Increase (decrease) in fine imposed by Greek competition authority

COLGATE-PALMOLIVE COMPANY Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (continued) (Dollars in Millions Except Share and Per Share Amounts)(Unaudited)  
  
subsidiary jointly and severally liable for any tax due from the Seller’s Brazilian subsidiary. The case has been pending since 2002, and the Lower Federal Court has not issued a decision. Although there can be no assurances, management believes, based on the opinion of its Brazilian legal counsel, that the Company should ultimately prevail in this action. The Company is challenging this action vigorously.  
In December 2005, the Brazilian internal revenue authority issued to the Company’s Brazilian subsidiary a tax assessment with interest, penalties and any court-mandated fees of approximately $50, at the current exchange rate, based on a claim that certain purchases of U.S. Treasury bills by the subsidiary and their subsequent disposition during the period 2000 to 2001 were subject to a tax on foreign exchange transactions. The Company had been disputing the assessment within the internal revenue authority’s administrative appeals process. However, in November 2015, the Superior Chamber of Administrative Tax Appeals denied the Company’s final administrative appeal, and the Company has filed a lawsuit in the Brazilian federal court. In the event the Company is unsuccessful in this lawsuit, further appeals are available within the Brazilian federal courts. Although there can be no assurances, management believes, based on the opinion of its Brazilian legal counsel, that the tax assessment is without merit and that the Company should ultimately prevail. The Company is challenging this assessment vigorously.  
Competition Matter  
Certain of the Company’s subsidiaries were historically subject to actions and, in some cases, fines, by governmental authorities in a number of countries related to alleged competition law violations. Substantially all of these matters also involved other consumer goods companies and/or retail customers. The Company’s policy is to comply with antitrust and competition laws and, if a violation of any such laws is found, to take appropriate remedial action and to cooperate fully with any related governmental inquiry. The status as of September 30, 2022 of such competition law matters pending against the Company during the nine months ended September 30, 2022 is set forth below.  
▪In July 2014, the Greek competition law authority issued a statement of objections alleging a restriction of parallel imports into Greece. The Company responded to this statement of objections. In July 2017, the Company received the decision from the Greek competition law authority in which the Company was fined $11. The Company appealed the decision to the Greek courts. In April 2019, the Greek courts affirmed the judgment against the Company’s Greek subsidiary, but reduced the fine to $10.5 and dismissed the case against Colgate-Palmolive Company. The Company’s Greek subsidiary and the Greek competition authority have appealed the decision to the Greek Supreme Court.  
Talcum Powder Matters  
The Company has been named as a defendant in civil actions alleging that certain talcum powder products that were sold prior to 1996 were contaminated with asbestos and/or caused mesothelioma and other cancers. Many of these actions involve a number of co-defendants from a variety of different industries, including suppliers of asbestos and manufacturers of products that, unlike the Company’s products, were designed to contain asbestos. As of September 30, 2022, there were 224 individual cases pending against the Company in state and federal courts throughout the United States, as compared to 203 cases as of June 30, 2022 and 171 cases as of December 31, 2021. During the three months ended September 30, 2022, 33 new cases were filed and 12 cases were resolved by voluntary dismissal or settlement. During the nine months ended September 30, 2022, 72 cases were filed and 19 cases were resolved by voluntary dismissal or settlement. The values of the settlements in the quarter and year-to-date period presented were not material, either individually or in the aggregate, to the Company’s results of operations in either such period.   
A significant portion of the Company’s costs incurred in defending and resolving these claims has been, and the Company believes that a portion of such costs will continue to be, covered by insurance policies issued by several primary, excess and umbrella insurance carriers, subject to deductibles, exclusions, retentions, policy limits and insurance carrier insolvencies.   
While the Company and its legal counsel believe that these cases are without merit and intend to challenge them vigorously, there can be no assurances regarding the ultimate resolution of these matters.  
  
17
