are performed on samples that are considered to be representative of the mineralization styles and mineralogy.  Beneficiation recovery factors estimated are based on appropriate metallurgical test work and confirmed with production data.  The data received from the A-Lab is within industry standards to drive and support conclusions regarding the actual processes. See Section 8.1 for information regarding the A-Lab. Date: December 31, 2022 11-1 11.0 Mineral Resource Estimates 11.1 Introduction Mosaic's phosphate mineral resources are reported as a beneficiation plant product (phosphate rock) tonnage and P2O5 grade including a total primary impurities ratio (MER). Mineral resources are reported exclusive of mineral reserves. The geological information used to estimate the phosphate mineral resources for the mining facilities and exploration properties are based on drilling and sampling. The mineral resource estimates are completed using a proprietary software that applies specific grade, physical and impurity limits to the raw drill data of the property. These factors are used to select material that contains sufficient grade, limited impurities and is physically extractable to be included in the mineral resource estimate. The confidence and classification of the mineral resources is estimated based on the drill density of the evaluated area. 11.2 Key Assumptions The following outlines the key assumptions used for the estimation of mineral resources.  100% of the estimated mineral resource (planned matrix) volume will be extracted.  The minimum beneficiation plant concentrate BPL (%P2O5) and minimum pebble BPL (%P2O5) mineral resource cut-offs used for each site are listed in Table 11-1. Table 11-1: BPL in Concentrate and Pebble Cut-Offs Location Minimum Concentrate BPL (%P2O5) Minimum Pebble BPL (%P2O5) Four Corners 60 (27.5%) 40 (18.3%) South Fort Meade 60 (27.5%) 40 (18.3%) Wingate 60 (27.5%) 40 (18.3%) South Pasture 60 (27.5%) 40 (18.3%) DeSoto 60 (27.5%) 50 (22.9%) Pioneer 60 (27.5%) 50 (22.9%)  Mineral resources are also defined by a maximum clay content cut-off for a logged matrix layer and the composite matrix volume (Table 11-2). South Pasture is expressed as a range to account for mineralogical variability. Table 11-2: Clay Percent Cut-Offs Location Clay % Volume Limit (Split/Hole) Four Corners 50/45 South Fort Meade 50/45 Wingate 40/40 South Pasture 40/40 to 50/50 DeSoto 40/40 Pioneer 40/40  There is no dilution applied to the mineral resource estimates. Date: December 31, 2022 11-2  Mineral resource limits are based on: o Setbacks from culturally sensitive, economically protected areas, municipal centers, adjacent property boundaries and structures as set by federal, state, county and local laws. The maximum set back is 1,320 ft. (402.3 m) from municipal centers. The minimum setback is 50 ft. (15.2 m). o Disturbance limits in issued federal, state and county permits.  The mineral resource quality allows for unadjusted maximum pebble magnesium oxide (MgO) volume cut-off of 2.5%. Impurity levels are adjusted based on historical measurements.  100% of the estimated primary impurities (Fe2O3, Al2O3, MgO, and CaO) are recovered by mining.  Maximum mining depth of 85 ft. (26 m) below ground surface for facilities that utilize draglines.  Maximum mining depth of 109 ft. (33 m) below ground surface for facilities that utilize dredges.  Beneficiation plant recovery assumptions: o 100% of the feed volume will be recovered o 100% of the pebble volume will be recovered o 100% of the concentrate will be recovered from the feed o 100% of the clay volume will be removed with no product included 11.3 Estimation Methodology The methodology for estimating mineral resources is described as follows:  Drill hole data is evaluated using a propriety software that applies mine specific mineral resource assumptions to each logged layer.  Each logged layer within a hole that meets the mine specific requirements is composited into a "matrix" zone using product volumes as the weighting agent.  Any analyzed logged layer that fails to meet the requirements and lies above all other passing logged layers or in- between passing logged layers is composited with the waste volume.  Logged layers that underlie the entire passing volume are not included in the composite data.  The composite data is exported as a text file to be used to determine the shape of the resource area in a GIS software and in the creation grids for the geologic model in a mining software.  The composite data is then added to an GIS map and the mineral resource shape is drawn using the inverse distance weighted interpolation function based on where acceptable matrix is present in the drill data.  A contour of the mineral resource shape is created and loaded into the mining software.  The contour is then trimmed to account for permit and mine boundary limitations.  The composite data text file and is then loaded into mining software to create a geological model.  Areas that do not allow sufficient space for typical mining operation to take place with the production equipment in service at that mine are not considered for mineral resources.  The drill data is also used to determine the shape of the mineral resource area for each confidence classification by further modifying the mineral resource contour within the accepted limits of mining.  The interpolation method used in the geologic model to create the volume, density, grade and impurity grids is inverse distance weighted based on the geo-located drill data. Date: December 31, 2022 11-3  Elevation grids are created using triangulation based on the LiDAR or survey data assigned to each drill hole.  A utility macro is used to adjust elevations to account for holes with no matrix that meets the mine requirements.  The data from each grid is then volumetrically combined using product volumes for the specific mineral resource shape and mineral resource classification creating a block of uniform constituents.  Estimation of mineralization tonnage, grade and impurities is done by applying the volume weight percent of pebble, feed and clay for the given mineral resource shape to the entire volume of the acceptable matrix within that mineral resource shape. 11.4 Exploratory Data Analysis The process for data analysis prior to mineral resource estimation is:  Sampled historical drill hole data is reviewed for selection accuracy and adjustments are based on the prescribed limits of the area of the remaining mineral resource.  As new drill data is added each hole is individually examined using operation specific mineral resource assumptions.  Annually, mineral resource limits are reviewed for possible changes to reflect in proposed mining and sequences. If changes are made to limits, drill data is updated with the new limits and re-evaluated.  Data that is not considered in the mineral resource estimation process includes data that cannot be geolocated, data that has missing densities, and data that has come from unverified sources through acquisition or other means. These are checked to ensure they have not been used in the current estimation process. 11.5 Validation The validations of the mineral resource estimates are:  Independent volumetric estimations are completed in parallel to the model estimates.  Comparison iterations using known changes to confirm model results are completed. 11.6 Confidence Classification of Mineral Resource Estimates Mineral resource classifications are defined in SEC Regulation S-K, Subpart 1300. Mosaic adheres to these definitions when assigning confidence and classification to their mineral resource estimates. The SEC Regulation S-K, Subpart 1300 definitions of measure, indicated and inferred mineral resources are as follows: Measured Mineral Resource A measured mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of conclusive geological evidence and sampling. The level of geological certainty associated with a measured mineral resource is sufficient to allow a qualified person to apply modifying factors, as defined in this section, in sufficient detail to support detailed mine planning and final evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. Because a measured mineral resource has a higher level of confidence than the level of confidence of either an indicated mineral resource or an inferred mineral resource, a measured mineral resource may be converted to a proven mineral reserve or to a probable mineral reserve. At all sites, a measured mineral resource is defined as mineralization delineated with at least a drill density of one hole per two and a half acres or greater. Indicated Mineral Resource

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1028.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 11-4 An indicated mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of adequate geological evidence and sampling. The level of geological certainty associated with an indicated mineral resource is sufficient to allow a qualified person to apply modifying factors in sufficient detail to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. Because an indicated mineral resource has a lower level of confidence than the level of confidence of a measured mineral resource, an indicated mineral resource may only be converted to a probable mineral reserve. At all sites, an indicated mineral resource is defined as mineralization delineated with a drill density of at least two holes per forty acres. Inferred Mineral Resource An inferred mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of limited geological evidence and sampling. The level of geological uncertainty associated with an inferred mineral resource is too high to apply relevant technical and economic factors likely to influence the prospects of economic extraction in a manner useful for evaluation of economic viability. An inferred mineral resource has the lowest level of geological confidence of all mineral resources. This prevents the application of the modifying factors in a manner useful for evaluation of economic viability, and an inferred mineral resource may not be considered when assessing the economic viability of a mining project and may not be converted to a mineral reserve. For all sites, an inferred mineral resource is defined as mineralization delineated using a drill density of less than two holes per 40 acres. 11.7 Reasonable Prospects of Economic Extraction Regulation S-K, Subpart 1300 requires that an evaluation be conducted as to the prospect of eventual economic extraction for mineral resources. The Florida phosphate mineral resources are reported exclusive of the mineral reserves. The parameters and assumptions listed in Section 11.2 are used to estimate the mineral resources for all sites. The additional parameters and assumptions used to assess reasonable prospects for economic extraction of the measured and indicated mineral resources at DeSoto, Pioneer and South Pasture exploration properties are listed below. Unlike mineral reserves, mineral resources do not have demonstrated economic viability, but they do demonstrate reasonable prospects for economic extraction. The SEC does not require an assessment of reasonable prospects for economic extraction for the inferred mineral resources at the DeSoto, Pioneer and South Pasture properties. General Assumptions  Deleterious elements have a minor impact on recovery of the mineral resources.  There are no environmental, geotechnical and hydrogeological factors and concerns that will impact the prospects for economic extraction of the mineral resources.  Each site will develop its own pumping, water and clay storage strategies.  Reclamation plans are expected to be designed and approved by appropriate federal, state and local agencies prior to any mining at the exploration properties.  The mining and surface rights are in place for the areas of mineral resource.  The mineral reserve cut-off based on productivity factors per site have been applied to assess the prospects for economic extraction of the mineral resources. These are listed in Table 11-3. Date: December 31, 2022 11-5 Table 11-3: Productivity Cut-off Factors Location Recoverable Phosphate Rock tons vs. Matrix Volume Mined Recoverable Phosphate Rock tons vs. Total Volume Mined DeSoto >7.5% >2.2% Pioneer >7.8% >2.2% South Pasture >7.8% >2.2%  The beneficiation plant assumed recoveries are listed in Table 11-4. Table 11-4: Beneficiation Plant Recoveries Location Recovered Sand Feed Volume % Recovered Pebble Volume % Recovered Intermediate Pebble Volume Concentrate Grade Recovered from the Feed Feed Grade Recovered Recovered Concentrate BPL tons Volume from the Feed DeSoto 100.0% 89.0% n/a 85.0% 80.0% 68.0% Pioneer 100.0% 89.0% n/a 85.0% 80.0% 68.0% South Pasture 87.0% 67.5% 280.0% 87.0% 83.0% 62.8%  Mining dilution (Table 11-5) grading 0% P2O5 is applied to estimate mineral reserves. Table 11-5: Mining Dilution Location Minimum Pebble Volume Dilution Minimum Intermediate Pebble Volume Dilution Minimum Concentrate Volume Dilution DeSoto 12.0% n/a 6.0% Pioneer 12.0% n/a 6.0% South Pasture 12.0% n/a 4.5%  Primary impurity recoveries in pebbles, intermediate pebbles and concentrate based on a three-year rolling average are listed in tables 11-6, 11-7 and 11-8 respectively. Table 11-6: Impurity Recoveries in Pebbles Location Fe2O3 Al2O3 CaO MgO DeSoto 100% 100% 100% 100% Pioneer 100% 100% 100% 100% South Pasture 96% 103% 99% 140% Table 11-7: Impurity Recoveries in Intermediate Pebbles Location Fe2O3 Al2O3 CaO MgO South Pasture 96% 83% 98% 74% Date: December 31, 2022 11-6 Table 11-8: Impurity Recoveries in Concentrate Location Fe2O3 Al2O3 CaO MgO DeSoto 100% 100% 100% 100% Pioneer 100% 100% 100% 100% South Pasture 98% 104% 102% 92% DeSoto Property Assumptions  The mineral resources are amenable to dragline mining.  An expected annual average production rate of 6.0 M tons/year (5.4 M tonnes/year) based on 365 production days per year.  It is anticipated that the three current draglines in use at South Fort Meade will be moved to DeSoto and an additional dragline will be made available from Four Corners.  The potable and production-water supplies and associated infrastructure are expected to be developed for the DeSoto property.  DeSoto is expected to be a standalone site requiring its own new infrastructure and beneficiation plant.  Rail and road access will be permitted and built.  Water, matrix slurry and clay pumping assets are expected to be acquired and sized to accommodate the planned production rate.  A "washer" of sufficient capacity is expected to be built to separate the oversized waste material and pebble product from finer size material.  A "sizer" of sufficient capacity is expected to be built to separate the coarser sand size material from the finer sand size material.  A section of the beneficiation plant flotation circuit is expected to be built to separate the finer sand size material from the fine waste material.  There are no water management structures or production-water assets presently onsite. These are expected to be developed in the future.  DeSoto expects to develop a power and electricity strategy. Pioneer Property Assumptions  The mineral resources are amenable to dragline mining.  An expected production rate of 3.5 M tons/year (3.2 M tonnes/year) based on 365 production days per year.  Beneficiation is assumed to be through the South Pasture beneficiation plant. The Pioneer Property is expected to begin production as the South Pasture Property is exhausted.  Pioneer is expected to share and supplement water and clay storage requirements with South Pasture.  There are no water management structures or production-water assets presently onsite. These are expected to be developed in the future.  The potable and production-water supplies and associated infrastructure are expected to be developed for the Pioneer property.  There are no beneficiation activities planned in this area as they are expected to be shared with South Pasture. South Pasture beneficiation facilities are expected to continue to use Duke Energy and Mosaic cogenerated power.  Mosaic is expected to develop a power and electricity strategy. Date: December 31, 2022 11-7 South Pasture Property Assumptions  The mineral resources remain amenable to dragline mining.  An expected average annual production rate of 3.5 M tons/year (3.2 M tonnes/year) based on 365 production days per year.  The idled active beneficiation plant is expected to be restarted to process this mineralization.  It is likely that the Duke Energy and the Mosaic cogeneration line from the New Wales and South Pierce chemical plants will resume supplying power to the site.  South Pasture currently has two active clay settling areas that are permitted for clay storage, with approximately 33.7 M cubic yards of clay storage available. There are a number of other areas that will be considered for future construction.  There are two operating public water wells for office areas and personnel. It is expected that these will be maintained and utilized.  South Pasture Mine currently has some of the required infrastructure in place to support mining and processing. The office complex and associated maintenance areas are expected be used once the mine restarts production. Additionally, a portion of the beneficiation plant equipment is expected to be usable.  The current water management structures are permitted to release water at a regulated quality and quantity from its two permitted in-service outfalls. This is expected to continue and be sufficient for the site. Individual economic assessments have been completed for DeSoto, Pioneer and South Pasture. The positive after-tax NPV and total cash flow results of the assessments support reasonable prospects of economic extraction for the three exploration properties and the mineral resource estimates. 11.8 Mineral Resource Statement The mineral resource estimates for the Florida phosphate exploration properties are listed in Table 11-9. Mineral resources are reported exclusive of the mineral reserves. Figures 11-1, 11-2 and 11-3 show the distribution of the mineral resources at the DeSoto, Pioneer and South Pasture properties, respectively.

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1029.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 11-8 Table 11-9: 2022 Mineral Resources Location Measured Mineral Resources Indicated Mineral Resources Measured + Indicated Mineral Resources Inferred Mineral Resources Tons (M) Tonnes (M) % P2O5 MER Tons (M) Tonnes (M) % P2O5 MER Tons (M) Tonnes (M) % P2O5 MER Tons (M) Tonnes (M) % P2O5 MER DeSoto Property 156 142 30.5 10.7 156 142 30.5 10.7 67 61 30 10 Pioneer Property 19 17 31.1 9.3 136 123 30.4 10.4 154 140 30.5 10.3 21 19 30 10 South Pasture Property 94 85 29.7 10.4 165 150 29.4 10.9 259 235 29.5 10.7 4 3 30 10 Total 113 102 30.0 10.2 457 415 30.1 10.7 569 517 30.0 10.6 92 83 30 10 Notes to accompany mineral resource table: 1. Mineral resource estimates were prepared by QP Kevin Farmer, a Mosaic employee. 2. Mineral resources are reported as a beneficiation plant product (phosphate rock) tonnage and P2O5 grade including a total primary impurities ratio (MER). 3. Mineral resources have an effective date of December 31, 2022. 4. Mineral resources are reported exclusive of those mineral resources that have been converted to mineral reserves. 5. Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. 6. Mineral resources are not mineral reserves and do not meet the threshold for mineral reserve modifying factors, such as estimated economic viability, that would allow for conversion to mineral reserves. There is no certainty that any part of the mineral resources estimated will be converted into mineral reserves. 7. Mineral resources assume dragline mining at all sites except Wingate Mine where dredging is assumed. 8. Mineral resources amenable to a dragline mining method are contained within a conceptual mine pit design using the same technical parameters as used for mineral reserves. 9. The cut-offs used to estimate mineral resources by site include, the minimum beneficiation plant concentrate BPL (%P2O5), minimum pebble BPL (%P2O5), maximum pebble magnesium oxide concentration and a maximum clay content cut-off for a logged matrix layer and the composite matrix volume (Section 11.2). 10. Impurities are reported as MER ((Fe + Al + Mg)/ P2O5 x 100). 11. Tonnage estimates are in US Customary and metric units and are rounded to the nearest million tonnes. 12. Rounding as required by reporting guidelines may result in apparent summation differences. 13. A commodity price of US$102.72/tonne of phosphate rock was used to assess prospects for economic extraction but is not used for cut-off purposes. Date: December 31, 2022 11-9 Figure 11-1: DeSoto Property Mineral Resources Date: December 31, 2022 11-10 Figure 11-2: Pioneer Property Mineral Resources Date: December 31, 2022 11-11 Figure 11-3: South Pasture Property Mineral Resources

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1030.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 11-12 11.9 Uncertainties (Factors) That May Affect the Mineral Resource Estimates A mineral resource is an estimate only and not a precise and completely accurate calculation, being dependent on the interpretation of limited information on the location, shape and continuity of the occurrence and on the available sampling results. Actual mineralization can be more or less than estimated depending upon actual geological conditions. The mineral resource statement includes inferred mineral resources. There is a low level of geological confidence associated with inferred mineral resources and there can be no certainty that further exploration work will result in the determination of indicated or measured mineral resources. The following outlines a number of factors that impact the mineral resource estimates:  Changing hole density as drilling continues.  Unforeseen deposit changes such as continuity of matrix, impurities, etc. not captured in current drill data density and spacing.  Drills holes can be offset from a designated pattern as a result of field conditions or access limitations. This could impact the pattern consistency for mine planning and mineral reserve pattern.  The shape of the mineral resource boundary may change as additional properties are acquired and as additional data is added. Estimates will vary as drilling is added and as additional properties are acquired.  Changes in finished products offered or developed could alter the limits and area that are used to estimate the mineral resource.  The area included in the mineral resource estimation may change as permit restrictions are refined.  If setback waivers are not acquired, the area of the mineral resource shape could change resulting in changed mineral resource limits and estimates. Date: December 31, 2022 12-1 12.0 Mineral Reserve Estimates 12.1 Introduction Mosaic's mineral reserves are reported as a beneficiation plant product (phosphate rock) tonnage and P2O5 grade including a total primary impurities ratio (MER). Mineral reserves have demonstrated economic viability utilizing the criteria and assumptions required at each phosphate facility. The geological information used to estimate the phosphate mineral reserves is based on applying specific product recoveries, concentration and plant limits to the raw drill data of mineral resource areas of the property. These factors are used to select material that contains sufficient product volume of economic value to be included in the mineral reserve estimate. The confidence and classification of the mineral reserves is estimate based on the drill density of the evaluated area. 12.2 Key Assumptions The following outlines the key assumptions used for the estimation of mineral reserves.  Cut-off based on productivity factors per site have been applied to estimate mineral reserves (Table 12-1). Table 12-1: Productivity Cut-off Factors Location Recoverable Finished Product tons vs. Matrix Volume Mined Recoverable Finished Product tons vs. Total Volume Mined South Fort Meade 9.8% 2.2% Four Corners 9.9% 2.2% Wingate 9.4% 2.2%  The beneficiation plant applied recoveries are based on an annual reconciliation process for a rolling three-year period (Table 12-2). Recoveries range from 67% to 131% and have been accounted for annually in the LOM plan. Table 12-2: Beneficiation Plant Applied Recoveries Location Recovered Sand Feed Volume Recovered Pebble Volume Concentrate Grade Recovered from the Feed Feed Grade Recovered Recovered Concentrate BPL tons Volume from the Feed South Fort Meade 131.0% 94.8% 78.4% 66.7% 68.5% Four Corners 100.0% 97.2% 88.8% 78.9% 70.1% Wingate 94.8% 87.8% 86.4% 97.1% 79.5%  Mining dilution (Table 12-3) grading 0% P2O5 is applied to estimate mineral reserves. Table 12-3: Mining Dilution Location Minimum Pebble Volume Dilution Minimum Concentrate Volume Dilution South Fort Meade 19.4% 12.6% Four Corners 18.6% 11.1% Wingate 13.5% 9.5% Date: December 31, 2022 12-2  Primary impurity recoveries in pebbles and concentrate based on a three-year rolling average and are listed in tables 12-4 and 12-5 respectively. Table 12-4: Impurity Recoveries in Pebbles Location Fe2O3 Al2O3 CaO MgO South Fort Meade 95% 104% 94% 150% Four Corners 97% 115% 100% 123% Wingate 88% 104% 100% 169% Table 12-5: Impurity Recoveries in Concentrate Location Fe2O3 Al2O3 CaO MgO South Fort Meade 90% 104% 90% 100% Four Corners 96% 104% 100% 82% Wingate 87% 91% 100% 102% 12.3 Estimation Methodology The methodology used to estimate mineral reserves is as follows:  Drill hole data is evaluated using our proprietary software that applies mine specific mineral resource and mineral reserve limits to logged layers.  Each logged layer within a hole that meets the mine specific requirements as detailed above, is composited into a "matrix" zone using product volumes as the weighting agent.  Any analyzed logged layer that fails to meet the requirements and lies above all other passing logged layers, or in-between passing logged payers, is composited with the waste volume.  Logged layers that underlie the entire passing volume are not included in the composite data.  Drill holes not containing any matrix that meets the required mineral reserve assumptions will have the upper most matrix layer included in the compositing process to provide mineral reserve data where mine pits lie outside of the mineral resource shape.  The composite data is exported as a text file and loaded into a mining software to create a geological model.  The interpolation method used in the geologic model to create the volume, density, grade and impurity grids is inverse distance weighted based on the geo-located drill data.  Elevation grids are created using triangulation based on the LiDAR or survey data assigned to each drill hole.  A utility macro is used to apply plant volume recoveries, adjust insoluble limits and elevations grids. The pebble and concentrate insoluble sand are adjusted as per each mine's criterion (Table 12-3), resulting in a reduction in grade.  Mineral reserves (mining areas) are overlaid on the mineral resource model by the mine planner.  The data from each grid is then volumetrically combined using product volumes for the specific mine plan pit shape creating a block of uniform constituents. Tons, grades and product quality are estimated by applying the mining shapes to the geological model.  The recoverable tons of pebble and feed for the entire mine pit are calculated based on the area of the mine pit. Date: December 31, 2022 12-3  The beneficiation plant grade recoveries are then applied to the recoverable feed tons to estimate the mineral reserves and recoverable concentrate tons. 12.4 Mineral Reserve Statement Mineral reserves are sub-divided into two confidence categories in Regulation S-K 1300, proven and probable. Table 12-6 outlines the 2021 mineral reserves for South Fort Meade, Four Corners and Wingate mining facilities. Figures 12-1, 12-2 and 12-3 show the distribution of the mineral reserves at the three Florida phosphate facilities. Proven Mineral Reserves A proven mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of a measured mineral resource and can only result from conversion of a measured mineral resource. Regulation S-K 1300 provides additional guidance that with regard to a proven mineral reserve, the qualified person must have a high degree of confidence in the results obtained from the application of the modifying factors and in the estimates of tonnage and grade or quality. At the mines, a proven mineral reserve is defined as the mineable portion of a measured mineral resource. Probable Mineral Reserves A probable mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of an indicated and, in some cases, a measured mineral resource. Regulation S-K 1300 provides additional guidance that with regard to a probable mineral reserve, the qualified person's confidence in the results obtained from the application of the modifying factors and in the estimates of tonnage and grade or quality is lower than what is sufficient for a classification as a proven mineral reserve, but is still sufficient to demonstrate that, at the time of reporting, extraction of the mineral reserve is economically viable under reasonable investment and market assumptions. The lower level of confidence is due to higher geologic uncertainty when the qualified person converts an indicated mineral resource to a probable reserve or higher risk in the results of the application of modifying factors at the time when the qualified person converts a measured mineral resource to a probable mineral reserve. At the producing mines, a probable mineral reserve is defined as the mineable portion of an indicated mineral resource.

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1031.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 12-4 Table 12-6: 2022 Mineral Reserves Location Proven Mineral Reserves Probable Mineral Reserves Total Mineral Reserves Tons (M) Tonnes (M) %P2O5 MER Tons (M) Tonnes (M) % P2O5 MER Tons (M) Tonnes (M) % P2O5 MER South Fort Meade Facility 8 7 27.0 10.9 34 31 26.4 7.3 42 38 26.5 8.04 Four Corners Facility 41 37 28.1 10.0 34 30 27.6 10.7 74 67 27.9 10.3 Wingate Facility 13 11 28.3 8.6 9 8 27.8 10.2 22 20 28.1 9.3 Total 61 56 28.0 9.8 77 70 27.1 9.4 138 126 27.5 9.6 Notes to accompany mineral reserves table: 1. Mineral reserve estimates were prepared by QP Kevin Farmer, a Mosaic employee. 2. Mineral reserves have an effective date of December 31, 2022. 3. Mineral reserves are based on measured and indicated mineral resources only. 4. Mineral reserves are reported as a beneficiation plant product (phosphate rock) tonnage and P2O5 grade including a total primary impurities ratio (MER). 5. South Fort Meade and Four Corners mineral reserves are mined by a dragline mining method. The Wingate mineral reserves are mined by dredge mining. 6. Cut-off based on productivity factors per site have been applied to estimate mineral reserves (Section 12.2). 7. Impurities are reported as MER ((Fe + Al + Mg)/ P2O5 x 100). 8. Mine designs are used to constrain mineral reserves within mineable pit shapes. 9. Only after a positive economic test and inclusion in the Life of Mine Plan are the mineral reserve estimates considered and disclosed as mineral reserves. 10. Tonnage estimates are in US Customary and metric units and are rounded to the nearest million tonnes. 11. Rounding as required by reporting guidelines may result in apparent summation differences. 12. A commodity price of US$68/tonne of phosphate rock was assumed to reach a rate of return equal to Mosaic's cost of capital Date: December 31, 2022 12-5 Figure 12-1: South Fort Meade Facility Mineral Reserves Date: December 31, 2022 12-6 Figure 12-2: Four Corners Facility Mineral Reserves Date: December 31, 2022 12-7 Figure 12-3: Wingate Facility Mineral Reserves

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1032.jpg)

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1033.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 13-4 On average, the phosphate matrix is deeper at Wingate compared to the other mines. Dredge mining allows for extraction of the phosphate at greater depths with minimal impact on the surrounding water table. The two original Ellicott dredges were replaced in 2013 and 2014 by two comparable dredges from Dredge Supply Company (DSC). Figure 13-4 outlines the dredge mining method process. Figure 13-4: Dredge Mining Process Pre-Mining Wingate faces the same permitting process as dragline mines. Ditch and berm systems are built to provide stormwater containment onsite. As the presence of a high groundwater table does not affect the dredges, pre-mining dewatering is not utilized. Mining – Overburden Removal and Waste Handling Transportation Cut widths are dependent upon dredge geometry and overburden thickness. The water level of the dredge pond is nominally 15 ft. (4.6 m) below the ground surface. The overburden dredge (Figure 13-5) utilizes a centrifugal pumping system with 26 inch (66 cm) steel pipe to transport and discharge spoil into previously mined areas of the pond. As the cutter head feeds the suction underwater, the solids are diluted with an abundance of surrounding water. Slurry is transported at flows in excess of 20,000 US gpm. On occasion, dense, consolidated sand known as hardpan is encountered. As this material is tough to extract, contractors are used on an as-needed basis to remove and haul this material outside the immediate mining area. This is known as pre-stripping. Figure 13-5: Overburden Dredge Date: December 31, 2022 13-5 Mining – Matrix and Transportation As with the overburden dredge, the cut width of the matrix dredge (Figure 13-6) is based on dredge geometry and matrix depth. It also utilizes a centrifugal pumping system with 20-inch (51 cm) steel pipe to transport matrix to the beneficiation plant. Ease of material extraction and pumpability are generally determined by the clay content of the matrix. The pumping system is designed to the same specifications as the 20-inch (51 cm) systems used for dragline operations. Figure 13-6: Matrix Dredge 13.2.3 Dragline and Dredge Mining Geotechnical Considerations Ground conditions are considered not only for dragline stability while relocating or mining, but also outside the mining area as it relates to road and utilities rights of way (i.e., power lines, gas lines, etc.), preservation areas, non-Mosaic property and internal infrastructure (i.e., pipelines, powerlines, ditches, clay settling areas, mine roads, etc.). Ground conditions are considered during mine design when establishing appropriate setbacks from these features. When a dragline completes mining of an area it is necessary to relocate the machine and related equipment. These are referred to as dragline relocations and require establishing dragline walk paths for safe movement of the mining equipment. Soil characteristics and water table are considered when determining walk path locations. Soil penetration tests (SPTs) are performed to characterize the soils ability to take load (Figure 13-7). Testing that identifies poor soils are re-evaluated and mitigated. Dragline cuts are inspected frequently by the geologists. Highwall condition, water inflow and ground conditions are observed. These factors, in addition to overburden/matrix thickness and soil characteristics are considered when the geologist establishes appropriate digging slopes and dragline setbacks from the highwall. Date: December 31, 2022 13-6 Figure 13-7: Dragline Walk Path Soil Penetration Testing and Piezometers 13.2.4 Hydrogeological Considerations Groundwater levels can impact the relocation of draglines and the mining process. Piezometers are installed to establish the water table elevation for dragline relocation walk paths. A minimum water table of 10 ft. (3 m) below the walk path grade is desired. This is achieved by a combination of ditching and dewatering wells (Figure 13-8). When dewatering techniques do not achieve the desired effect, earthen fill can be placed to raise the dragline walk path grade. Water inflow into mine cut during mining contributes to increased dilution, decreased phosphate matrix recovery and potential unstable ground conditions. When needed, dewatering wells with submersible pumps are installed to the bottom of the deepest layer of matrix and operate for a period of three to six months prior to mining. Once a mine cut is established, the dragline digs a pit ditch below the bottom of the deepest mineable layer. The ditches convey water to a sump established by the dragline. A pump is placed in the sump and periodically repositioned as necessary. Cut water is discharged into previously mined cuts, clarified and re-introduced into the mine recirculating water system. Date: December 31, 2022 13-7 Figure 13-8: Pre-mining Dewatering Due to the water level required for operation, dredge mining is less impactful to the hydrogeology than dragline mining. Groundwater drawdown mitigation is not needed due to the absence of pre-mining dewatering. The water level in the mining area is generally held within 10 to 15 ft. (3.0 to 4.6 m) from natural ground. 13.3 Mine Design and Operations 13.3.1 Production Plan/Life of Mine Plan The LOM plan for South Fort Meade extends from 2023 to 2034, Four Corners from 2023 to 2033 and Wingate from 2023 to 2035 (Table 13-1).

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1034.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 13-8 Table 13-1: 2022 Life of Mine Plans Year Status South Fort Meade Facility Four Corners Facility Wingate Facility Tons Tonnes P2O5% MER Tons Tonnes P2O5% MER Tons Tonnes P2O5% MER 2023 Plan 2,966,441 2,691,155 26.9 10.1 7,914,471 7,180,008 28.0 10.0 2,042,277 1,852,741 28.0 9.0 2024 Plan 3,164,575 2,870,903 26.6 12.3 7,559,818 6,858,267 27.4 10.6 2,297,812 2,084,561 28.0 8.5 2025 Plan 3,064,713 2,780,307 26.8 9.5 7,238,717 6,566,964 27.4 11.4 2,612,577 2,370,115 28.5 7.8 2026 Plan 3,369,484 3,056,795 25.0 7.2 7,036,268 6,383,303 27.2 11.1 2,127,960 1,930,472 28.5 7.7 2027 Plan 4,220,459 3,828,801 26.6 7.0 6,954,497 6,309,120 27.2 10.7 1,698,940 1,541,268 28.5 8.0 2028 Plan 4,850,348 4,400,236 26.7 6.7 7,402,907 6,715,918 27.0 10.2 1,387,231 1,258,487 28.7 8.1 2029 Plan 4,715,632 4,278,022 26.6 7.3 7,735,245 7,017,415 27.4 9.5 1,117,113 1,013,438 28.1 8.4 2030 Plan 4,326,417 3,924,925 26.7 7.2 6,755,794 6,128,856 28.0 9.5 1,465,690 1,329,666 28.0 9.6 2031 Plan 4,144,703 3,760,074 26.7 7.3 6,202,234 5,626,667 27.8 10.5 1,887,853 1,712,649 28.1 8.4 2032 Plan 3,574,952 3,243,197 26.6 7.2 6,555,654 5,947,290 28.4 9.7 1,249,403 1,133,451 28.2 8.6 2033 Plan 3,098,493 2,810,953 26.2 7.8 3,045,211 2,762,615 28.2 9.8 1,802,943 1,635,620 26.9 13.9 2034 Plan 512,948 465,347 25.8 7.3 1,669,901 1,514,924 27.0 13.9 2035 Plan 598,464 542,923 28.2 9.0 Total LOM 42,009,165 38,110,715 26.5 8.0 74,400,817 67,496,422 27.9 10.3 21,958,164 19,920,316 28.1 9.3 Date: December 31, 2022 13-9 13.3.2 Planning Assumptions/Design Criteria The following outlines the planning assumptions incorporated into the phosphate facilities 2022 Life of Mine (LOM) Plan:  Legal and permit limitations eliminate areas of reserve based on federal, state and local laws and agreements.  Mine pits are designed based on equipment limits and efficient mining practices.  Mining areas are sequenced and scheduled based on various priorities including: waste disposal, reclamation requirements, permit limits, volume, grade and quality needs.  No optimization is required as all areas determined to have recoverable matrix of sufficient finished product volume, grade and quality will be mined.  Equipment production rates and availability.  Mine pit limits are designed based on stability setbacks from impoundments, powerlines and other permanent infrastructure.  Overburden is removed at a sufficient rate that the matrix mining dredge at the Wingate Facility will not be negatively impacted.  Areas not currently permitted for mining will be available as sequenced in the LOM plan. 13.3.3 Mining Sequence The mining sequences for South Fort Meade, Four Corners and Wingate facilities are presented in Figures 13-9, 13-10 and 13-11, respectively. The planned mining covers the extent of the current mineral reserves. The sequence was developed to maximize the equipment availability and production from the reserve acreage available at that time. The mining sequence and planning for the producing facilities consider the following points:  Timing required to build, place needed infrastructure and area preparation for mining to commence.  The need to balance ton volume and quality.  Time needed to receive permits for newly acquired property.  Equipment relocations and access requirements.  Permit limitations.  Waste storage needs.  Reclamation planning and timing. Date: December 31, 2022 13-10 Figure 13-9: South Fort Meade Facility LOM Plan Sequence Date: December 31, 2022 13-11 Figure 13-10: Four Corners Facility LOM Plan Sequence

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1035.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 13-12 Figure 13-11: Wingate Facility LOM Plan Sequence Date: December 31, 2022 13-13 13.3.4 Mine Production Monitoring Mine production is monitored in real time as follows: Draglines  A Dragline Monitoring System (DMS) is installed on each dragline that provides real time feedback on: o Bucket count of matrix and overburden o Cubic yards moved of matrix and overburden o Dragline operating and downtimes o Dragline cycle times o Dragline swing angles  Video cameras are installed on each dragline and monitored at a central location.  Mass-flow systems are installed on each matrix pumping system utilizing nuclear density gauges for density and magnetic flow meters for slurry flow. The combination produces real-time mass-flow (tons per hour) feedback.  Matrix and hydraulic water pumping systems are equipped with pressure transducers and ammeters to monitor performance. Dredges  A dredge monitor is installed on each dredge that provides real time feedback on: o Cutter head depth (i.e., mining depth) o Hydraulic system pressures (i.e., cutter head, swings, etc.) o Suction vacuum  Video cameras are installed on each dredge and monitored at a central location.  Mass-flow systems are installed on each matrix pumping system utilizing nuclear density gauges for density and magnetic flow meters for slurry flow. The combination produces real-time mass-flow (tons per hour) feedback.  Matrix and overburden pumping systems and equipped with pressure transducers and ammeters to monitor performance. 13.3.5 Equipment Each mine controls the equipment necessary for overburden removal and phosphate matrix extraction. Table 13-2 outlines the amount of major mining equipment and their associated capacities and estimated useful life. Table 13-3 outlines the support equipment including any lease terms. Date: December 31, 2022 13-14 Table 13-2: Major Mining Equipment Facility Manufacturer / Model Quantity Bucket Capacity (cu yds) Estimated Useful Life (Years) South Fort Meade Electric Walking Dragline 3 55 75 Four Corners Electric Walking Dragline 1 65 75 Four Corners Electric Walking Dragline 4 55 75 Four Corners Electric Walking Dragline 2 42 75 Four Corners Electric Walking Dragline 2 40 to 42 75 Four Corners Electric Walking Dragline 1 45 50 Wingate Electric Cutter Head Dredge – 26 inch 1 n/a 30 Wingate Electric Cutter Head Dredge – 20 inch 1 n/a 30 Table 13-3: Primary Support Equipment Type Quantity Lease Term (months) Wheel Loader 21 60 to 64 Track Dozer 26 30 to 36 Motor Grader 4 60 Excavator 9 48 to 60 Crane 8 60 to 84 Draglines are scheduled for 12-hour repair days every four to six weeks. Major maintenance turnarounds are scheduled every five to seven years depending on the scope of major repairs to be completed. Major repairs include repair or replacement of mast/boom suspension cables, tub, rack/rails/rollers, drag/hoist/swing/propel drivetrains, motors, generators, etc. Heavy mobile equipment used for supporting activities are leased for 30 to 84 month terms. Upon termination of the lease, equipment is replaced with like equipment. 13.3.6 Personnel Table 13-4 outlines the current and forecasted mine personnel requirements. It excludes personnel who may report to a centralized support function. The sites utilize contractors on an as-needed basis. The bulk of the Mosaic mining workforce is positioned as operational workforce including supervisory roles and support to the operational workforce. Contractors used onsite must adhere to strict safety guidelines and registration within an online portal. This portal tracks contractor's safety performance and compliance to specific registrations, such as insurance coverage. Where contracted employees are in an embedded contractor relationship, supervision is provided by the contractor with an assigned liaison for oversight who is a Mosaic employee. Date: December 31, 2022 13-15 Table 13-4: Mining and Beneficiation Plant Personnel Requirements (Hourly and Salary) Location Area 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 LOM Plan Actual Actual Actual Actual Fcast. Plan Plan Plan Plan Plan Four Corners Hourly Operations 244 267 256 249 249 249 249 249 249 249 249 South Fort Meade 127 127 123 128 128 128 128 128 128 128 128 Wingate 64 61 59 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 Subtotal 435 455 438 437 437 437 437 437 437 437 437 Four Corners Hourly Maintenance 141 145 141 123 123 123 123 123 123 123 123 South Fort Meade 39 44 45 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 Wingate 25 26 25 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 Subtotal 205 215 210 191 191 191 191 191 191 191 191 Four Corners Salary 104 100 84 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 South Fort Meade 50 49 45 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 Wingate 26 25 24 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 Subtotal 181 175 153 127 127 127 127 127 127 127 127 Four Corners Overall 489 512 481 442 442 442 442 442 442 442 442 South Fort Meade 215 220 213 211 211 211 211 211 211 211 211 Wingate 116 112 107 102 102 102 102 102 102 102 102 Total 820 844 801 755 755 755 755 755 755 755 755

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1036.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 14-1 14.0 Recovery Methods 14.1 Introduction After receiving matrix from the pits, the washers separate minerals from each other and generate four separate material groups. These are debris, pebbles, clay and unsized flotation feed. The debris is mineralization rejected due to the high MgO content. The minimum size for the rejected debris is 5/16 inch, 3/4 inch, and one inch for Four Corners, South Fort Meade and Wingate, respectively. This difference is due to the mineralogy at the three facilities. Pebbles are one of the final products with a particle size ranging from 5/16 inch to 16 mesh, 3/4 inch to 16 mesh and one inch to 20 mesh for Four Corners, South Fort Meade, and Wingate, respectively. Material smaller than 150 mesh is pumped to the clay settling areas. The remaining material is unsized flotation feed and ranges in size from 16 to 150 mesh. Sizing separates the unsized flotation feed into four parts: intermediate pebble (IP), ultra-coarse flotation feed (South Fort Meade only), coarse flotation feed and fine flotation feed. The IP (or sizer rock) is one of the final products and its size is in the range of 16 to 20 mesh. The ultra-coarse, coarse and fine flotation feed will be pumped to the flotation plant and the particle size is normally in the range of 20 to 24 mesh, 24 to 35 mesh, and 35 to 150 mesh, respectively. Flotation separates phosphate and sand using reagents in a two-stage process. The final concentrate product is transported to stockpile via conveyors with the tailings pumped back for reclamation. 14.2 Beneficiation Process When mined, the phosphate and sand particles are embedded in compacted mud, or "clay-balls." Before separation can begin, all the particles must be liberated from the matrix of mud. The very first unit operation in the beneficiation process is to disaggregate the various particles. This starts while the matrix is flowing through the pipeline from the mine to the beneficiation plant. While in the pipeline, the matrix is exposed to shear forces as it passes through the various centrifugal pumps. These intense shear forces cause a significant percentage of the sand and phosphate particles to be liberated from the clay-balls by the time they arrive at the beneficiation plant. Once reaching the plant, the first goal is to finish disaggregating the clay and make a size separation at 1 mm. This processing is conducted in the "washer." In all the currently operating beneficiation plants, the washer is a large structure that receives the matrix, screens it, then discharges a +1.0 mm "pebble" phosphate product and a -1.0 mm slurry of liberated clay, sand and phosphate particles. This first phosphate product (pebble) can be as little as 5%, and as large as 70% of the mine's total production depending on the nature of the matrix being mined. The next process objective is to remove the clays that are finer than 0.1 mm. The beneficiation plant does this with hydro- cyclones. Slurry from the washer is fed tangentially into the cyclone (a conical chamber) at a high gravitational force. The slurry swirls around inside the cyclone until fine clays overflow the top of the chamber. Coarse sand and phosphate particles swirl to the bottom of the cyclone and exit. The fine clays are collected and pumped to large impoundments. The +0.1 mm sand and phosphate move on to the next process, sizing. Sizing is done with equipment called "hydrosizers." Feed and upward flowing water are injected into large tanks that force the fine particles to rise and overflow the tank, while the coarse particles gently fall and flow out the sizer's underflow. The phosphatic material that passes through the sizing process is then separated from the waste material by the flotation process that is used in mineral beneficiation plants around the world. Flotation was discovered early in the 20th century, and today it is the most used separation technology in the mining industry. Flotation separates valuable minerals (copper, lead, zinc, iron and phosphate) from the unwanted minerals in the ore (sand in this case). In the direct flotation process the valuable mineral is coated with a special hydrocarbon (fatty acid). Once the phosphate surfaces are coated, they repel water just like a freshly waxed car during a rainstorm. The slurry of waxed-phosphate and un-waxed sand is diluted and put in agitated tanks. Tiny air bubbles are injected into the tanks (called flotation cells) that attach to the waxed phosphate particles (the water-repelling particles are pushed out of the water into the bubbles). The air bubbles rise with the phosphate to the top of the flotation cell where the valuable froth is skimmed from the surface and collected. This unique chemical technology can make particles denser than water rise to the top and float on the surface of a slurry. Date: December 31, 2022 14-2 To upgrade the initial ("rougher") phosphate concentrate to a usable product, a second cleaning flotation process is used to remove the last of the residual sand. The original hydrocarbons are stripped from the phosphate surfaces, and then a different hydrocarbon is applied to the rougher concentrate. This second hydrocarbon is an amine-based reagent that coats sand, but not phosphate. Once again, the slurry is fed into flotation cells, agitated and exposed to tiny air bubbles. The air carries the remaining sand to the surface where it is skimmed off and discarded. The remaining phosphate mineral ("concentrate") is collected, blended with the pebble product and shipped via rail or truck to the chemical plant for the third step in making phosphate fertilizer. The sand from the rougher and cleaner flotation process is collected and pumped back to the mine cuts for use in land reclamation. 14.3 Plant Design The beneficiation plants are designed with primary production inputs from the draglines or dredge and with a smaller secondary input from recaptured circuits. All inputs enter the plant at the washer and flow through the sizing section to the flotation plant. There is a restricted recycle process that can relieve overflow from the sizing section by transferring volume to the flotation plant to keep the plant operational. Phosphate rock is transported to stockpiles via conveyors and waste is pumped to storage impoundments or back to the mine for reclamation. 14.4 Process Flowsheet The simplified plant flowsheet is shown in Figure 14-1 and described below. This is a typical phosphate beneficiation plant flowsheet. The South Fort Meade plant has three step sizers (primary, secondary and tertiary), while the Four Corners and Wingate plants only have one step sizer. The South Fort Meade beneficiation plant has an ultra-coarse flotation circuit, which is similar to the Four Corners IP circuit. Wingate does not have the IP product because it is recycled back to the washer trammel screen underflow tank. In addition, the cut size of debris varies from plant to plant due to rock minerology difference, that is 5/16 inch, 3/4 inch and one inch for Four Corners, South Fort Meade and Wingate, respectively. Date: December 31, 2022 14-3 Figure 14-1: Phosphate Beneficiation Process Flowsheet Washer Area In general, the washer area receives matrix/ore feed from the mine, disaggregates the clays from pebble and screens the matrix into four size fractions: +3/4 inch as rejects, -3/4 inch to +16 mesh as pebble, -16 mesh to +150 mesh as raw feed (unsized flotation feed), and -150 mesh as waste clay. The washer area consists of trommels, hammermills and hydroslicers. The trommels are used to separate oversize materials for size reduction, whereas the hammermills and hydroslicers are used to break down or disaggregate mudball materials containing feed and clays. South Fort Meade washer has hydroslicers that were installed in 2000. Before the installation of hydroslicers, the washer used hammermills to break the mudballs. The hydroslicers use 600 to 700 psi pressure water to detach material trapped on the surface of the large mudballs. After the process of hammermills and hydroslicers, the coarse materials (>1 inch) are saved at a mudball pile. Date: December 31, 2022 14-4 The primary and secondary log washers are used to disintegrate clay-balls that contain phosphate material. Three stages of vibrating screening (intermediate screens, double deck screens, finishing screens) remove the remaining and newly disintegrated -16 mesh material from the pebble. The design capacity of Four Corners washer is 8,000 tons/hour, 4,000 tons/hour at South Fort Meade and 2,200 tons/hour for Wingate. However, the maximum matrix rate is associated with the clay content. If the clay content increases, the matrix rate is decreased to reduce feed losses. Declay Area Material smaller than 16 mesh is pumped to primary declay cyclones for clay removal. Cyclones separate particles based on the mass of each individual particle. If all the particles are the same specific gravity, then effectively a size separation can be made. The clay, sand and phosphate minerals are all virtually the same specific gravity which allows the segregation of fine particles from coarse particles using cyclones. As the cyclone feed clay content rises, there is a documented exponential increase in fluid viscosity. This results in worse sizing performance. Based on historical results, the clay content of the overflow should be lower than 4.5% solids to have optimal cyclone sizing performance. A typical 24-inch declay cyclone can be fed with up to 15.7 tons/hour clay by assuming the overflow discharge at ~1,350 US gpm. Four Corners and South Fort Meade have 48 primary declay cyclones, allowing the washer to process up to 751 tons/hour of clay and still have acceptable losses. Compared to Four Corners and South Fort Meade, the Wingate declay cyclone design is different, as it has 12 24-inch and 13 26-inch cyclones. The clay content changes from shift to shift, therefore the matrix feed rate to the plant should be adjusted accordingly. The relationship between the clay content of the matrix and the maximum feed rate to avoid excessive cyclone feed losses (for 48 cyclones) is presented in Figure 14-2. Figure 14-2: Matrix Clay Content vs. Maximum Feed The declay cyclone systems can recover 99.5% of the +150 mesh material using current technology, leaving 0.5% of the feed reporting to the clay. For the old cyclones, the feed loss is approximately 1.0%. The mine plan provides the average matrix clay content; then the maximum matrix pumping rate can be estimated using the average clay content. Any time the washer is fed higher than this maximum rate, a higher feed loss will occur.

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1037.jpg)

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1038.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 14-9 Table 14-5: Four Corners Key Beneficiation Plant Metrics Year 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Actual Actual Actual Actual Fcast. Plan Plan Plan Plan Plan Feed Volume, tons (x1000) 28,050.0 27,362.2 30,034.9 29,169.3 31,285.2 29,217.2 27,209.5 24,406.2 26,725.4 27,207.1 Feed Ton Recovery, % 111.0 107.0 107.4 104.4 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Water Usage (estimate) X1000 Gal. 68,827,320 64,412,280 70,482,960 71,113,680 67,922,550 62,604,000 58,302,000 52,299,000 57,267,000 58,302,000 Flotation Recovery, % 87.3 88.9 89.5 89.0 88.8 88.8 88.8 88.8 88.8 88.8 Feed BPL 12.82 13.88 14.25 13.50 13.20 13.93 13.66 12.95 13.05 12.08 Concentrate Volume, ton 4,814,864 5,186,670 5,900,625 5,376,096 5,893,651 5,665,821 5,221,650 4,435,816 4,930,729 4,623,658 Concentrate BPL 65.2 65.1 64.9 65.2 63.9 63.8 63.2 63.3 62.8 63.1 Feed BPL Recovery, % 65.0 71.0 75.0 75.2 78.9 78.9 78.9 78.9 78.9 78.9 Matrix Volume, cubic yds 33,740,400 35,159,800 36,156,100 36,594,374 32,601,600 32,883,100 31,591,300 29,653,600 32,216,500 33,426,000 Tailings BPL Grade % 1.97 1.91 1.93 1.88 2.00 1.90 1.90 1.80 1.80 1.60 Tailing Volume, tons 22,216,897 22,175,519 23,848,216 23,518,561 25,391,500 23,551,400 21,987,800 19,970,400 21,794,700 22,583,500 Pebble Volume, tons 2,832,704 1,975,960 2,581,519 2,478,814 2,644,308 2,248,650 2,338,168 2,802,901 2,105,539 2,330,839 Pebble Recovery, % 105.0 111.0 107.1 96.5 97.2 97.2 97.2 97.2 97.2 97.2 Date: December 31, 2022 14-10 Year 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Actual Actual Actual Actual Fcast. Plan Plan Plan Plan Plan Sizer Volume, tons 28,333,913 27,647,182 30,041,404 30,732,415 31,691,908 29,597,024 27,563,224 24,723,481 27,072,830 27,560,792 Concentrate BPL Ton Recovery, % 63.0 67.8 72.1 69.9 70.1 70.1 70.1 70.1 70.1 70.1 Date: December 31, 2022 14-11 Table 14-6: South Fort Meade Key Beneficiation Plant Metrics Year 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Actual Actual Actual Actual Fcast. Plan Plan Plan Plan Plan Feed Volume, tons (x1000) 11,874.7 11,830.9 11,139.0 10,528,084 11,677.3 13,854.9 13,776.6 11,634.6 14,176.7 14,131.5 Feed Ton Recovery, % 118.0 117.5 109.6 109.6 109.6 141.7 141.7 141.7 130.0 130.0 Water Usage (estimate) X1000 Gal. 48,492,000 47,505,600 42,465,600 34,969,032 46,042,560 51,156000 50,868,000 42,955,200 52,344,000 52,178,400 Flotation Recovery, % 88.5 88.1 86.8 83.9 81.7 81.7 81.7 81.7 78.7 78.7 Feed BPL 15.14 14.54 12.92 8.84 8.11 7.61 8.98 9.27 5.79 7.47 Concentrate Volume, ton 2,449,795 2,321,060 1,930,418 1,249,868 1,305,268 1,364,632 1,640,632 1,388,665 1,006,794 1,294,801 Concentrate BPL 64.80 65.30 64.72 62.45 63.79 63.09 61.61 62.90 64.19 64.13 Feed BPL Recovery, % 66.5 67.5 68.1 68.1 65.5 65.5 65.5 65.5 68.1 68.1 Matrix Volume, cubic yds 12,753,300 14,229,600 14,993,683 9,214,593 12,589,400 10,837,100 11,129,200 9,741,400 11,381,400 12,085,200 Tailings BPL Grade % 2.18 2.14 2.06 1.61 1.11 1.50 1.90 2.00 1.30 1.80 Tailing Volume, tons 9,397,949 9,509,820 9,208,624 9,278,217 10,372,100 12,490,300 12,136,200 10,245,900 13,169,900 12,836,700 Pebble Volume, tons 2,219,801 2,356,470 2,156,214 1,930,117 2,041,110 1,601,809 1,524,155 1,676,048 2,362,689 2,925,659 Pebble Recovery, % 114.0 103.0 102.4 102.4 102.4 81.7 81.7 81.7 100.0 100.0 Sizer Volume, tons 12,230,941 12,185,827 11,422,920 9,004,360 11,629,773 13,798,511 13,720,529 11,587,247 14,119,001 14,073,985 Concentrate BPL Ton Recovery, % 69.4 69.9 64.8 62.6 63.1 75.8 75.8 75.8 69.7 69.7 Date: December 31, 2022 14-12 Table 14-7: Wingate Key Beneficiation Plant Metrics Year 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Actual Actual Actual Actual Fcast. Plan Plan Plan Plan Plan Feed Volume, tons (x1000) 5,963.2 6,412.1 5,100.9 5,154.3 6,341.0 6,323.9 5,853.1 6,021.6 6,094.2 6,161.8 Feed Ton Recovery, % 100.0 98.0 99.5 97.4 94.8 94.8 94.8 94.8 94.8 94.8 Water Usage (estimate) X1000 Gal. 33,819,732 30,871,116 28,637,316 31,087,050 32,339,100 32,252,400 29,850,300 30,712,200 31,079,400 31,426,200 Flotation Recovery, % 88.4 85.9 85.6 84.5 86.4 86.4 86.4 86.4 86.4 86.4 Feed BPL 13.46 13.18 12.71 12.86 10.94 14.42 16.57 20.79 16.70 13.86 Concentrate Volume, ton 1,089,666 1,104,934 839,618 867,076 915,243 1,210,634 1,284,555 1,648,891 1,341,272 1,126,474 Concentrate BPL 65.1 65.7 66.1 64.6 65.7 65.1 65.2 65.6 65.6 65.5 Feed BPL Recovery, % 97.0 98.5 95.9 97.1 97.1 97.1 97.1 97.1 97.1 97.1 Matrix Volume, cubic yds 6,032,300 6,287,600 5,480,600 5,627,355 5,796,400 6,013,200 6,037,800 6,009,500 6,014,900 6,011,800 Tailings BPL Grade % 1.93 2.27 2.21 2.41 1.70 2.40 2.90 3.90 2.90 2.30 Tailing Volume, tons 4,873,558 5,307,203 4,261,246 4,287,191 5,425,757 5,113,300 4,568,600 4,372,700 4,752,900 5,035,300 Pebble Volume, tons 662,459 554,311 646,689 279,720 426,621 831,643 1,013,257 963,687 786,688 572,466 Pebble Recovery, % 85.0 83.0 84.5 94.3 94.3 87.8 87.8 87.8 87.8 87.8 Sizer Volume, tons 5,981,451 6,434,509 5,205,253 5,162,902 6,364,525 6.347,362 5,874,815 6,043,940 6,116,809 6,184,660 Concentrate BPL Ton Recovery, % 85.7 82.9 81.7 79.9 79.7 79.5 79.5 79.5 79.5 79.5

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1039.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 15-1 15.0 Infrastructure 15.1 Introduction The three active mining facilities are in Hillsborough, Polk, Manatee and Hardee counties, Florida. The facilities are readily accessible from multiple paved public roads and are situated near several population centers, eliminating the need for onsite housing for working personnel. The facilities have the infrastructure in place to meet current production goals and anticipated future expansion if needed. Internal infrastructure includes a Mosaic-owned power distribution system, railways, water supply systems, clay settling areas, a number of pumping systems and a network of access roads. These assets are inspected and maintained by Mosaic personnel and using third-party vendors and consultants to ensure the operation can meet current and anticipated future production expectations. Mosaic also relies on some infrastructure that is maintained by third parties (Table 15-1). Table 15-1: Infrastructure Maintained by Third Parties Infrastructure Supplied and Maintained Rail Network CSX Road Network Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Power Duke Energy, TECO, PRECO, Florida Power, Mosaic cogeneration Communications Verizon 15.2 Roads, Rail and Logistics 15.2.1 South Fort Meade Facility Primary access to the South Fort Meade Facility is through the main entrance road off County Line Road (Figure 15-1). The mining areas are accessed by County Line Rd, CR 657, CR 664A and CR 664B. The primary entrance road to the beneficiation plant area including offices, maintenance shops and warehouse, is a paved road directly off County Line Road 664. This access point is monitored with a security guard gate and manned 24/7. Due to the large footprint, the mining areas have multiple access points. A system of unpaved dirt roads extends from these access points through infrastructure corridors allowing personnel to access production equipment, water storage areas and waste disposal areas. Higher volume main corridor roads are capped in rock and maintained regularly with motor graders. Most equipment, parts and supplies to operate the mine are delivered via public roads and then utilize Mosaic's road network. Certain reagents used in the beneficiation process are delivered via CSX/Mosaic owned railways. All phosphate rock at South Fort Meade is transported via rail to Mosaic chemical plants. South Fort Meade utilizes a 4.4 mile (7.0 km) Mosaic-owned railway spur and locomotive to transfer product rail cars to a transfer yard at which point CSX picks up and delivers product to the Mosaic fertilizer plants via CSX rail networks and locomotives. At South Fort Meade, truck haulage of phosphate rock on public roads is not permitted. Date: December 31, 2022 15-2 Figure 15-1: South Fort Meade Facility Major Roads and Logistics Infrastructure Date: December 31, 2022 15-3 15.2.2 Four Corners Facility Primary access to the Four Corners Facility is through the Four Corners Mine Road entrance road off SR37 in Hillsborough County (Figure 15-2). The mining areas are accessed by SR37, SR39, SR62, Taylor-Gill Rd. and SR674. Four Corners Mine Road is a paved road directly off Florida State Road 37 and is the primary entrance road to the beneficiation plant area including offices, maintenance shops and warehouse. This access point is monitored with a security guard gate and manned 24/7. Due to the large footprint, the mining areas have multiple access points. A system of unpaved dirt roads extends from these access points through infrastructure corridors allowing personnel to access production equipment, water storage areas and waste disposal areas. Higher volume main corridor roads are capped in rock and maintained regularly with a fleet of motor graders. Most equipment, parts and supplies to operate the mine are delivered via public roads and then utilize the Mosaic road network. Certain reagents used in the beneficiation process are delivered via CSX/Mosaic owned railways. All phosphate rock at the Four Corners site is transported by either truck or rail to Mosaic chemical plants. Four Corners utilizes a Mosaic-owned railway spur and locomotive to transfer product rail cars to a transfer yard at the Agrock location, from which point CSX picks up and delivers product to the Mosaic fertilizer plants via CSX rail networks and locomotives. Four Corners utilizes truck haulage of phosphate rock on public roads to supplement rail haulage depending on logistics timing and destination. Date: December 31, 2022 15-4 Figure 15-2: Four Corners Facility Major Roads and Logistics Infrastructure

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1040.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 15-5 15.2.3 Wingate Facility Primary access to the Wingate Plant is through the Nu-Gulf Mine Road entrance off Duette Road in Manatee County (Figure 15-3). The mining areas are accessed from the main entrance road. Nu-Gulf Mine Road is a paved road directly off County Line Road 664 and is the main entrance road to the beneficiation plant area including offices, maintenance shops and warehouse. This access point is monitored with a security guard gate and manned during day shift hours weekdays Monday through Friday. Mine areas are accessed from the entrance road and a system of unpaved dirt roads extending from these access points through infrastructure corridors allowing personnel to access production equipment, water storage areas and waste disposal areas. Higher volume main corridor roads are capped in rock and maintained regularly with a fleet of motor graders. Most equipment, parts and supplies to operate the mine are delivered via public roads and then utilize the Mosaic road network. There is no rail service to the Wingate site. All phosphate rock at Wingate is transported via truck to the Four Corners Facility for final shipping or directly to a Mosaic chemical plant. Wingate truck haulage of phosphate rock on public roads is only permitted using the Duette Road traveling north to SR62. Date: December 31, 2022 15-6 Figure 15-3: Wingate Facility Major Roads and Logistics Infrastructure Date: December 31, 2022 15-7 15.3 Stockpiles 15.3.1 South Fort Meade Facility The South Fort Meade Facility produces a pebble and concentrate size fraction phosphate rock product. The pebble product is temporarily stored on the washer day pile and then transferred to the South Fort Meade phosphate rock stockpile. The stockpiles are located near the beneficiation plant (Figure 15-4) The concentrate size fraction product is transferred directly to the primary product stockpile. Product streams are segregated by product grade and deposited on the product stockpile using a large mobile stacker system. A system of gates and a loadout tunnel allow for Mosaic to blend phosphate rock as it is loaded into rail cars. Date: December 31, 2022 15-8 Figure 15-4: South Fort Meade Facility Beneficiation Plant and Related Infrastructure

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1041.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 15-9 15.3.2 Four Corners Facility The Four Corners Facility produces a pebble and concentrate size fraction phosphate rock product. The pebble product is conveyed to the Four Corners primary product stockpile. The stockpiles are located near the beneficiation plant (Figure 15- 5) The concentrate size fraction product is transferred directly to the primary product stockpile. Product streams are segregated by product grade and deposited on the product stockpile directly from the conveyor. A system of gates and a loadout tunnel allow for Mosaic to blend phosphate rock as it is loaded into rail cars. On-highway trucks are loaded by mobile equipment from the stockpile perimeters. Date: December 31, 2022 15-10 Figure 15-5: Four Corners Facility Beneficiation Plant and Related Infrastructure Date: December 31, 2022 15-11 15.3.3 Wingate Facility The Wingate Facility produces a pebble and concentrate size fraction phosphate rock product. The pebble product is transported using a stationary stacker conveyor to the pebble product stockpile. The concentrate size fraction product is transported using a second stationary stacker conveyor directly to the concentrate product stockpile. Pebble (NW) and concentrate (NE) stockpiles are north of the beneficiation plant (Figure 15-6). Pebble and concentrate products are loaded into trucks from the perimeter of piles. Blends are accomplished by controlling the ratio of pebble and concentrate loaded in each truck and by number of total trucks shipped of each product. Date: December 31, 2022 15-12 Figure 15-6: Wingate Facility Beneficiation Plant and Related Infrastructure

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1042.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 15-13 15.4 Clay and Tailings Storage The South Fort Meade, Four Corners and Wingate phosphate facilities produce two primary tailings by-products from the beneficiation process: clays and sand tailings. Clays are pumped hydraulically via large diameter pumping systems to clay settling areas (CSAs) for storage, which are then subject to consolidation, decommissioning and reclamation. Sand tailings are pumped hydraulically to mine reclamation program areas where they are placed below grade and recontoured to match the approved reclamation topography. Areas that have been disturbed in the mining process must be reclaimed after mining operations are complete. Clay Settling Areas (CSAs) CSAs are earthen embankments approximately 40 to 60 ft. (12 to 18 m) high above the surrounding ground surface. Table 15-2 outlines the number and the storage available at each of the three operating facilities. The CSAs are engineered and constructed out of compacted competent soils under the direction of a third-party engineer with extensive expertise in such impoundments. As clays are hydraulically placed in the clay settling areas, clay particles consolidate and settle leaving a clarified supernatant that is subsequently decanted through spillway towers. Each CSA utilizes redundant spillways, each capable of passing the design storm and process flows. This decant water is returned to the beneficiation plant and field production areas through a network of above and below grade return water ditches. Mosaic maintains a minimum 5 ft. (1.5 m) of freeboard on all clay settling areas and a minimum 3 ft. (0.9 m) of freeboard on ditches. Table 15-2: Current Clay Setting Areas Summary Location Number Storage Available (Acre-ft.) Storage Available (M yd3) Storage Available (M m3) South Fort Meade Facility 7 23,800 38.3 29.3 Four Corners Facility 13 68,000 109.6 83.8 Wingate Facility 3 23,100 37.3 28.5 Monitoring of the CSAs includes:  Site visits and reviews by operations personnel twice a day. Their focus is to manage water levels and mine-wide water balance while complying to strict water level restrictions.  Weekly inspections of the CSAs embankment by trained specialist technicians that monitor conditions including pore water pressures, erosion features, vegetation, seepage, cracks, sloughing, infrastructure and overall embankment integrity.  An annual inspection by a Mosaic geotechnical engineering consultant, focusing on the CSA embankments. South Fort Meade currently has seven active CSAs (Figure 15-7) with approximately 23,800 acre-ft. of total clay storage currently available. This remaining clay storage volume is adequate to meet the South Fort Meade 2022 LOM plan clay storage needs. Date: December 31, 2022 15-14 Figure 15-7: South Fort Meade Facility Clay Settling and Sand Tailings Locations Date: December 31, 2022 15-15 Four Corners currently has 13 active CSAs (Figure 15-8) with approximately 68,000 acre-ft. of clay storage currently available to final pool elevation. Four Corners currently has two CSAs under construction for future clay storage and eleven future CSAs planned in Hardee and Manatee Counties. Date: December 31, 2022 15-16 Figure 15-8: Four Corners Facility Clay Settling and Sand Tailings Locations

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1043.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 15-17 Wingate currently has three active CSAs (Figure 15-9) with approximately 23,100 acre-ft. of clay storage currently available. Wingate has one CSA, designated as ISA, that is active but at capacity and one (WC-1) planned for future construction. This additional clay settling pond is believed to be adequate to allow Wingate to meet its LOM plan clay storage needs. Date: December 31, 2022 15-18 Figure 15-9: Wingate Facility Clay Settling and Sand Tailings Locations Date: December 31, 2022 15-19 Sand Tailings Sand tailings are pumped hydraulically from beneficiation plants to mine reclamation program areas where they are placed below grade and recontoured to match the approved reclamation topography. As the sand tailings are pumped hydraulically to these areas, a fleet of heavy equipment places this material to the required grade. Water from the pumping process is captured in sumps and is pumped via diesel and electric pumps into the mine network of return water ditches. Mine reclamation programs are identified in the permitting process and post-mining reclamation plans are planned at that time. Reclamation plans are based on permit conditions, regulatory requirements and post-reclamation land use. Reclamation programs are identified below, and sand tailings are used to achieve program contours. Monitoring of the sand tailings areas:  Water levels in reclamation area sumps are managed to strict water level restrictions and are inspected twice daily by operations personnel.  All mine boundaries are protected by a BMP berm system to contain stormwater or production-water flows from leaving the property. The berms are passable by pickup trucks and inspected daily. Weekly inspections of the BMP berms are completed by trained specialist technicians that monitor conditions including erosion features, roadway condition, vegetation, cracks, sloughing and overall berm integrity.  Mosaic reclamation personnel work in conjunction with various third-party contractors to place sand tailings on schedule and to final approved grade. Third-party contractors widely utilize GPS equipped earthmoving equipment to maintain actual grade to the planned grade. 15.5 Pumping Systems Pumping systems are critical and widely utilized across the entire mining process. Detailed engineering is performed to properly size systems to meet production requirements and evenly distribute line pressure throughout the long pumping systems. Each facility has a maintenance department utilizing Mosaic and third-party specialists to monitor and maintain asset health using a variety of preventative and predictive maintenance practices. Ore (matrix) and byproduct from the beneficiation plant are transported hydraulically, as a slurry, through a network of pipelines. Each mine utilizes large diameter centrifugal pumps, arranged in a series configuration to transport ore and waste streams long distances. Table 15-2 provides an overview of ore and waste stream pumping systems. These systems are operated by remote control by a single operator. Pumping assets are fully instrumented and data is logged in a data historian. Critical operating data from each asset is transmitted nearly instantaneously to operators so that any abnormal pumping system conditions can be rectified. Reclaimed and recycled water is supplied to the remote mining areas using a network of pipelines and pumps. This water is boosted to 285 psi at the pits to assist in breaking down the ore into a pumpable slurry. Multiple processes and technologies are utilized to maintain the asset health of pipelines and mechanical/electrical equipment. Each operation utilizes third-party technicians to measure steel pipe thicknesses using ultrasonic equipment. This data is used to manage a process of rolling (shifting pipe wear areas) and pipe replacements. Mine facilities use technicians to monitor vibration for mechanical equipment and measure powerline, substations and switchgear temperature using IR thermography. Each facility may be converted to conditional based online vibration monitoring in the future. Lubrication preventative maintenance and time interval-based inspections on mechanical equipment are completed at each site. Pumping systems along with a system of sumps and mine recirculation ditches are used to maintain mine water balance and manage storm water. The facilities currently utilize a fleet of rental and Mosaic-owned pumps for this purpose. 15.5.1 South Fort Meade Facility Table 15-3 outlines the South Fort Meade dragline ore and byproduct pumping systems. Date: December 31, 2022 15-20 Table 15-3: South Fort Meade Ore and Waste Stream Pumping Systems Pipeline Pumps Type Miles in Service Diameter (inches) Type Quantity Size (inches) Horsepower Ore (Matrix) 34 20 AR Steel 39 54 1,750 to 2,000 Clay 8 36 to 48 HDPE 4 42 1750 Sand Tailings 12 20 AR Steel 9 46 1,500 to 1,750 Water Supply to pits 8 24 to 42 Steel/HDPE 3 30 vertical 600 Water Boosters Steel 6 50 1,500 15.5.2 Four Corners Facility Table 15-4 outlines the Four Corners dragline ore and waste stream pumping systems. Table 15-4: Four Corners Ore and Waste Stream Pumping Systems Pipeline Pumps Type Miles in Service Diameter (inches) Type Quantity Size (inches) Horsepower Ore (Matrix) 76 20/22 AR Steel 78 54 1,500 to 2,000 Clay 32 36 to 48 HDPE 7 42 1500 to 1750 Sand Tailings 35 24 AR Steel 26 46 1,500 to 2,000 Water Supply to pits 24 Steel/HDPE 6 30 vertical 600 to 1,500 Water Boosters 6 24 Steel 12 50 1,500

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1044.jpg)

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1045.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 16-2 at an average annual fertilizer price for the period 2023-2026. The arithmetic average of this period was then utilized for 2027 and all subsequent years of the forecast period through the life of mine. This average fertilizer price is $511 per tonne. Similar methodology was applied to the downstream operations costs for sulphur and ammonia, along with internal forecasts for the remaining costs. The arithmetic average of the 2023-2027 period of these costs is $243 per tonne, leaving a margin before phosphate rock costs of $135 per tonne. This is referred to as Gross Margin Available (GMA). Under this approach, the phosphate rock internal transfer price cannot exceed the GMA. The discounted cash flow (DCF) in Section 19.0 was calculated using the Internal Transfer Price (ITP) of phosphate rock to show a Net Present Value of zero. The ITP per tonne in the DCF is $68 which is significantly less than the GMA of $135. Refer to the economic section of the report for further detail on this methodology. 16.3 Contracts Effectively all phosphate rock produced in Florida is consumed at Mosaic's nearby downstream facilities. Date: December 31, 2022 17-1 17.0 Environmental Studies, Permitting and Plans, Negotiations or Agreements with Local Individuals or Groups 17.1 Introduction The Environmental Section of this document (Section 17) mainly focuses on the permitted and active phosphate facilities, consisting of South Fort Meade (SFM), Four Corners (FCO), and Wingate (WIN). Discussion of each mine in this section also includes associated extension tracts or infill parcels. Some discussion in this Environmental section also includes the exploration properties South Pasture (SP), DeSoto and Pioneer. Although not an active phosphate facility, SP, including the South Pasture Extension (SPE), has obtained required permits and continues to maintain some of the same environmental requirements as the active sites. Properties such as DeSoto and Pioneer, although not fully permitted, may be included in certain subsections of this Environmental section and will be specifically referenced. If not specifically referenced, the discussion only applies to the active phosphate facilities previously mentioned. 17.2 Baseline and Supporting Studies Prior to initiating mining operations on any tract of land, Mosaic must obtain federal, state and local approvals. As more fully described in the permits section below (Section 17.8), these approvals authorize Mosaic to conduct its mining, reclamation and mitigation plans on each tract without the need for renewals (i.e., "Life of Mine" approvals). Mosaic's permitted mine boundaries have been addressed in either an environmental impact statement (EIS) or an environmental assessment (EA) to fulfill requirements under the federal National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Prior to 2011, Mosaic's mine sites were subject to review and approval under the Development of Regional Impact (DRI) process (Section 380.0651(2)(t), F.S.). The DRI process has been replaced by each county's own Land Development Code (LDC) that regulate phosphate mining. Those regulatory processes require collection of baseline data and studies addressing potential impacts, that inform a regulator's decision about whether to issue the permits and approvals. Additionally, applications for Florida Wetland Resource Permit (WRP) or an Environmental Resource Permits (ERP) require baseline data and impact analyses that are focused on environmental resources (Table 17-1). Date: December 31, 2022 17-2 Table 17-1: Baseline Monitoring and Impact Analyses NEPA DRI/LDC ERP/WRP Map Land Covers x x x Delineate Wetlands x x x Wetland Functional Value x x x Wildlife Surveys x x x Threatened & Endangered (T&E) Species x x x Surface Water Flow x x x Surface Water Quality x x x Groundwater Aquifers x x Groundwater Quality x x x Soils x x x Flooding Potential/Floodplains x x x Water Supply x x Stormwater Runoff x x x Wastewater Discharge x x Solid/Hazardous Waste x x Air Quality/Noise x x Cultural Resources x x x Collectively, the baseline monitoring data and impact analyses and related modeling provide agency decisionmakers with the data necessary to determine that the following criteria for issuance have been met, including consideration of secondary and cumulative impacts: o Wetland impact and avoidance plans were found to be the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative, as required by the CWA and Florida law. o Wetland mitigation plans result in no net loss of wetland functions. o Surface water quality meets designated Florida standards. o Mining and reclamation are not expected to cause downstream flow volumes in streams to fall below minimum levels established by Florida law. o Measures implemented to prevent offsite impacts from mine dewatering have proven effective. o Groundwater quality beneath and adjacent to the mine meets designated Florida standards. o Mining and reclamation are not expected to adversely affect public water supplies. o No prime farmland was present prior to mining. o Mining and reclamation are not expected to cause increases in downstream flood levels/impacts. o Stormwater runoff following 25-year and 100-year 24-hour storm events is not expected to increase materially. o No critical habitat for threatened or endangered species was present prior to mining. o Mining and reclamation are not expected to adversely affect any threatened or endangered species. o National ambient air quality standards are being met during mining. o Noise and light levels generated by mining operations conform with current county land development code limits. o Discharges of excess production-water and stormwater are not toxic to fish and aquatic organisms and have not been demonstrated to cause or contribute to violations of Florida's surface waters standards. o No significant cultural resources have been found and if found, would be avoided or mitigated in accordance with regulations. Date: December 31, 2022 17-3 17.3 Environmental Considerations and Monitoring Programs The permits and approvals under which Mosaic operates each mine site prescribe performance standards that are protective of the environment with respect to unavoidable but minimized impacts to wetlands and waterways, air quality, and water supply and quality, along with requirements to monitor each on a routine schedule. Also imposed are requirements to develop and implement management plans to address mine dewatering, wildlife habitat and listed species, spill prevention and control, pollution prevention and hazardous waste management. Protection of environmentally sensitive lands can be addressed in a conservation easement, together with reclamation and mitigation requirements addressed below. Routine reporting of environmental conditions, as well as upsets or incidents, is required. In addition, Mosaic conducts other voluntary programs described below in Section 17.9. 17.3.1 Performance Standards, Monitoring and Reporting Permits and approvals impose requirements to meet regulatory criteria and standards, monitor conformance with those requirements, and report the monitoring results. Table 17-2 below provides the main water quality/quantity monitoring and reporting requirements that are required at each mine site. Table 17-2: Monitoring and Reporting Requirements Permit/Approval Performance Standards Monitoring Reporting National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Surface Water Quality, Groundwater quality, Effluent quality, Aquatic toxicity Weekly, monthly, quarterly, semi-annually Monthly, quarterly, semi- annually, annually, incident Water Use Permit (WUP) Water Levels Weekly, monthly Monthly, semi-annually, annually, incident Wetland Resource Permit (WRP) Surface Water Quality Monthly, quarterly Annual Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) Surface Water Quality, Groundwater quality Monthly, quarterly Annual, Incident Development of Regional Impact (DRI)/County Land Development Code (LDC) Surface Water Quality, Groundwater quality, Water Levels, Air Quality Monthly, quarterly Annual, quarterly, incident Monitoring data is submitted to each applicable agency according to the terms of relevant approvals. In 2021, there was one NPDES permit limit exceedance for turbidity that occurred at a Four Corners outfall due to Hurricane Elsa and in 2022 there was also one NPDES permit limit exceedance for turbidity at a South Fort Meade outfall due to Hurricane Ian. Other sporadic deviations have occurred historically; however, these noted above and all prior permit excursions have since been reversed or resolved. Similarly, reportable incidents have occurred infrequently in the past. In 2021, there were two releases that required notification to the Florida State Watch Office and a Public Notice of Pollution. One incident occurred at the South Pasture property, while the other occurred at the Four Corners facility. In 2022, there was one release that required the same notifications at the Four Corners facility. All of these incidents have since been resolved. Additionally, due to Hurricane Ian in 2022, notifications to the Florida State Watch Office and Public Notices of Pollution were made for unauthorized stormwater discharges at both the Four Corners facility and the South Fort Meade facility.

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1046.jpg)

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1047.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 17-8 Containment of rainfall and run-off results in the need to discharge water when the volume of water within the active mining and reclamation areas exceeds the mine's recirculation system capacity. Discharge volumes are generally correlated to antecedent rainfall levels and vary significantly in the short term and long term. For example, no discharges have occurred when central Florida was in an extended drought. In contrast to the drought years, during years when central Florida experienced chronic excessive rainfall and hurricanes, discharges were nearly continuous and discharge volumes were correspondingly larger. As shown on the mine process flow diagram (Figure 17-1) all production-related water and collected storm water are contained within the mine water recirculation system. The recirculation system consists of pumps, pipelines, ditches and CSAs and is designed to store and recycle water to supply the mine's needs. Discharges generally occur only when the system is full and cannot store additional rainfall or in advance of a major predicted weather event (i.e., hurricane). The CSAs are multi-functional in that these areas are used to backfill mined lands with clay residuals; provide much of the storage capacity for the mine recirculation system; and serve as the pre-treatment facility for water to be discharged. Specifically, the settling areas provide treatment defined as "sedimentation" by FDEP. Domestic Wastewater The domestic wastewater produced onsite at each beneficiation plant or supporting buildings/offices is either disposed of through a permitted septic system or treated through the use of an onsite package plant. Effluent from a package plant is discharged through an approved NPDES outfall into the mine recirculation system. Internal Water Management Facilities The internal water management facilities typically consist of:  Perimeter ditch and berm systems.  Stormwater sumps (surge ponds), pumps and pipelines.  The mine water recirculation system.  Final clarification ponds and/or sand filters and NPDES outfalls.  CSAs.  Mined areas (pits).  Mine water ditches and water storage ponds. Upon completion of reclamation and mitigation, the internal water management facilities are removed. Water Control Structures Various water control structures have been and will be installed, that include the retaining berms around the boundaries of active mining and reclamation areas, outlet structures for CSA dams, NPDES outfalls, etc. Upon completion of reclamation and mitigation, all water control structures have been and will be removed. 17.7 Reclamation, Mitigation and Closure Mosaic is subject to state and county requirements to reclaim each acre disturbed by mining operations. In certain circumstances, financial responsibility must be provided to backstop those commitments. Mosaic satisfies these financial responsibilities using mechanisms such as surety bonds, audited financial statements, insurance certificates, financial tests and corporate guarantees. Financial responsibility mechanisms are updated and submitted to the appropriate agency as required. Additionally, for certain counties, Mosaic's financial responsibility is reviewed and approved by the Board of County Commissioners on an annual basis. Mosaic is currently in compliance with these reclamation financial responsibilities. Mitigation (Section 17.7.2) is required by the 404 Permits and the WRP/ERPs issued to authorize disturbance of waters of the state and the United States. Financial responsibility must be provided commensurate with funding to complete construction and monitoring of the mitigation sites. Once implemented, the conservation easements covering most mitigation sites include long-term management plans and financial responsibility to implement those plans. Date: December 31, 2022 17-9 Closure of the beneficiation plant and associated facilities (see Section 17.7.3), including infrastructure corridors, is regulated by the reclamation obligation according to each site's approved post-reclamation land use included in the CRP. 17.7.1 Reclamation According to 62C-16.0051(12)(b)4, F.A.C. "Reclamation and restoration shall be completed within two (2) years of the actual completion of mining operations, exclusive of the required growing season to ensure the growth of vegetation, except that where sand-clay-mix or other innovative technologies are used, the Department may specify a later date for completion. The required completion date may vary within a reclamation parcel, depending upon the specific type of mining operation conducted." Due to this reclamation timing requirement, reclamation is completed as mining is ongoing. Annual reports for each active and idle mine site are submitted to the FDEP each year detailing the number of acres mined or disturbed and the amount of land reclaimed within that footprint. The reclaimed acres are provided in three categories: contoured to final grade, revegetated, and released. These detailed reports are public information and can be found on the FDEP website. Additionally, each county requires a separate annual report detailing county requirements. Florida Requirements Rule 62C-16.0075, F.A.C., establishes minimum reclamation requirements in terms of the percent of mined land that must be reclaimed during each five-year interval following commencement of mining operations. If a mine operator fails to comply with this "rate of reclamation rule", the operator must post a financial security to cover the cost of reclaiming "delinquent acres" and remain in effect until the delinquent acres have been reclaimed. Mosaic is in compliance with the rate of reclamation rule at all active mine sites in Florida, therefore, is not subject to the reclamation financial responsibility requirements. Polk County Requirements Chapter 10, Article III, in the Polk County Code of Ordinances is known as the Polk County Mining Ordinance (Ordinance). The Ordinance imposes no other requirements beyond those established by Chapter 62C-16, F.A.C. at the state level. Hardee County Requirements Section 3.14.02 of the Hardee County Land Development Code (LDC) establishes the Hardee County Mining Regulations. The regulations prescribe requirements for preparation and approval of a Master Mine and Reclamation Plan (MMRP) for each mine in the county: standards and minimum schedules for the reclamation of mined and disturbed lands; fee schedules; and financial responsibility requirements. The financial responsibility requirements are US$15,000 for each acre of land excavated but not yet reclaimed and $1,000 for each acre-ft. of the maximum above-grade volume of the largest CSA. The annual review fee is US$7.00 per acre of mined or disturbed land not yet reclaimed, and the annual monitoring fee is $1.20 per acre of mined land. Manatee County Manatee County Ordinance No. 04-39 is codified as Chapter 2-20 in the Code of Ordinances and is titled The Manatee County Phosphate Mining Code (Code). Generally, the Code imposes requirements to obtain approval of a life-of-mine Master Mining Plan (MMP), that is implemented and governed by issuance of a sequence of five-year operating permits. The MMP must include a reclamation plan that meets the requirements of the applicable Manatee County Phosphate Mining Reclamation Manual. Reclamation through initial planting must be completed no later than five years after cessation of mining extraction on each specific reclamation unit, with the exception of CSAs. Section 2-22-42 establishes the following financial responsibility mechanisms and amounts:  Insurance o Personal injury coverage = US$5 M; o Property damage = $5 M; and o CSA environmental damage = $25 M or $1,000 for each acre-ft. of above-grade storage in the largest CSA. Date: December 31, 2022 17-10  Unqualified certified financial statements demonstrating the ability to fund liabilities of not less than: o $3,000 per acre of land to be disturbed during the operating permit term; and o $4,000 for each acre-foot of above-grade storage in the largest existing or proposed CSA.  General Surety Bond equal to $500 for each acre to be disturbed during the operating permit term.  Reclamation bond in an amount equal to 110% of the cost to reclaim each acre of land to be disturbed during the upcoming year plus all land previously disturbed but not yet released by the county as estimated by a registered professional engineer, as well as the cost to physically demolish and dispose of all mine infrastructure not needed after mining and reclamation are complete. Hillsborough County Part 8.02.00 in the LDC establishes the Hillsborough County Phosphate Mining Regulations. The regulations define the requirements for approval of a life-of-mine operating permit; annual reports; standards for operations; standards and minimum schedules for reclamation; fee schedules; and financial responsibility requirements. Generally, physical reclamation work must be completed within four years of completion of mining in each mining unit or use as a CSA or other mine infrastructure. Financial responsibility is calculated annually in the annual report for each acre to be disturbed during the upcoming year plus all land disturbed but not yet released at a rate of $6,113 per acre, which is then escalated from base year 2020 by applying the Construction Cost Index. CSA liability is $1,000 for each acre-ft. of above-grade storage in the largest active CSA. Evidence of financial responsibility may be furnished by current financial statements, corporate guarantees, letters of credit, insurance, surety bonds or other financial instruments acceptable to the county. 17.7.2 Mitigation Mitigation is required to offset impacts to waters of the state and the United States with specific requirements defined in conditions in the 404 Permits and WRP and ERPs that authorize mining. Mitigation credits are generated by: (a) preserving high quality wetlands and streams; (b) enhancing lower quality wetlands and streams avoided by mining operations; (c) creating wetlands and streams on mined land during the reclamation process; and/or (d) purchasing credits from a mitigation bank. Mitigation is sufficient if the sum of the credits from the above-listed actions exceeds the loss of functional value resulting from wetland and stream disturbance associated with mining. The mitigation plan for each site is outlined in the 404, WRP or ERP Permits. Mosaic provides annual reports to the agencies with the status of each site's mitigation obligation. Information regarding conservation easements that have been granted or committed to as part of these mitigation plans can be found in Section 17.3.3. 17.7.3 Closure Requirements The chemical storage tanks at a beneficiation plant must be closed once operation of the plant ceases. There are no financial responsibility obligations associated with the storage tanks. The financial liabilities associated with current/future reclamation obligations and closure/demolition of the beneficiation plant and associated facilities are discussed in Section 17.7.4. 17.7.4 Obligations Upon Asset Retirement Mosaic's financial liabilities associated with active phosphate facilities consist of current and future reclamation obligations, beneficiation plant closure/demolition, and mitigation obligations. Current liabilities are "net" of reclamation/mitigation work already completed. Life of Mine Estimated Reclamation Costs Date: December 31, 2022 17-11 Mosaic's current estimate for the 2023 LOM plan reclamation costs for Four Corners, Wingate and South Fort Meade is $301,693,483. Beneficiation Plant Closure/Demolition Mosaic retained Burns & McDonnell Engineering Co., Inc. to develop site closure plans for each beneficiation plant. A +/- 25% estimate of total closure is included in each site closure plan. The costs include decommissioning costs based on the demolition of the site in mobilization, as well as credits for salvage and recycling. An initial estimate of additional required environmental assessment costs is also included. The costs listed below have been consolidated and include only the active mining facilities (i.e., Four Corners, South Fort Meade and Wingate). The following costs are based on the reports prepared by Burns & McDonnell Engineering Co., Inc. during 2021. Demolition Activities It is estimated that closure cost to complete the facility demolition activities for all existing active mining facilities (including facility buildings and structures, infrastructure and ACM) is $12,280,600. The anticipated 25% range of the estimate was determined to be $9,210,525 to $15,350,875. Environmental costs are provided for the asbestos abatement and decommissioning of residual universal and regulated waste. Scrap Value The total estimated value of the scrap onsite for all existing active mining facilities is $6,226,800. This includes the process structures. Net Total Estimate The net total estimate (demolition cost – scrap value) for site closure for all existing active mining facilities ranges from $2,983,725 to $9,124,075. Mitigation Liabilities Mosaic must provide financial responsibility to ensure the mitigation work required in the form of wetland and stream creation and enhancement is completed. Annually, Mosaic submits to the FDEP the financial assurance documents as required by the WRP/ERP Permit and F.A.C. Rule 62-312.390 utilizing the guarantee specified in subpart H of 40 CFR and/or section 373.414(19)(b)7, F.S. 17.8 Permits and Registrations Mosaic has received all necessary governmental permits and approvals to authorize the mining operations currently being conducted. These approvals can be categorized as discretionary development approvals, operating permits, and licenses/registrations. In addition, a Conceptual Reclamation Plan (CRP) has been approved by the FDEP for each site; however, the CRP does not regulate or authorize mining. Mosaic maintains an extensive database to track each permit and specific condition compliance. Permits for the active and idle sites are renewed as necessary. For future mineral resource areas, such as DeSoto and Pioneer, permits must be obtained from federal, state and local agencies before any mining activities commence. 17.8.1 Development Approvals The federal approval for each facility consists of a 404 Permit, which includes a certification of conformance with the Endangered Species Act (i.e., USFWS biological opinions), the National Historic Preservation Act, and NEPA. The Florida approval consists of a WRP or an ERP, that regulate surface water and wetland resources and represents the Section 401 CWA and Section 307 Coastal Zone Management Act state certifications. The local approval consists of DRI or county LDC and MMRP approvals.

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1048.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 17-12 As noted above, each of these approvals do not require periodic renewals, unlike the operating permits described below. However, most have 5-year compliance review/re-opener conditions. To date, 5-year reviews have found Mosaic to be in compliance with the conditions of approval and have not required any material changes in operations. 17.8.2 Operating Permits Operating permits are issued by FDEP, the Florida Department of Health, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, the SWFWMD and certain counties. The operating permits authorize activities or actions common to many industries, landowners and municipalities in Florida. All have defined terms and renewal requirements. Renewal of these types of operating permits is likely throughout the life of the facility, however, it is at the discretion of the authorizing agency. Several have mining-specific requirements or authorizations as described below. The FDEP-issued NPDES permit (also referred to as the Industrial Wastewater Facility Permit), not only represents the federal CWA Section 402 authorization, but also authorizes and regulates discharges to the surficial groundwater aquifer. In addition, the permit authorizes the construction, operation and abandonment of above-grade impoundments referred to as CSAs. The SWFWMD integrated water use permit (IWUP) authorizes the withdrawal of groundwater from underground aquifers through permitted wells to provide potable and production-water supplies. One IWUP addresses all of the Mosaic's active mining operations. A separate water use permit (WUP) was issued for the South Pasture facility. The IWUP and the South Pasture WUP also regulate mine dewatering to ensure wetlands and offsite properties are not adversely affected as described above. Certain operating permits include conditions of approval that impose monitoring and/or reporting requirements as described above. All of the operating permits have been issued based on agency findings that the proposed action meets the criteria for permit issuance or renewal. Continued renewals of the operating permits in the future is likely. 17.8.3 Registrations and Licenses Registrations and licenses are, in essence, perfunctory approvals that seldom include discretionary decisions by agency staff. These are for facilities common to many industries (e.g., petroleum storage tanks). 17.8.4 Bureau of Land Management Leases Mineral rights beneath the acreage shown in the table below (Table 17-5) were reserved by the United States. Prior to mining these areas, federal leases were obtained or will be obtained from the U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Mosaic is currently in compliance with this requirement. Table 17-5: Bureau of Land Management Lease Summary Location Acres Total Acres Mined Acres Remaining Four Corners Facility 111.4 49.3 62.1 South Fort Meade Facility 916.6 773.4 143.2 South Pasture Property 41.0 0.0 41.0 DeSoto Property 39.1 0.0 39.1 17.9 Social Considerations, Plans, Negotiations and Agreements The following sub-sections discuss some of the social considerations, plans, negotiations and agreements that Mosaic currently maintains in relation to mining. Date: December 31, 2022 17-13 17.9.1 Consideration of the Human Environment Consideration of the potential effects of each mine site on the human environment were an integral component of the analyses conducted by the agencies when conducting NEPA reviews. Evaluations under county standards also considered potential impacts to the human environment (Table 17-6). Table 17-6: Human Environment Elements Considered NEPA DRI/County State Historic, cultural and scenic x x x Property ownership x x NA Safety of impoundment structures x x x Water supply and conservation x x x Energy conservation and development x NA NA Economics x x NA Public health and safety x x x Aesthetics x NA NA Demographics/environmental justice x NA NA Transportation x x NA Government revenue generation NA x NA Land use compatibility NA x NA Issuance of the 404 Permits and county approvals include findings by the agencies that the human environment was considered, and potential impacts were found to be insignificant. Florida regulatory agencies also applied certain human environment criteria which must be met under Florida Law as a pre-condition for permit issuance. These state permits include WUP, NPDES, and ERP permits. 17.9.2 Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Program The Mosaic Company has developed and is implementing a company-wide ESG program. Specific quantifiable targets/goals have been adopted for achievement by 2025. The 2025 environmental goals applicable to the mine sites include:  Eliminate significant environmental incidents;  Reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20% per tonne of product; and  Reduce freshwater use by 20% per tonne of product. 17.9.3 Investment in the Environment Mosaic supports organizations that work in watershed restoration, habitat conservation and nutrient stewardship. These programs, respectively, include shoreline restoration and oyster reef installations; improved land management practices and wildlife protection; and 4R nutrient stewardship, that is best management practices for fertilizer application, minimizing field runoff and improving farmer yields. In 2021, Mosaic invested in the following areas: Habitat Conservation $641,488, Nutrient Stewardship $170,000, Watershed Restoration $81,462 for a total of $892,950. 17.9.4 Citizen Advisory Panels Mosaic has organized and implemented a citizen advisory panel (CAP) program in each county where mining is occurring. The CAPs consist of a diverse group of citizens from each county in terms of occupations, demographics, history, etc. A key role of each CAP is to help Mosaic identify and address community impact issues. Date: December 31, 2022 17-14 17.9.5 Sierra Club Settlement Agreement The Sierra Club litigated issuance of the 404 Permit that authorizes SFM Hardee County Extension (SFM-HC). Ultimately, Mosaic and the Sierra Club entered into a settlement agreement. The key provisions of the agreement were:  Avoidance, enhancement and/or CE protection of additional wetlands on SFM-HC;  Additional CE protection of land adjacent to SFM-HC;  Use of recharge wells within a certain mining area;  Additional acreage of reclaimed wetland in the reclamation plan;  Development and implementation of the Peace River Monitoring Plan (PRMP); and  Donation and placement of lands in perpetual conservation. Mosaic is in compliance with the terms of this agreement and submits an annual report to the Sierra Club on the results of the PRMP. 17.9.6 Peace River Monitoring Plan (PRMP) One component of Mosaic's overall monitoring program is the PRMP. This monitoring is in addition to the monitoring that is required by Mosaic's approved permits. The PRMP consists of monitoring water quality and stream biology at locations within the upper, middle and lower reaches of the river. This monitoring data complements monitoring conducted by government agencies in terms of documenting the chemical and biological conditions in the Peace River and one of its major tributaries. 17.9.7 Horse Creek Stewardship Plan (HCSP) In collaboration with Peace River Manasota Regional Water Supply Authority (PRMRWSA) since 2003, the HCSP is a long-term monthly monitoring agreement of water quality and quantity at several locations within Horse Creek. Horse Creek is a major tributary to the Peace River. The program provides a protocol for collection of information on the physical, chemical and biological characteristics of Horse Creek during Mosaic's mining activities in the watershed. This monitoring is in addition to the monitoring that is required by Mosaic's approved permits. 17.9.8 Southwest Florida Water Management District Agreement Mosaic entered into an agreement with the SWFWMD for public reporting purposes of surface water stage elevation data. Mosaic installed and continues to operate, maintain and monitor stage level recording devices at eight surface water stations (referred to as "SCADA" Surface Water Level Monitoring). Data is uploaded monthly to the SWFWMD system. Mosaic may terminate the agreement without cause upon 30 days' written notice. 17.9.9 United States Geological Survey (USGS) Agreement Mosaic entered into an agreement that requires the USGS to provide continuous water-level data for three gauges on Little Charlie Creek in Hardee County adjacent to the South Fort Meade mine. USGS owns, operates and maintains all three gauges. The agreement may be terminated by either party on 30 days' written notice. 17.9.10 Hardee County Economic Development Mosaic has entered into Local Development Agreements (LDAs) with Hardee County to implement Goal E5 of the county's Comprehensive Plan. The LDA provides resources to achieve economic diversity and maximize sustainability on reclaimed Date: December 31, 2022 17-15 lands through the initiatives advanced by the county's Economic Development Council/Industrial Development Authority. Mosaic presented a status summary on April 1, 2021 to the Hardee County Board of County Commissioners and is in compliance with the terms of the LDAs. 17.9.11 Manatee County For the promotion and benefit of the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Manatee County, Mosaic has agreed to additional conditions in certain Manatee County approvals/operating permits. These conditions are often referred to as "overriding public benefit". Mosaic has fulfilled the obligations in those agreements with the exception of the ongoing/future efforts related to the Wingate East permit, including the agreement for Mosaic to pay a portion of the cost to replace the Duette Bridge in Manatee County. Mosaic's proportionate share for the bridge replacement is approximately $384,000. Mosaic has executed a surety bond to ensure payment of its proportionate share of the bridge replacement costs until Manatee County replaces the Duette Bridge. 17.10 Qualified Person's Opinion on Adequacy of Current Plans to Address Issues Based on information referenced in Section 17.1, 17.2, 17.3, 17.8, and 17.9, it is the QP's (Bethany Niec) opinion that Mosaic has monitoring plans in place to evaluate environmental performance to standards applicable to the active phosphate facilities as prescribed by applicable law and permit conditions. Based on the information referenced in Section 17.4, 17.5, 17.6, and 17.7, it is the QP's (Scott Wuitschick) opinion is that Mosaic has monitoring plans that are designed to minimize the risks of significant environmental incidents in the near future related to the operation of the active phosphate facilities.

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1049.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 18-1 18.0 Capital and Operating Costs 18.1 Capital Cost Estimates 18.1.1 Basis of Estimate The basis to estimate capital expenditures for the Four Corners, South Fort Meade and Wingate facilities is as follows:  The target accuracy level is at a pre-feasibility level, -25% to +25%.  The estimate was prepared and reported in USD currency.  The estimates have been compiled and organized annually with cost by category.  Mine capital costs include only capital expenditures related to the extraction of the mineral reserves. Expenditures are classified as mine capital if they relate to physical assets, exceed US$10,000 or have a minimum expected useful life of two years.  Expansion costs consist of land/reserve acquisitions, field-related mining infrastructure and equipment additions. These costs are based on currently available engineering estimates.  Sustaining – Geotech/CSA costs are derived from the mining plan and estimated from unit cost rates that have been established from historical costs.  Sustaining – Other. 1) Dragline and dredge sustaining turnaround timing is based on maintenance schedules and costs are estimated by historical analysis. 2) Field mining (pipe/pumping systems) required to move mined mineral reserves (matrix slurry form) to site beneficiation plant facilities. Costs are based on historical spending in these areas. 3) Electrical infrastructure such as power lines, substations, transformers and others required to sustain operations are estimated from historical spending levels. 4) Plant processing and material handling/loading costs are derived from anticipated production levels and based on historical spending.  Capital cost forecasts are based on planned mine development and construction needs, mobile equipment re- build/replacement schedules and fixed asset replacement and refurbishment schedules.  The estimate is inclusive of project indirect costs and owner costs as these are captured in the historical cost analysis used to prepare the estimate.  State and county sales tax are included.  Freight and installation are included.  Contingency has not been added. 18.1.2 Exclusions for the Capital Cost Estimate The following has not been included in this capital cost estimate:  Schedule delays and associated costs, such as those caused by unexpected conditions and labor disputes.  Inflation and escalation.  Capital expenditures related to fire, flood and severe weather events (hurricanes, tornados). General and administrative costs are not allocated to capital projects at Mosaic and have not been included in this cost estimate. Date: December 31, 2022 18-2 18.1.3 Capital Cost Estimate The capital cost estimates for the 2023 LOM plan based on mineral reserves are listed by category in Table 18-1. The total capital for the 2023 LOM plan (2023 to 2035) is estimated at US$1,616 M. Historical costs from 2018 to 2021 and a forecast for 2022 are included. Table 18-1: Historical and LOM Plan Capital (M US$) Year Status Expansion M US$ Sustaining- Geotech / CSAs M US$ Sustaining- Other M US$ Total Capex M US$2018 Actual 26.4 32.1 59.9 118.4 2019 Actual 107.8 20.5 52.2 180.5 2020 Actual 82.5 47.5 47.3 177.3 2021 Actual 139.5 57.3 74.2 270.9 2022 Fcast. 71.7 117.8 52.0 241.5 2023 Plan 181.4 120.7 49.3 351.4 2024 Plan 269.9 98.1 62.6 430.6 2025 Plan 116.0 51.0 62.8 229.9 2026 Plan 35.6 51.8 49.4 136.7 2027 Plan 15.3 80.6 54.0 149.9 2028 to 2035 Plan 0.0 60.7 257.0 317.6 2023 LOM Plan 618.2 462.8 535.1 1,616.1 18.2 Operating Cost Estimates 18.2.1 Basis of Estimate The basis of estimate used for the mining operating costs are as follows:  The estimate was prepared in USD currency.  Operating costs do not include inflation and are in today's dollars over the three active mining phosphate facilities (South Fort Meade, Four Corners and Wingate) LOM plan.  Historical costs are used as the basis for mining operating forecasts and adjustments are made by using a variable cost per tonne. The accuracy of the operating costs is within the required parameters for a pre-feasibility level estimate, -25% to +25%.  Mosaic and contractor labor headcount complement are assumed relatively constant and fixed in total for the LOM plan.  Other operating costs consist of functional, administrative and plant costs. These costs are assumed to remain relatively constant compared to the 2022 forecast.  Depreciation, depletion and accretion are excluded from the operating cost estimates listed below. Section 18.1 outlines the expected future capital expenditures and outlay of cashflows over the 2023 LOM plan.  Freight charges are excluded from the operating costs and are shown net of the sales price. Date: December 31, 2022 18-3 18.2.2 Mine Operating Costs Historical costs are used as the basis for mine operating cost forecasts, that are estimated using a long-term cost model. This model accounts for the impact of varying production rates and labor complement. Mine operating costs are organized in the following categories:  Mining cash costs include mining, beneficiation plant, maintenance and direct overhead costs but exclude the clay settling areas, sustaining capital, Geotech costs, and expansion development costs.  Other Operating Costs comprise central and functional overhead allocated costs. These costs consist of services related to warehousing, purchasing, accounting, information technology, environmental and safety, mechanical integrity, asset reliability, and quality control.  Royalties and other Government levies or interests include severance taxes, royalties, and excludes income taxes. The total operating costs supporting the 2023 LOM plan are estimated at US$5,285.3 M (Table 18-2). Table 18-2: Historical and LOM Plan Cash Costs Year Status Production M tonnes Mining Cash Costs M US$ Other Operating Costs M US$ Royalties and Other Government Levies or Interests M US$ Total Site Cash Costs M US$2018 Actual 12.8 372.4 43.9 33.9 450.2 2019 Actual 12.2 388.8 45.1 37.6 471.6 2020 Actual 12.8 377.2 47.5 36.5 461.2 2021 Actual 11.1 359.7 50.2 27.0 436.8 2022 Fcast. 10.6 388.9 42.7 24.5 456.1 2023 Plan 11.7 397.5 49.6 24.8 471.9 2024 Plan 11.8 397.6 47.6 23.3 468.6 2025 Plan 11.7 385.0 47.1 22.5 454.6 2026 Plan 11.4 396.1 49.8 20.7 466.6 2027 Plan 11.7 399.2 51.8 21.3 472.3 2028 to 2035 Plan 67.2 2,489 340.3 122.2 2,951.3 2023 LOM Plan 125.5 4,464.1 586.3 234.8 5,285.3 Date: December 31, 2022 19-1 19.0 Economic Analysis 19.1 Methodology Used The financial model that supports the mineral reserve and mineral resource declarations is a standalone model that calculates annual cash flows based on scheduled mined production, assumed processing recoveries, commodity sale prices, projected operating and capital costs and estimated taxes, along with anticipated reclamation and decommissioning costs. Mosaic defines the Internal Transfer Price (ITP) as effectively a cost. It is the forecasted cost incurred by the mining and beneficiation plant in order to produce the concentrate at a discount rate which accounts for the cost of money and a mining risk. The concentrate is then purchased at the ITP by the chemical plant, which then adds value to the concentrate by turning it into a fertilizer product. The Gross Margin Available (GMA) takes the revenue from the sale of fertilizer products (due to processing the tonnes of fertilizer product will not equal concentrate tons) and divides this revenue by the tons of concentrate. The number produced from this calculation represents how much revenue is being generated from fertilizer adjusted to be per ton of concentrate produced. The chemical plant and downstream costs are subtracted. This makes the GMA equal to (Total Revenue – Chemical Plant Costs)/Tonnes of Concentrate. Refer to Section 16 for more details. If GMA > ITP then the operation is profitable. The greater the difference between those two values the more profitable it is. If the GMA < ITP, then the operation is not profitable. The GMA and ITP do not influence each other, they are simply two values used for comparison. ITP depends on forecasted costs and GMA depends on forecasted revenue. All monetary amounts are presented in United States dollars (US$). 19.2 Financial Model Inputs, Parameters and Assumptions The model projects the cashflows generated from mining starting in 2023 to the end of the scheduled mineral reserves. The sum of the discounted cashflows reflects the discounted value as of December 31, 2022. The following outlines the input, parameters and assumptions used in the financial model.  The active mining facilities consist of Four Corners, Wingate and South Fort Meade.  The planned production life based on mineral reserves is from 2023 to 2035.  The LOM plan assumed ITP discussed in Section 16 and applied in the financial model.  Total capital for the LOM plan is estimated as $1,616 M. This includes all the capital required for mine development and other sustaining capital to maintain the equipment and infrastructure and to support continuing operations from 2023 to 2035.  The mining costs include the direct labor, materials and direct costs incurred through mine operations. Other operating costs includes the central administrative and allocated costs.  The mines pay a severance tax to the State of Florida of approximately $1.77/tonne mined ore each year.  Florida sales and use tax applies to taxable goods and certain taxable services acquired by the Florida phosphate facilities. The rate is approximately 7 to 7.5% in total and comprises a state and county portion.  Property taxes are assessed by county assessors and collected by county treasurers with oversight from the Property Tax Division. Florida collects realty and tangible personal property taxes.

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1050.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 19-2  Mosaic is taxed on its taxable income in the United States. It is taxed at the federal and state level. The total statutory tax rate is 22.34%, consisting of a 21% federal rate and a 1.34% state rate (net of federal benefit).  Reclamation and closure related costs of approximately $278 M were included in the financial model. This estimate is informed from the work undertaken each year to estimate the asset retirement obligations for financial and compliance reporting purposes. The costs relating to closure of the facilities include all demolition, reclamation and decommissioning costs, net of the estimated salvage and scrap proceeds. Since many of the reclamation and decommissioning obligations extend well beyond the mine closure date, these cashflow obligations were discounted at the last LOM year and included in the cashflow analysis as one discounted value at the end of LOM year.  The economic analysis is based on 100% equity financing.  The financing and capital structure of mines were not considered in the analysis. The earnings are reduced for a notional cash income tax expense.  The economic analysis is based on 2022 prices and future values have not been adjusted for inflation.  The discounted cashflow analysis applies end of year discounting and uses a discount rate of 9.0%. 19.3 Economic Analysis Table 19-1 shows the annualized cash flow for the 2023 LOM plan. The LOM ITP of $68 is calculated by setting the NPV to zero at the targeted discount rate of 9.0% which is equal to cost of capital. The ITP is significantly less than the GMA of $135. Date: December 31, 2022 19-3 Table 19-1: Cash Flow Analysis Date: December 31, 2022 19-4 19.4 Sensitivity Analysis A sensitivity analysis is shown in the Figure 19-1 utilizing the following factors.  GMA  Total operating cost  Total capital cost The sensitivity analysis of the 2023 LOM plan is presented in Figure 19-1.  If the GMA were to decrease 20% from currently estimated, Florida phosphate mining will remain economically viable, with a minimum ITP needed to achieve zero NPV (a rate of return equal to Mosaic's cost of capital) still below the lower GMA.  If the operating costs were to increase 20% from those currently estimated, Florida phosphate mining will remain economically viable, with a minimum ITP needed to achieve zero NPV (a rate of return equal to Mosaic's cost of capital) well below the GMA.  The capital spending sensitivity assumes a 20% change to annual capital spending requirements each year. If the capital costs were to increase 20% from those currently estimated, Florida phosphate mining will remain economically viable, with a minimum ITP needed to achieve zero NPV (a rate of return equal to Mosaic's cost of capital) well below the GMA. Figure 19-1: Sensitivity Results on ITP vs GMA Date: December 31, 2022 20-1 20.0 Adjacent Properties No information from adjacent properties has been included in the preceding sections of this Report. All information used and included in this Report is the result of geology, engineering, mining, environmental and processing, etc. activities completed at the mines. Properties adjacent to the mining facilities and exploration properties are owned by many individuals and other parties. These properties have a level of historical exploratory drilling already completed. This drilling is of varying quality but does provide information on the potential for additional phosphate mineralization. Mosaic has access to the majority of the drill hole information from the adjacent properties and uses this to make decisions on future property acquisitions. There is no publicly disclosed information or mineral resource estimates from the owners of the adjacent properties. Table 20-1 provides a Mosaic-generated order of magnitude range estimate of the exploration potential on the adjacent properties to the Florida phosphate mining facilities and properties. Table 20-1: Order of Magnitude Exploration Potential Estimate on Adjacent Properties Estimated Number of Owners Approximate Acreage (Acres) Tonnage Estimate (M tonnes) 500 to 1,500 10,000 to 15,000 50 to 150 M

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1051.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 21-1 21.0 Other Relevant Data and Information All data relevant to the estimation of the Florida phosphate mining mineral resources and mineral reserves has been included in the sections of this Report. Date: December 31, 2022 22-1 22.0 Interpretation and Conclusions 22.1 Mineral Resources The following is a summary of the key interpretations and conclusions relating to the mineral resource estimates:  All of the land included in mineral resource estimation is controlled by Mosaic. Any outstanding mineral rights without lease agreements are not significant and do not represent a risk to mineral resource estimate.  The geology team has a strong understanding of lithology, stratigraphy and phosphate mineralization. The available data is appropriate to support the geological interpretation for this style of mineralization.  The geologic and deposit related knowledge has been considered and applied in support of exploration, interpretation and mineral resource estimation processes used by the Florida phosphate geology team.  Exploration data collection methods follow industry standard practices that were in place at the time of the various past and current exploration campaigns.  Data that does not meet the standards for reliability are removed from the mineral resource estimation process.  The validated geological information is considered reliable, representative and is fit for purpose in developing a geological model and for mineral resource estimates, as well as for use in other modifying factors studies including mine design, scheduling and mineral reserve estimation.  The appropriate internal data verification and data validation work on historical and recent exploration data to ensure the geological information is reliable, representative and free of material errors or omissions has been completed.  The sample preparation, security and analytical procedures that have been utilized at Florida phosphate mining facilities are suitable to support mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation.  The analytical procedures, data quality and quantity are aligned with industry standards and practice. The data received from the A-Lab and the QA/QC processes validating is within industry standards to drive and support conclusions regarding the actual processes.  The current mining processes and methods employed at the Florida phosphate mines support the establishment of reasonable prospects for economic extraction for the Florida phosphates mineral resource estimates.  The active facilities have power and water infrastructure and staffing plans needed to operate efficiently. Each facility is readily accessible by municipal roads and private rail service.  The mature nature of Florida phosphate mining and the good understanding of the continuity of the phosphate mineralization, supports the establishment of reasonable prospects for economic extraction for the Florida phosphates mineral resource estimates.  Mosaic's active phosphate facilities are well established and have been producing for over 40 years. There are no issues that require further work relating to relevant technical and economic factors that are likely to influence the prospect of economic extraction.  The classification of mineral resources into confidence classes measured, indicated and inferred considered geological confidence, uncertainty and the distribution of the geological and mining data. Risks or uncertainties associated with the Florida phosphate mining mineral resource estimates are:  There are a number of uncertainties (Section 11.9) that exist at the mines that could impact the mineral resource estimates. They are considered as areas of future mineral resource estimation improvements.  Historically, there has not been external third-party data verification and mineral resource estimation audits completed.  Drilling density variation is observed occasionally through the drilling programs. This adds some uncertainty to tonnage estimates. Date: December 31, 2022 22-2  As enhancements are pursued to allow the mining of higher impurity or heavier clay material, the mineral resource estimates may change. 22.2 Mineral Reserves The following is a summary of the key interpretations and conclusions relating to the mineral reserve estimates and supporting modifying factors.  The mineralization, mining, processing and environmental aspects of the facilities are very well understood. The operational and technical knowledge has been appropriately used in the development of the LOM plan and mineral reserve estimates.  Land included in the LOM plans is controlled. Any outstanding mineral rights without lease agreements are not significant and do not represent a risk to the LOM plan.  The reconciliation process used to develop mine modifying factors is adequate to produce LOM plans.  The modeling creation procedure is sufficient to generate accurate LOM plan.  The mines have appropriate power and water infrastructure and are staffed with ample personnel needed to operate efficiently. The facilities are readily accessible by municipal roads and private rail service.  Years of historical operational data and observations have been adequately documented.  The mineral reserve estimate has been prepared to comply with all disclosure standards for mineral reserves under S-K 1300 reporting requirements.  The mineral reserve estimates are based on a 2021 LOM plan, employing proven industry and practical methods of mining applicable to the type of mineralization and are demonstrated to be economic through a supporting economic evaluation.  The facilities have the appropriate equipment for mining and have identified and scheduled the capital spending required to provide the required equipment fleet size and capacity, and labor staffing to support the LOM plan.  The mining and material transport processes have been shown to be effective from a cost, reliability and production standpoint.  Beneficiation recovery relies upon standardized metallurgical and analytical testing. The metallurgical and analytical testing and historical data are adequate for the estimation of recovery factors supporting the mineral reserves. The metallurgical test work is performed on samples that are considered to be representative of the mineralization styles and mineralogy. The data quality and quantity are aligned with industry standards. beneficiation recovery factors are based on appropriate metallurgical test work and confirmed with production data.  There is sufficient infrastructure in place to support the mining and processing activities at the mines.  The management of all environmental aspects, permitting and social considerations at all Mosaic facilities is guided by Mosaic's Environmental, Health and Safety Policy, the Mosaic Management System Program and Procedures, and current legal and regulatory requirements. Mosaic understands the sustainability of their business and communities are indelibly linked and strives to be a thoughtful and engaged neighbor who invests carefully and generously and seeks long-term partnerships with organizations that are making a difference.  Mosaic has monitoring plans in place to evaluate the environmental performance to standards as prescribed by applicable law and permit conditions.  Closure plans are completed, representing current land disturbance conditions and anticipated land disturbance conditions at the end of the LOM plan.  Beneficiation recovery factors estimated are based on appropriate metallurgical test work and confirmed with production data. Date: December 31, 2022 22-3  The economic results and sensitivity analysis for the mineral reserves indicates that the mines can withstand 20% variations in the key cash flow components.  Future new technology and innovation may be relevant to mining operations. The technological and process efficiencies that may be achieved have not been factored into the LOM and economic assessments. The benefit of achieving these targets along with the operational efficiencies that will be enabled by new technologies in the years that follow, create potential for significant upside to the cashflows presented. Risks or uncertainties associated with the Florida phosphate mining mineral reserve estimates are:  There are a number of uncertainties that exist at mines that could impact the mineral reserve estimates. They are considered as areas of future mineral reserve estimation improvements.  The current reconciliation process limits comparison to the lithologic units that pass mineability criteria. When unmineable units are considered, the mineral reserve estimate could change.  A more robust design and timing software that considers the complexity of the mineralization and more complex mining conditions, could change the mineral reserve estimate.  There is a risk and opportunity associated with the variation of pricing on product sale prices and the prices of operational and capital materials and services. The sensitivity analysis is provided to help understand the impact that this risk could have on net present value.  Over the lengthy time span there is risk that the amount of annually invested capital required to sustain the plant could fluctuate above the levels estimated.

------

![](a2022floridaphosphatesk1052.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Date: December 31, 2022 23-1 23.0 Recommendations Based on current project status, the QP's are not recommending additional work at this time. However, the following recommendations have been identified to further enhance internal processes and planning.  Mosaic will continue to investigate and consider new innovations in phosphate mining and processing technology.  A thorough production reconciliation process will be considered to further improve and support the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates. Sample and measuring points will be revisited and assessed.  The current central Florida exploration plan will be further refined to better define future opportunities for mineral resource and mineral reserve expansion.  Mosaic will consider increasing the drilling density in the indicated and inferred mineral resource areas.  Investigate new technology to improve the efficiency of core sample processing and sample tracking.  A more robust modeling software for mineral resource estimates will be considered.  Investigate the use of optimization processes for improving mineral resource limits.  The process of acquiring additional land adjacent to the operating mines should continue as this adds mineral resources and mineral reserves to the LOM plan.  More samplers at the beneficiation plants would help monitor the flotation performance for each circuit.  Completion of plant step tests are recommended to evaluate changes in the minerology or verify correct setpoints when draglines have moved to a new area. Date: December 31, 2022 24-1 24.0 References Altschuler, ZS, Dwornik EJ, Kramer H. 1963. Transformation of montmorillonite to kaolinite during weathering. Science 141 (3576): pp. 148-152. Blakely, A.F (1973). The Discovery of Phosphate Rock in Florida. The Florida Phosphate Industry: A History of the Development and Use of a Vital Mineral (pp. 19 and 22). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Wertheim Committee, Harvard University. Brewster-Wingard, G.L., Scott, T.M., Edwards, L.E., Weedman, S.D., and Simmons, K.R., 1997, Reinterpretation of the peninsular Florida Oligocene: an integrated stratigraphic approach: Sedimentary Geology, v. 108, pp. 207-228. Cunningham, K., McNeill, D., Guertin, L., Ciesielski, P., Scott, T., and de Verteuil, L., 1998, New Tertiary stratigraphy for the Florida Keys and southern peninsula of Florida: Bulletin, Geological Society of America, v. 110, n. 2, pp. 231- 258. Cunningham, K., Locker, S. D., Hine, A. C., Bukry, D., Barron, J. A., and Guertin, L. A., 2003, Interplay of late Cenozoic siliciclastic supply and carbonate response on the southeast Florida Platform: Journal of Sedimentary Research, Vol. 73, no. 1, pp. 31-46. CRU International Ltd., Phosphate Rock Database, August 2021 Guertin, L. A., 1998, A late Cenozoic mixed carbonate/siliciclastic system, South Florida: lithostratigraphy, chronostratigraphy and sea-level record: Ph. D. dissertation, University of Miami, pp. 424. Guertin, L.A., Missimer, T. M., and McNeill, D. F., 2000, Hiatal duration of correlative sequence boundaries from Oligocene-Pliocene mixed carbonate/siliciclastic sediments of the south Florida Platform: Sedimentary Geology Vol. 134, pp. 1-26. Missimser, T. M., Maliva, R. G., Walker, C. W., and Owosina, E., 2000, Anatomy of a nearshore mixed siliciclastic- carbonate deposit, the Plio-Pleistocene of southern Broward County, Florida: Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies Transactions, Vol. L, pp. 111-128. Missimser, T. M., 2001, Siliciclastic facies belt formation and the Late Oligocene to Middle Miocene partial drowning of the southern Florida Platform: Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies Transactions, Vol. LI, pp. 229-238. Missimser, T. M., 2002, Late Oligocene to Pliocene evolution of the central portion of the south Florida Platform: Mixing of siliciclastic and carbonate sediments: Florida Geological Survey Bulletin 65, 184 p., 6 plates. Randazzo, A. F., 1997, The sedimentary platform of Florida: Mesozoic to Cenozoic: in Randazzo, A. F., and Jones, D. S., 1997, The geology of Florida, University Press, Gainesville, FL, pp. 39-56. Schmidt, W., 1997, Geomorphology and physiography of Florida: in Randazzo, A. F., and Jones, D. S., 1997, The geology of Florida, University Press, Gainesville, FL, pp. 1-12. Scott, T. M., 1988, the lithostratigraphy of the Hawthorn Group (Miocene) of Florida: Florida, Geological Survey Bulletin 59, pp. 148. Warzeski, E. R., Cunningham, K. J., Ginsburg, R. N., Anderson, J. B., and Ding, Z. D., 1996, Neogene mixed siliciclastic and carbonate foundation for the Quaternary carbonate shelf, Florida Keys: Journal of Sedimentary Research, Vol. 66, pp. 788-800. Winston, G.O., 1991, Atlas of structural evolution and facies development on the Florida-Bahama Platform – Triassic through Paleocene: Miami Geological Society, 39 pp. Date: December 31, 2022 25-1 25.0 Reliance on Information Provided by the Registrant Table 25-1 outlines the information provided from the Registrant (Mosaic) for use by the QPs in the writing of this Report. Table 25-1: Information Provided by the Registrant Brian Ball 16. Market Studies Marketing information including commodity price and exchange rates Brian Ball 18.Capital and Operating Costs 19. Economic Analysis Royalties and other accommodations; taxes and other governmental factors; mine closure costs

------