Commitments and Contingencies Litigation Brazil Imposto sobre Circulacao de Mercadorias e Servicos ("ICMS"), a form of value-added tax in Brazil, was assessed to SWM-B in December of 2000. SWM-B received two assessments from the tax authorities of the State of Rio de Janeiro (the "State") for unpaid ICMS taxes on certain raw materials from January 1995 through October 1998 and from November 1998 through November 2000 (collectively, the "Raw Materials Assessments"). The Raw Materials Assessments concerned the accrual and use by SWM-B of ICMS tax credits generated from the production and sale of certain non-tobacco related grades of paper sold domestically. SWM-B contested the Raw Materials Assessments based on Article 150, VI of the Brazilian Federal Constitution of 1988, which grants immunity from ICMS taxes to papers intended for printing books, newspapers and periodicals, on the ground that tax immunity extends to the raw material inputs used to produce such papers. In 2015, the first chamber of the Federal Supreme Court decided the first Raw Materials Assessment in favor of SWM-B. On May 24, 2019, the second chamber of the Federal Supreme Court decided the second Raw Materials Assessment against SWM-B in the amount of approximately $8.7 million, based on the foreign currency exchange rate at September 30, 2020. SWM-B, with assistance of outside counsel, is currently evaluating the decision and exploring its options and other defenses to partially satisfy or reduce the judgment and SWM-B plans to pursue these avenues vigorously. However, because the outcome of any reductions and defenses is uncertain, SWM-B recorded a liability sufficient to satisfy this amount in the second quarter of 2019. This judgment may be settled over the course of 60 months after all possible challenges are concluded. Interest and penalties will continue to accrue until the judgment is paid. SWM-B received assessments from the tax authorities of the State for unpaid ICMS and Fundo Estadual de Combate a Pobreza ("FECP," a value-added tax similar to ICMS) taxes on interstate purchases of electricity. The State issued four sets of assessments against SWM-B, one for May 2006 - November 2007, a second for January 2008 - December 2010, a third for September 2011 - September 2013, which was replaced by a smaller assessment for January - June 2013, and a fourth for July 2013 - December 2017 (collectively the "Electricity Assessments"). SWM-B challenged all Electricity Assessments in administrative proceedings before the State tax council (in the first-level court Junta de Revisao Fiscal and the appellate court Conselho de Contribuintes) based on Resolution 1.610/89, which defers these taxes on electricity purchased by an "electricity-intensive consumer." In 2014, a majority of the Conselho de Contribuintes sitting en banc ruled against SWM-B in each of the first and second Electricity Assessments ($3.3 million and $6.3 million, respectively, based on the foreign currency exchange rate at September 30, 2020), and SWM-B is now pursuing challenges to these assessments in the State judicial system where SWM-B obtained preliminary injunctions against enforcement of both assessments. In March 2020, the first-level judicial court ruled in favor of SWM-B in the second Electricity Assessment, a decision that is now on appeal. The third Electricity Assessment was dismissed on technical grounds by the Conselho de Contribuintes in 2018 after the State admitted the tax did not apply as it had asserted. Instead, in August 2018, the State filed a revised third Electricity Assessment in the amount of $0.5 million for ICMS on electricity purchased during part of 2013, and a fourth Electricity Assessment in the amount of $7.1 million pertaining to ICMS and FECP on electricity purchased from July 2013 to December 2017. SWM-B filed challenges to these 2018 assessments in the first-level administrative court on the same grounds as the older cases. The Junta de Revisao Fiscal rejected SWM-Bs challenge to the revised third Electricity Assessment, but the Conselho de Contribuintes agreed with SWM-B that the 2013 claim was time-barred. Both the Junta de Revisao Fiscal and the Conselho de Contribuintes ruled against SWM-B in the fourth Electricity Assessment. Both 2019 decisions from the Conselho de Contribuintes are being appealed to the full bench of the Conselho de Contribuintes. The State issued a new regulation effective January 1, 2018 that only specific industries are electricity-intensive consumers, a list that excludes paper manufacturers. SWM-B contends this regulation shows that paper manufacturers were electricity-intensive consumers eligible to defer ICMS before 2018. SWM-B cannot determine the outcome of the Electricity Assessments matters; as such, no loss has been accrued in our condensed consolidated financial statements. Germany In January 2015, the Company initiated patent infringement proceedings in Germany against Glatz under multiple LIP-related patents. In December 2017, the Dusseldorf Appeal Court affirmed the German District Court judgment on infringement of EP1482815 against Glatz. The Company filed an action against Glatz in the German District Court to set the amount of damages for the infringement and Glatz has filed a counterclaim. Glatz has filed an action in the German Patent Court to invalidate the German part of EP1482815. The German Patent Court held that some of the patent claims at issue were invalid and also that another claim at issue was valid. The Company has appealed the portion of the decision with respect to the claims held to be invalid. The hearing on this invalidity appeal has not yet been scheduled. The cost, timing and outcome of intellectual property litigation can be unpredictable and thus no assurances can be given as to the outcome or impact on us of such litigation. Environmental Matters The Company's operations are subject to various nations' federal, state and local laws, regulations and ordinances relating to environmental matters. The nature of the Company's operations exposes it to the risk of claims with respect to various environmental matters, and there can be no assurance that material costs or liabilities will not be incurred in connection with such claims. While the Company has incurred in the past several years, and will continue to incur, capital and operating expenditures in order to comply with environmental laws and regulations, it believes that its future cost of compliance with environmental laws, regulations and ordinances, and its exposure to liability for environmental claims and its obligation to participate in the remediation and monitoring of certain hazardous waste disposal sites, will not have a material effect on its financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. However, future events, such as changes in existing laws and regulations (including the enforcement thereof), or unknown contamination of sites owned, operated or used for waste disposal by the Company (including contamination caused by prior owners and operators of such sites or other waste generators), or similar circumstances arising at our unconsolidated joint ventures, may give rise to additional costs which could have a material effect on the Company's financial condition or results of operations. General Matters In the ordinary course of conducting business activities, the Company and its subsidiaries become involved in certain other judicial, administrative and regulatory proceedings involving both private parties and governmental authorities. These proceedings include insured and uninsured regulatory, employment, intellectual property, general and commercial liability, environmental and other matters. At this time, the Company does not expect any of these proceedings to have a material effect on its reputation, business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. However, the Company can give no assurance that the results of any such proceedings will not materially affect its reputation, business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.